The existence of God

"Let's start with "perfect distance" and uniqueness. " There is a conflict with the concept of habitable zones. It assumes that all alien life if existing has exactly the same requirements as terrestrial life. Even assuming this, other circumstances may result in suitable planets outside the "habitable zone" For example, "Jupiter's moon Europa is thought to have a subsurface ocean with an environment similar to the deep oceans of Earth. " The existence of extremophiles on Earth makes life on Europa even more likely, despite the fact that Europa is not in the presumed circumstellar habitable zone within a solar system. "A discovery of any form of life in such an environment would expose these hypothetical restrictions as too conservative. " Basically, the forms of life we have researched and known is life on Earth, not anywhere else. (1) So why am I attempting to refute this? Because aliens don't have to exist under the conditions of humans if they exist. However, since we can't confirm their existence, we would have to explain why we didn't yet. Obviously my opponent attempts to refute the probabilities I stated by saying: "With about 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe, suggesting that there are at least 10 trillion planetary systems are in the Universe. " Because aliens are not confirmed yet to exist, the Fermi paradox apparently contradicts "between high estimates of the probability of the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations and the lack of evidence for, or contact with, such civilizations. " Given the extreme age of the universe and its vast number of stars, it suggests that if the Earth is typical, extraterrestrial life should be common. If advanced extraterrestrial civilizations exist in the Milky Way galaxy and in the universe why evidence such as spacecraft, radio transmissions or probes are not seen or detected. The following explanations are: *No other civilizations currently exist. *No other civilizations have arisen. *Human beings were created alone. "See above for probabilities. Your error is that human life is the benchmark. Evolution is not that certain were we to rewind and start from an earlier point again that humans would again arise. " The statement "Total Probability = 1 :( 10 to the power of 99)" may be roughly calculated, but it poses a solution to why extraterrestrial life is not common or at least easily detected: the chance that civilizations have been created on another planet other than Earth is so low, it seems almost impossible that Earth could have existed. "Even if Earth was the result of "winning the cosmic lottery" against inconceivable odds, after decades of intense research scientists have made no progress on their quest to explain how the first living organisms came into existence. " (3) I will explain this later. Earth was formed specifically for life. But why not other planets? I have shown you that if you ever tried to create a duplicate of the Earth, but change almost everything about it, then it could not support life. Venus and Mars cannot support life because it is either too far or too close to the Sun and will affect temperature. Similar with the size of the Earth, if you change the size, you will change the power of the magnetic field and gravitational field. (3) "Saturn's moons, Enceladus, Jupiter's moons, Ganymede and Callisto have shown to have water and organic compounds. " You have started your argument with the concept of habitable zone yet you have stated that the moons of Saturn and Jupiter have been shown to have organic compounds. Why couldn't have Earth been outside of a habitable zone? If the moons of Saturn and Jupiter contain life, why aren't they intelligent enough to create spacecraft and probes so that we can confirm their existence? If those moons contain life, then what would be exactly the concept of a habitable zone? If the moons contain life and there wasn't a concept of a habitable zone, it would seem that life can only thrive on organic matter. If that was true, then explain why we can't detect radio transmission from aliens in our Milky Way galaxy even thousands of miles away? "Earth: Clearly also not made for life - 99% of all known species are now extinct. " Yet we still have life, unlike Mars and Venus. "The most famous origin of life experiment was completed in 1953 by Stanley Miller at the University of Chicago. The Miller/Urey experiments involved filling a sealed glass apparatus with methane, ammonia, hydrogen gases (representing what they thought composed the early atmosphere) and water vapor (to simulate the ocean). " Due to character space, the experiment could be found at (5). Although the press widely spread the news that "proving" the origin of life could have occurred on Earth under natural conditions without intelligence, the experiment actually provided compelling evidence for exactly the opposite conclusion. There are numerous reasons why creating life in a test tube with organic and inorganic matter turned out far more difficult than Miller or anyone else expected are numerous which lessens the chance that natural processes can create life by itself without intelligence. Although amino acids are the building blocks of life, the key to life is information. That is why by itself a bunch of bricks alone don't make a house, so it takes more than a random collection of amino acids to make life. Without intelligence, natural processes alone cannot write a book. Explain how the widely distributed ingredients linked up into protein. Presumed conditions of primordial Earth would have driven the amino acids toward lonely isolation without intelligence. Imagine that scientists had all the ingredients that would link up into a protein. Those ingredients would be left at a puddle and then the scientist would wait for natural causes that would supposedly form proteins. No one is allowed to touch the ingredients since Earth had no intelligence before life was created. In fact, "If the process starts down deep at discrete vents, they say, it can build amino acids--and link them up--right there. " "Furthermore, no geological evidence indicates an organic soup, even a small organic pond, ever existed on this planet. It is becoming clear that however life began on earth, the usually conceived notion that life emerged from an oceanic soup of organic chemicals is a most implausible hypothesis. " (6) "Fallacy - Appeal to Authority. Quote mining. " Quote mining? Didn't Charles Darwin lead to the creation of the theory of evolution? "There is no fallacy involved in simply arguing that the assertion made by an authority is true, in contrast to claiming that the authority is infallible in principle and can hence be exempted from criticism. " (7) Charles Darwin said exactly my points: blind chance or necessity. I'm simply arguing for what he quoted, not because there was anything positive about Darwin. "Fallacy - Argument from ignorance" I'm trying to prove God's existence, not that God existed only because it has not been proven false. "A being outside both those dimensions by definition cannot interact within the set universe. " God made all concepts including and space because he is omnipotence. Because he is energy or acts like energy, he cannot be created or destroyed. The universe had a beginning - the Big Bang. Sources: 1. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 2. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 3. . http://www.windmillministries.org... 4. . http://www.realtruth.org... 5. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 6. . http://www.christiananswers.net... 7. . http://en.wikipedia.org...