Since the other poll is badly worded, I thought I’d start one.
I have submitted a request to make the pull public, if that’s possible.
Thanks, Skald. You put an option for me! I believe we will never know. We can theorize, speculate, and put together great scientific ideas, but we will never know for sure. I just know it’s here now.
That’ll be a dollar.
I’ve never been able to believe that life was created by any sort of deity, precisely because life is such a complicated and unique phenomenon. Consider all of the things that had to happen just so in order for life as we know it to evolve - even simple single-celled organisms are a fantastic improbability.
Now, consider how much more complicated, more extraordinary, more insanely improbable must be the circumstances that would give rise, not just to life as we know it, but intelligence so far beyond our understanding or capabilities that we might as well call it God. Such circumstances would surely make those that gave rise to live on Earth look run-of-the-mill - and I’m aware of no reasonable explanation for how circumstances of that sort could arise.
Arguments that boil down to “God did it” are far more complicated than any other explanation for the existence of life on Earth - and so absent compelling evidence in their favor, we must lean towards natural processes as the explanation for life on Earth.
Whether those processes took place here (abiogenesis) or elsewhere (panspermia) doesn’t seem to matter all that much - the natural processes that gave rise to life had to happen somewhere. That said, I lean towards abiogenesis - the suggestion that life might evolve in one distinct biosphere, and yet prove versatile enough to survive both the depths of space and our own environment, seems unnecessarily complicated.
Which option is, “Abgenisis was made possible because an omnipotent deity made the laws of physics the way they are”?
I voted it was started by God but only in the sense that God put lifeforms here on Earth and directed evolution.
The first four all just push the question back further (How did life arise on another world? How did the life that eventually evolved into technologically advanced aliens first get its start? Where do God or gods come from?). Although some of those answers may be possible explanations, there seems to be no good reason to uncessarily multiply our causes (in the absence of additional evidence like black monoliths buried on the Moon or one of our–carefully and completely sterilized–deep space probes coming back festooned with bacteria); and of course the first four explanations all raise additional questions (By what mechanisms does life cross interplanetary or even interstellar space and survive the journey? How did the sufficiently advanced aliens overcome the difficulties of interstellar spaceflight, and why did they bother? And of course God raises all sorts of massive philosophical conundrums.)
And I’m enough of a Polyanna-ish optimist not to vote for the last option. Plus I can’t help but think of poor August Comte.
So #5 it is.
That’s a different question (how did the laws of physics end up the way they are?), which could have its own poll.
I chose “Life began by means of abiogenesis; only terrestrial matter was involved, and no conscious being” as being most likely. I do think that “Life was seeded here by a natural process such as a meteor from a life-bearing world landing here” is a possibility however; in theory meteorites from Mars could have carried life here. If there is surviving life on Mars we might even be able to prove it. For example, if genetic tests show that Martian life had several origins, one of which has genes in common with Earth life; I think that would both show a connection, and that the transfer was almost certainly Mars-to-Earth and not the other way ( which I understand is more likely anyway for reasons of orbital mechanics ).
Mind if I add the option, “We don’t know yet.”?
Oooh, this would be my choice, if it were available. I picked abiogenesis because it’s what scientists lean toward, but really…I dunno. I don’t necessarily think that we’ll never know, though.
That is logically equal to option 1, I’d say. I realize I wrote miracle in the thread title, but that was just for the sake of simplicity.
I made that observation in the thread which inspired this one. But you’ll note that the poll question is NOT how did life arise IN THIS UNIVERSE. It’s how life arose ON THIS PLANET.
If you’re serious about adding that option, I’d be grateful if you would, as I thought I had included it but evidently edited it out.
It’s turtles all the way down.
Isn’t that just a fact, though? How could anyone currently possibly know how life began? Is knowledge being conflated with belief in this poll? It seems to me that there’s a difference between “I don’t know” and “I don’t have a belief about this”.
So, to respond to the poll: Of course I don’t know how life began on Earth, nor do I think anyone does. But to the extent that I have faith in the intellectual milieu I’ve been raised in, I have been led to believe that abiogenesis is the most plausible answer we have.
(Bolding added)
Ahhh… see, there’s your mistake right there! It’s crazy to have any faith in intellect… it makes the Babby Jesus (and the knuckle-draggers) cry!
(Yes, Babby. As in: “How is babby formed? How girl get pragnent?”)
I answered that “we don’t know yet” and I’m not sure we ever will know, but if I were placing a bet I’d put it on abiogenesis without hesitation. If the eventual conclusion is “Life was seeded here by a natural process such as a meteor from a life-bearing world landing here”, it wouldn’t exactly shake my world view to its core, but I tend to think of that as an interesting idea that TV science documentaries and whatnot have picked up because it’s so much cooler than molecules randomly joining up into amino acids.