is life only evolved and selected chemical reactions?

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > is life only evolved and selected chemical reactions?

The Bloop: Jul 5, 2004; by Fluffdaddy

minasole posted:

is life only evolved and selected chemical reactions?

It's a bit more complicated than that, but you have the gist, yes.

So what and/or isn't that amazing!?

# ¿ Jan 12, 2016 01:37

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 01:32

The Bloop: Jul 5, 2004; by Fluffdaddy

SedanChair posted:

there might be other kinds of life but since we're a bunch of evolved and selected chemical reactions we can't see or measure it

Yet.

Maybe ever, but we're pretty clever for ugly bags of mostly water

# ¿ Jan 12, 2016 18:35

The Bloop: Jul 5, 2004; by Fluffdaddy

Toasticle posted:

Does remind me of a talk Tyson gave where he pointed out that chimps/apes share 99% of our DNA, if that 1% is the difference between a monkey and intelligence capable of what we've done, would another life form with 3% different DNA even register us as more than we view bacteria.

I love me some Dr Tyson, but I find this argument very unconvincing.

It would be clear to any intelligence that we do things with more purpose and that we have abstract thought.

Now, creatures that are simply very different from us, like being incorporeal or differently-dimensioned might not be able to recognize us as fellow intelligences, or us them. I can't see this being true for things merely a few % different, but still basically biological as we understand it.

# ¿ Jan 14, 2016 02:45

The Bloop: Jul 5, 2004; by Fluffdaddy

The Belgian posted:

Becoming interstellar doesn't seem like a maybe; it seems like a certainty.

Lol.

I'm an extremely optimistic person, but there are a mind boggling number of challenges on that road.

I hope so, but certainty? Pff

# ¿ Jan 17, 2016 00:27

The Bloop: Jul 5, 2004; by Fluffdaddy

The Belgian posted:

The position is hardly one of extreme optism. Just look at how far we've come these last 500 years. That's a blink of an eye, not only on a cosmological scale; but even on the scale of biological life. Further, there's no sign of our advancement slowing down, on the contrary.

I don't doubt our raw capability for advancement. There are, however, plenty of signs of us loving everything up before we can get there.

(Also there are possibly insurmountable technical hurdles, but there my optimism is sufficient to generally ignore this fact)

# ¿ Jan 17, 2016 02:16

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 01:32

The Bloop: Jul 5, 2004; by Fluffdaddy

The Belgian posted:

.

When we look at our overall scientific advancement, things seem to be going exponentially. There's no sign so far that we're stopping or have only been grabbing the low-hanging fruit.

Any timescale which makes this argument even look reasonable if you squint at it includes renaissance discoveries that were made well before the scientific method was even codified and essentially using things you find lying about the house. This is pretty much the platonic ideal of low hanging fruit for the field. True modern science has too small a sample size, timeline-wise, to draw any meaningful conclusions. Again, I'm very optimistic, but that's different from confident or convinced by actual evidence.

# ¿ Jan 17, 2016 12:55

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > is life only evolved and selected chemical reactions?