Asteroids May Have Brought Sugar to Earth

Doughnuts... by fogof · 2001-12-19 17:11 · Score: 1

That would make a great commercial for Dunkin Doughnuts ... MMMMmmmmm fluffy little doughnuts ....

--
--=.=-- www.cyber2000.qc.ca

Re:Doughnuts... by Anonymous Coward · 2001-12-21 09:40 · Score: 0

"Sugar found on meteorites? Dammit, I told Adam not to jerk off..."

thank you by redhotchil · 2001-12-19 17:13 · Score: 1

thank you, space, for the wonder that is rock candy. pure of sugar, pure of flavor, and only found in major theme parks.

Crumbs of the Gods by jgardn · 2001-12-19 17:22 · Score: 1

So that means that life started from a crumb of sugar the fell from the cookie of the Gods. At last, a true SPOG!

--
The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.

um by nadie · 2001-12-19 18:37 · Score: 2, Funny

>"This discovery may support the theory that
>life on earth was seeded from outer space."

Now all you need is a theory on where life in outer space was seeded from?

There seems to be a step missing by pubudu · 2001-12-19 19:03 · Score: 5, Interesting

I don't understand how the presence of sugars in asteroids suggests that meteors planted sugars on Earth. If sugars can be created through inorganic processes, where's the argument that such processes were not responsible for the sugars on Earth? If they cannot be so created, then sugars are not the seeds required for life, and so there is no reason to suspect that life was seeded by meteors. I don't find the discussion at the end of the article particularly helpful in this regard.

--
~~~~~~

under-paid karma whore

Re:There seems to be a step missing by Wolfger · 2001-12-19 21:46 · Score: 1

sarcasm
Seems logical to me! Everybody knows that if you throw sugar on the ground, you'll grow sugar cane.
/sarcasm

--
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Re:There seems to be a step missing by codexus · 2001-12-20 00:29 · Score: 2, Interesting

You're right. The basic molecules of life (including sugars) could have been created on earth. The problem is that we are currently unable to explain the process of how that would happen.

It's then logical to think that maybe, we can't explain it because it didn't happen and instead these molecules came from space. Explaining how they are created in space is also a very important question in order to confirm this "extraterrestrial" origin of the components of life. But this process seems to exist since we find, for example, sugars in meteors

There's a lot of open questions remaining, and a lot of fascinating subjects to research.

--
True warriors use the Klingon Google
Re:There seems to be a step missing by gi-tux · 2001-12-20 06:50 · Score: 1

Hey, I like this idea! If we can't explain it we'll just move it elsewhere, then we don't have to explain it for now. So if my checking account comes up empty, aliens must have taken the money.

To believe this, you still have to come up with an answer to where did it come from originally. I believe that it is much easier to believe in God than to believe that all this stuff just happened to occur in the right order.

Also, since this "sugar-like substance" was found on "meteorites that are chips off old asteroid that fell to Earth", are we sure that the "sugar-like substance" didn't get on them here on earth?

Why is it so much easier to believe this than to believe Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."? Is it impossible to believe that truth as we know it just simply started one day, because an omnipotent being declared it should begin?

--
I have no sig, does anyone have one to spare?
Re:There seems to be a step missing by Mr.+Slippery · 2001-12-20 07:32 · Score: 1

To believe this, you still have to come up with an answer to where did it come from originally. I believe that it is much easier to believe in God...

In which case, you still have to come up with an answer to where did god(ess)(es/s) come from originally?
Invoking a creator deity has no explanatory power.

--
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Re:There seems to be a step missing by gi-tux · 2001-12-20 09:54 · Score: 0, Troll

Without a creator deity (let's call him God), you can't explain eternal life. Oops, I forgot, you probably don't believe in that either.

I personally believe in eternal life after God judges the world on the last day. If my soul can live with God forever after this world is over, then God could have lived forever before the beginning of the world. To put material limits on God is unrealistic, however it is quite human as that is all that we fully understand.

To take this one step further, if you don't believe in God and his omnipotence, why are you wasting time at Slashdot? You could make much more of the short time you have to live by robbing banks, old people, children, etc. And if there is no God and no eternal life, why worry about morals? There would be no right and no wrong? The biggest dog eats the most, might make right, etc.

Don't feed me any lines about humanity either. Humanity comes from Genesis 1:26-27
"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

This is continued in Genesis 2:7 "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

The difference between my believing God and your accepting that life came from somewhere in space, is that you give life a materialistic beginning and I give it an omnipotent creator whose powers are far beyond anything that we can imagine or dream. You accept that there are limits to everything and I believe in infinity in both directions, Revelations 22:13 "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last."

--
I have no sig, does anyone have one to spare?
Re:There seems to be a step missing by *lythande* · 2001-12-20 10:23 · Score: 1

We know that polyols are present in the M and M meteorites, that they (by definition) came from space and we know that these sugars form an integral part of life as we know it. Is it so seemingly illogical to you to hypothesize that, since we cannot discern how these sugars came to be present here,they might have originated elsewhere? Your post is an a-typical appeal to ignorance coupled with a mis-application of Occam's razor(Do not multiply entities unnecesarily,or *newer application* the simplest answer is most often true.) Your argument seems to be,"Theory X is too complex for me to understand, and it is so easy to say 'God did it!Read Genesis.' that it MUST be the correct answer."
The fallacy in this is that your deity concept is far more complex than even the most complicated of theories. Where did this God come from?What is this God's nature? etc. etc. Theories can be tested,and are based on objectively verifiable evidence.Religion is not. It is based solely on the subjective testimonies of religious persons. If said testimonies were accepted as the be-all end-all of explanations, we would be in a sorry state indeed, and not sitting in front of out computers in our air-conditioned homes.If we simply threw up our hands and said,'God did it.I think I'll give up my job in astrophysics and go have a lie down.' then there would be a great deal we would have never learned.
Additionally,I would like to say that the assertions that theists make about what/when/where and why their respective deities did or did not do something is akin to blasphemy. I would think that an omniscient omnipowerful deity that was capable of concealing every shred of evidence of its very existance from the curious and driven minds of mankind collectively might be just a tad insulted when a mere human made claims of knowing anything it did.Just a thought.

--
"When in trouble or in doubt,run in circles,scream and shout." -Lazarus Long
Re:There seems to be a step missing by Mr.+Slippery · 2001-12-20 10:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

Without a creator deity (let's call him God), you can't explain eternal life. Oops, I forgot, you probably don't believe in that either.

No, I don't, but the questions are quite orthagonal. Creator god(ess)(es/s) still wouldn't explain the continuity of psychology after bodily death, because we still have to explain the existance of the creator.
Saying "X was created by Y" leads to the question "So what created Y?" If your answer is "Y is eternal", why not skip the middleman and asusme that X is eternal in the first place?
And if there is no God and no eternal life, why worry about morals? There would be no right and no wrong? The biggest dog eats the most, might make right, etc.

I don't worry about morals at all. Consult any Zen master or Taoist sage for further enlightenment.
I just try to act compassionately, simply because it suits me to do so - not out of any fear of "eternal damnation" or "the wrath of god(ess)(es/s)", but because my experience is that it leads to less suffering. Metaphysics has nothing to do with it; speculations about some process whereby the fiction "I" call "my self" might continue after this body dies, don't help me figure out how to live this life at all.

--
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Re:There seems to be a step missing by pubudu · 2001-12-20 11:01 · Score: 2

To believe this, you still have to come up with an answer to where did it come from originally. I believe that it is much easier to believe in God than to believe that all this stuff just happened to occur in the right order.

I'd like to retract the confusion of my original post in order to answer this one. I reread the space.com article, and there do seem to be reasons that it would be easier for such molecules to have formed in space than on Earth. It seems that the primordial formation of our solar system would have been favorable to their production (in some discernable amount), and as all--or at least most--of the stuff in the solar system came from this primordial mixing of gases, it would be reasonable that some simple sugars would be found in asteroids. (Of course, such processes could also be the source of these sugars on Earth, it having formed from the same stuff; asteroid impact would still not be needed for seeding life.)
This is easier to believe than the first chapter of Genesis because it is the product of our own reasoning. God may have created the heavens and the earth, but the jump from belief to knowledge requires that we know how He did so. The Bible does not tell us the processes that took place ("And there was light" isn't very helpful in this regard); it at most gives us the first cause and result ("And God said ..." and the above quote).
Moreover, since God does not speak in the Bible of simple sugars, other planets or asteroids, or penguins, we must, if we are to remain believers, admit that God did not give us every detail. (Do we really need to know about polyhydroxylated compounds in order to be led to belief?) We should not, then, assume that the discovery of every detail that is not mentioned in the Bible is an attempt to contradict the Bible, and thus need not assert the Bilical account as an alternative.
Of course, the order of creation is open to dispute, if God meant that early account to be a scientific explanation of our origins.

--
~~~~~~
under-paid karma whore
Re:There seems to be a step missing by Anonymous Coward · 2001-12-20 12:09 · Score: 0

if you were trying to be funny, you weren't
if you are serious, go read an encyclopedia and not a comedy site
~very anonymous coward
Re:There seems to be a step missing by SEE · 2001-12-20 14:44 · Score: 2

Sure, it's easy to believe Genesis 1:1. Similarly, it's easy to believe that all existence is an illusion (Buddhist), that all existence is part of a chain of never-ending self-destorying-and-recreating universes (Hindu), that we're all a simulation running in a computer somewhere and that our belief in free will is a computer-induced delusion, or any of a dozen other theories.

But none of those theories are relevant to the question of the origin of life. Even if God or whatever specifically decreed each step on the transformation of inert matter into human beings, the scientific study of what happened at each stage is still relevant -- at the very least, as a method of studying the way in which God's mind works.
Re:There seems to be a step missing by gi-tux · 2001-12-20 15:21 · Score: 1

I like the link you provided for the Taoist sage. It is quite like some Biblical scriptures in Joshua 4:5-7
And Joshua said unto them, Pass over before the ark of the LORD your God into the midst of Jordan, and take you up every man of you a stone upon his shoulder, according unto the number of the tribes of the children of Israel:
That this may be a sign among you, that when your children ask their fathers in time to come, saying, What mean ye by these stones?
Then ye shall answer them, That the waters of Jordan were cut off before the ark of the covenant of the LORD; when it passed over Jordan, the waters of Jordan were cut off: and these stones shall be for a memorial unto the children of Israel for ever.

I can also see that you lack a basic requirement to be able to believe in God. That basic requirement is FAITH or as is stated in Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Without FAITH one can't possibly break free of material constraints. Without FAITH you can't possibly believe anything that you can't see or touch or feel.

While it is easy for me to agree with a lot of the things that you say as I believe that there are many good and scholarly men that do or did not believe in God as I do, you can only believe that I have loose screws for believing in something that can't be totally comprehended in earthly terms. I can agree that a lot of the things taught by Zen masters or Taoist sages are useful, but you can't believe that life is eternal, because you can't understand eternity.

I can say that God created man, because I have FAITH in God. He created man because he wanted to do so, and I can't possibly understand it.

You are correct that having FAITH in God doesn't tell you how to live this life at all. However, in John 14:15 you can learn about living this life
If ye love me, keep my commandments.

And how do you learn his commandments? 2 Timothy 2:15 states
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

This is no different than studying the quotes of Zen masters or Taoist sages. You can't possibly understand (believe) if you don't know (or hear).

To sum it all up please read John 1:1-4
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God.
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

--
I have no sig, does anyone have one to spare?
Re:There seems to be a step missing by gi-tux · 2001-12-20 15:47 · Score: 1

I agree that God is complex. Why would an omnipotent being like God, who knows all, want to create man, a being that would cause him so much trouble? How could he have possibly sent his only son to earth to live as one of us and to be ridiculed and killed in such a cruel way? That is just a part of the complexity of God.

What you are saying is exactly what I said about people that "can't believe in God". It seems to me that you are saying, "If I can't get it into simple terms that can be described in an earthly manner and I can duplicate, then it can't possibly be true". You seem to be stuck on "Where did God come from?" and I say that he didn't come from anywhere because he always was. God is a spirit according to John 4:24
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
If you say that theories can be tested, how do you test that this "sugar-like substance" is where life came from? I have yet to see people just suddenly appear in this world, I haven't seen anything just suddenly appear in this world. I disagree with you on the sorry state part also. I am a computer programmer, and my family has participated in the space program in various ways for 3 generation (engineering, programming, model making, research, etc.). We in no way see that it conflicts with our religious beliefs. God saw fit to give me the understanding to program computers and I use that ability. If you decide not to use your abilities in "astrophysics and go have a lie down", remember 2 Thessalonians 3:10
For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
If you read every one of my posts concerning God, you will find that I back them up with scriptures. The Bible is the inspired word of God, written by men to whom God gave directions. It is recorded for our learning and training. God wants us to know of him, and he doesn't hide anything from us.

Now I would like to answer your question they might have originated elsewhere? with another question. Is it impossible that they came from God? Maybe he has given you a clue that you are too blind to see. Just a thought.

--
I have no sig, does anyone have one to spare?
Re:There seems to be a step missing by gi-tux · 2001-12-20 16:24 · Score: 1

I see no confusion between your two posts. I agree that the Bible doesn't give all the steps, but we at some point must accept "And God said...". In Genesis 11:1-9, we read a story of people who wanted to build a tower to heaven. God came and confused their language and scattered them abroad. God gave them the ability to build, but they misused that ability. We can't confuse the knowledge, with a need to know. Knowledge and faith are not mutually exclusive, but knowledge is not required for faith.

I do not believe that God gave us every detail. I also do not believe that I must be able to duplicate everything to be able to believe it. I can't see electrons flowing through my cable modem, but I believe that all of these postings came from people located somewhere in the world. I can't see any of you and might never see you, but I believe that you exist. I have never seen England, but I believe that it exists. I don't know the exact steps that God used to create the world, but I do know that according to Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. That tells me that everything was here by his plan and it was his breath that gave me life. That breath can't be explained in human terms any better than that, and therefore even if we learn everything else we can't duplicate the creation of life. Therefore we can never determine if our knowledge is accurate, because we can't duplicate the experiment.

My contention is that our time would be better spent investigating things that we can duplicate and use, rather than investigating things that can't possibly be duplicated. Space exploration and investigation of our own planet are important as God has made us the custodians of the universe. How can we protect our world or the universe if we don't understand them?

--
I have no sig, does anyone have one to spare?
Re:There seems to be a step missing by pubudu · 2001-12-20 17:26 · Score: 1

I see no confusion between your two posts. I agree that the Bible doesn't give all the steps, but we at some point must accept "And God said...". In Genesis 11:1-9, we read a story of people who wanted to build a tower to heaven. God came and confused their language and scattered them abroad. God gave them the ability to build, but they misused that ability. We can't confuse the knowledge, with a need to know. Knowledge and faith are not mutually exclusive, but knowledge is not required for faith.

The confusion mentioned in my first post was why we should think that sugars were created in space, requiring an extraterrestrial seed for their presence on Earth. I stepped back from that confusion in my second post, admitting that it may be more likely that they were created in space than on Earth after it had formed/been formed.
Moreover, I must disagree that knowledge is not at all required for faith. Cf. Deut. 4:6, "...for it is your wisdom and your discernment...", discernment being the closest thing to reason, in our usage, in Hebrew (Binah). See also Prov. 2:1-5, 7:4, 9:6, and 9:10 (the word may be translated understanding).
It does not appear, then, that God struck Babylon for its pursuit of scientific knowledge; God did not steal the secret of architecture from them (unless this is one of those omitted details--why would He omit such an important detail?). Their reasons were not a pursuit of knowledge, but to make a name for themselves (Gen. 11:4). (Incidently, when God ensures that they will not "understand the language of his neighbor" (Gen. 11:7), the word is literally listen, not understand or discern, as above.)
And at the very least, even scriptural literalism requires that one know the scriptures and their pedigree. And how could we know the miracles described therein to be miracles without a knowledge of the Nature from which they deviate?

--
~~~~~~
under-paid karma whore
Re:There seems to be a step missing by Herstel · 2001-12-20 23:19 · Score: 1

Without a creator deity (let's call him God), you can't explain eternal life. Oops, I forgot, you probably don't believe in that either.

Except maybe for something abstract, our vision of the creator deity won't help find facts based on chemistry and physics which explain the original issue. The deity's power is only philosophy based on imagination, ie. a temporary replacement for unexplained.
Re:There seems to be a step missing by gi-tux · 2001-12-21 01:33 · Score: 1

OK, I understand what you meant by confusion now. I must also say that I didn't write exactly what I meant when I stated that knowledge wasn't necessary for faith. You are correct that knowledge of the scriptures is necessary. In an earlier post I quoted 2 Timothy 2:15 "Study to show thou self approved ...". Obviously this will lead to knowledge because of the rest of that verse "... a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

I will agree that God most likely did not take away the architectural ability of the people of Babel, but he made it impossible for them to work together to reach their goal. They wanted to reach unto heaven. My feeling is that the people of Babel were more interested in materialism and the worship of man than in the worship of God. This was the ultimate cause of their confusion and distribution.

To move this into todays world, if the product of science is knowledge, then let's get the knowledge correct. We must be able to reproduce the things that we discover and they must be consistant before we declare them as a truth. Often times in the scientific world things are declared to be true before they have been fully tested. For example in times of old it was believed that the world was flat and that you could fall off the edge of the world. This was thought by many to be a truth for centuries, but it wasn't fully tested. The same goes for powered flight by man, space travel, etc. These truths are often changed as new knowledge is discovered.

While this article doesn't declare a truth, it contributes to the materialism and worship of mankind. I am only saying that we should be careful how we apply knowledge. Just because these "sugar-like substances" came from space and are similar to sugars required for life as we know it, doesn't mean that life came from space. It could be a parallel occurence. It could be that this is a clue that God wants us to investigate, or it could be that this is our tower of babel, something to confuse us in scientific pursuit.

--
I have no sig, does anyone have one to spare?
Re:There seems to be a step missing by gi-tux · 2001-12-21 02:58 · Score: 1

I disagree with that. Please read my entire post. It involves FAITH. Believing in things that you can't understand or see. I have faith that God exists and that a part of me will live forever with him or in eternal damnation based upon my physical existence. God's power is limitless and physical. The power of God healed the sick and raised the dead. The power of God has caused the unexplained (the plagues in Egypt as described in Exodus). You can call it imagination if you wish, I call it hope. Again to quote Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
By this FAITH, I can believe that God created man by giving him the breath of life (which implies that I can't duplicate the act) and that I have the hope of living eternally with him.

I believe that a great portion of what we call science is imagination. It is people trying to persuade themselves that God doesn't matter or exist, simply because they won't allow themselves to believe that anything is greater than themselves. I believe that science in and of itself is not a bad thing, as I have stated I have participated in the space program as have many members of my family. I simply believe that many have let science become their religion rather than the worship of the one true God.

--
I have no sig, does anyone have one to spare?
Re:There seems to be a step missing by pubudu · 2001-12-21 06:44 · Score: 1

For example in times of old it was believed that the world was flat and that you could fall off the edge of the world. This was thought by many to be a truth for centuries, but it wasn't fully tested.

It's odd that you should choose this example, as it was based on authority rather than reason. In cases were men applied their reason to the matter, unfettered and unguided by authority, they have concluded that the Earth was round (look at the shadow it casts on the moon).
If God were so intent that we not explore science for its own sake but only for those things that are useful or readily apparent, wouldn't He have told us as much in a commandment or two, rather than in an easily interpretable story? Instead, he says, My son, eat thou honey, because it is good; And the honeycomb, which is sweet to thy taste: So shall the knowledge of wisdom be unto thy soul: When thou hast found it, then there shall be a reward, And thy expectation shall not be cut off. (Prov. 24:13-14). (knowledge is actually in the imperative, know that wisdom is such to your soul.) Which would suggest the pursuit of science for its own sake. And if science is commanded, how can He not also command whatever missteps are necessary for the advancement of science?

--
~~~~~~
under-paid karma whore
Re:There seems to be a step missing by Anonymous Coward · 2001-12-21 09:37 · Score: 0

You mean it won't happen?

Damn, then what about the tooth fairy?

And Santa Claus?

...and the Goat Sex Man? Do the not exist?
Re:There seems to be a step missing by *lythande* · 2001-12-21 12:58 · Score: 1

To be clear,it is not my assertion that there is no supreme being responsible for the creation of life. It is, however, my assertion that attacking science because one's religious texts seem to contradict any given theory is counter-productive. To cease looking for the how's and what's and simply be content with the answers given us in the Bible, or the Bhagavad Gita, Qu'ran or any other such religious writings does not encourage the growth of the human sphere of knowledge. I have no issues with anyone's religious beliefs, but I DO take issue with those who would constrain learning and growth because it does not jive with those beliefs. If anyone wishes to attack a hypothesis or theory, then do so,but do so by pointing out flaws in said theory/hypothesis, and supporting your arguments with facts,not by simply invoking the name of your deity and then dismissing the theory/hypothesis as apocryphal and therefore unworthy of any further pursuit.
It irks me that every time people learn something new about the nature of the universe, the beginnings of life, or the history of the Earth, someone has to say something like,"That's stupid. The answers are all in *insert name of holy book here*" This is a non-argument.
In answer to the question of whether or not it is impossible that life was created by God: nothing is impossible though it may be highly unlikely. In the case of God,I do not dismiss the possibility of one, because I can no more prove that such a being does not exist than anyone can prove that one does.
*sigh* I can't believe I chased a red herring this far.....

--
"When in trouble or in doubt,run in circles,scream and shout." -Lazarus Long
Re:There seems to be a step missing by netsharc · 2001-12-25 06:39 · Score: 1

Oh no, it's one of those religious argumentators. Run everybody!

I don't believe any supreme being had anything to do with the creation of life and the universe, I believe the Bible is fiction written by common human beings, I believe religion was created to control society. Prove me wrong. And don't quote from the Bible because the Bible is fiction. Even though it may say "This book is not fiction. Those who don't believe that it is not fiction will be condemned to eternal damnation. Therefore, believe that what is written in this is real, or else..!"

--
What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
Re:There seems to be a step missing by cosmol · 2001-12-26 08:30 · Score: 1

What you call faith, I call blind acceptance of cultural myths stemming from your obvious fear of death and the unknown. So you imagine an infinite god and an afterlife simply as a defense mechanism.
this is MUCH different from what we call science.
Re:There seems to be a step missing by mselmeci · 2001-12-26 20:41 · Score: 1

I know I'm going to get modded down for this, but I believe faith is just a device used by those who feel the need to invent something just because they cannot accept a gap in their (collective) knowledge.
Re:There seems to be a step missing by gi-tux · 2001-12-27 04:19 · Score: 1

And what you call science, I call the inability to accept things that you can't understand in human terms. I strongly believe in science and can agree to some extent that we need to learn about our beginnings. However, I don't think that people like you would ever believe it if the truth were found, no matter what the truth is.
I have no fear of death, I know that when it is time for my existence on this earth to end, I will spend eternity with my God. I feel very sorry for you that you believe that this earthly existence is all that you have. And like I asked someone else earlier, why are you here posting to Slashdot, when you could do better for yourself out robbing from children and the elderly. If there is no eternal life or damnation, it doesn't matter what you do here on earth, so just go have fun.

--
I have no sig, does anyone have one to spare?
Re:There seems to be a step missing by cosmol · 2001-12-27 07:10 · Score: 1

However, I don't think that people like you would ever believe it if the truth were found.
I assume the "truth" you are talking about is the existence of an omnipotent god. Science does not rule out god, In fact quantum mechanics almost suggests that an outside observer is necessary for the universe to exist. But I will gladly believe it when I see proof, till then, I will not accept the memetic virus called christianity to fill in the gaps of my knowlege to make me feel better.
I have no fear of death, I know that when it is time for my existence on this earth to end, I will spend eternity with my God.
EXACTLY! if you didn't have your faith you would fear death right?
I feel very sorry for you that you believe that this earthly existence is all that you have. ... If there is no eternal life or damnation, it doesn't matter what you do here on earth, so just go have fun.
I also feel sorry for you that you find the "earthly existence" so lacking that you need the assurance of an afterlife. I am very concerned that you consider robbing from children and the elderly "fun" perhaps it is a good thing that you have found christianity.
As the other poster replied, god is not the only fountain from which goodness arises. You are looking at the world through your own lens and cannot imagine other points of view. Maybe I like doing good works because I want to make the most of my earthly existence in the eyes of my fellow humans. Maybe I think fun is "doing unto others as they would..." One doesn't need to believe in god to love goodness.
Re:There seems to be a step missing by gi-tux · 2001-12-28 05:07 · Score: 1

By truth, I mean whatever truth is discovered. For a person who uses science as their religion, they can not accept that a truth is the ultimate truth, because then their religion has ceased to need to exist. And whether you will admit that science is your religion or not, it takes the place of a god and therefore has become a god.
Actually, if I didn't believe in eternal life, I would have absolutely no fear of death. There would be no need to fear death, because I would simply cease to exist. I would be like any other animal, like a dog that will give its life to protect its master and never has a thought of the fact that it will cease to exist.
As to the part about robbing children and elderly, I simply use that as an extreme. My point was that goodness only hurts YOU and in no way helps YOU personally, if you do not believe in eternity. All you have is here. As to finding this earthly existence lacking, I do find it lacking. I have to deal with sickness, death, and evil. The promise I have for eternity, is for no pain or sorrow and no evil. I have stated that there are other sources of goodness, and I make use of them from time to time, but I get my assurance for eternal bliss from only one source, the Holy Bible as inspired by God. There is goodness in the teachings of Mohammad, Budda, Joseph Smith, John Wesley, and many others, but these are uninspired and can not directly lead to knowledge of the will of God. Just as the study of science can not directly lead to that knowledge.
Science can lead to knowledge, and that knowledge is not bad in and of itself. However, using that knowledge to teach falsehoods is a sin that will lead to eternal damnation. There are scriptures throughout the Bible that warn us of false teachers and false ministers. Several of these scriptures warn us that people will not believe the truth, such as 2 Timothy 4:3-4
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
Maybe I think fun is "doing unto others as they would..." One doesn't need to believe in god to love goodness. I am glad that you feel this way. However, it is still illogical to me. I have never seen a species that didn't have a soul that would live eternally have goodness like humans. Some animals will care for their young, as long as it doesn't "cost" too much. Rarely will an adult animal care for its young to the point of its own death. Animals never care for the old like humans. And in most cases animals don't care for their own kind outside of their family or community. Therefore it would seem to me, that you would have no problems with doing whatever was necessary for the survival of you and your offspring. If that meant stealing from others or whatever.

--
I have no sig, does anyone have one to spare?

Shh... by Anonymous Coward · 2001-12-19 22:06 · Score: 0

>This discovery may support the theory that life on earth was seeded
>from outer space.

Don't say that too loudly, or the Church of Scientology will be suing Slashdot for copyright infringement!

--
"Kapitan, fire the Tom Cruise missiles!"
Yes, even Anonymous Cowards get to have a .sig

I always thought ... by Big+Dogs+Cock · 2001-12-19 22:52 · Score: 0

... that anyone who could come up with this couln't be from this planet.

--
"Under the iron bridge, we fist" - The Smiths, Still Ill

Re:I always thought ... by DrSpin · 2001-12-23 04:49 · Score: 1

Proof that Alan Sugar came from the planet Zog?
I always suspected - now I know!

all i can say is... by msouth · 2001-12-20 03:29 · Score: 2, Funny

...sweet!

--
Liberty uber alles.

Re:all i can say is... by crtreece · 2001-12-22 20:19 · Score: 1

Dude!

--
file: .signature not found

about to hit the penicillin by kresmoi · 2001-12-20 04:56 · Score: 1

>The new study found a variety of polyols in two meteorites, both thought to have originated in the main asteroid belt between
>Mars and Jupiter.

I recall some theory about the origins of the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter saying that it might have been a planet once upon a time, and then got destroyed for whatever reason...

...time for sci-fi theories galore...

this lends support to the Great Experiment Theory. Some higher being is experiementing with us...the previous experiment (planet betwen mars and jupiter) got too nosy for its own good so they had to destroy it, sort of like how penicillin is used to control bacteria reproduction. However, rather than start the whole thing over from scratch again, They just arranged for the essential elements of life to be transferred from the old experiment to the new one...Earth.

i think there was a sci-fi short story about this in a mag i read years ago...

Re:about to hit the penicillin by Bonker · 2001-12-20 07:01 · Score: 2

James Hogan's 'Gentle Giants' books do quite a bit with this particular idea.

--
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!

Sugarcoating? by Archanagor · 2001-12-20 05:17 · Score: 2, Funny

Could it be that somewhere, far, far away they're actually sugarcoating the asteroids as they send them to us?

--

The (Hopefully) Great Slashdot Blackout

sugars in space by donutz · 2001-12-20 05:58 · Score: 1

obligatory Simpson's quote: "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power. Then you get the women..."

Do these sugars only come in small quantities in space rocks, or might there be veins of sugar running through them? Could we create space probes that power themselves by feeding off this sugar? if you licked one of those space rocks, would it taste sweet?

Not that kind of sugar! by LightBender · 2001-12-20 06:29 · Score: 1, Informative

It's not that kind of sugar - not what you put in your coffee to make it sweet! I believe they are talking about four different sugars that make up DNA and RNA. These four sugars are called nucleotide bases and have the names adenine, guanine, cytosine and thymine. So, not quite as fun as rock candy. :)

Re:Not that kind of sugar! by Happy+go+Lucky · 2001-12-21 03:01 · Score: 2, Informative

It's not that kind of sugar - not what you put in your coffee to make it sweet! I believe they are talking about four different sugars that make up DNA and RNA. These four sugars are called nucleotide bases and have the names adenine, guanine, cytosine and thymine. So, not quite as fun as rock candy. :)
Um, those are nucleic acids. They're definitely not sugars. All sugars (yes, ALL sugars) have the formula n(CH20). That means the composition is always an integer multiple of one carbon atom, two hydrogen atoms, and one oxygen atom. That's actually the definition of sugar (well, carbohydrate, anyway).
All of the nucleic acids include amino groups, NH2. That makes this easy, since sugars NEVER include nitrogen. The only sugars involved in nucleotide bases are ribose and deoxyribose, both of which are five-carbon-atom sugars matching the formula above.
I couldn't get to the article. I'm going to guess, however, that it was referencing simple carbohydrates, one- or two-carbon sugars.

Sugar by Anonymous Coward · 2001-12-20 06:30 · Score: 0

Well, sperm *IS* a form of sugar (no, not the sweet kind, the scientific term), so you can say life on Earth *was seeded* from space (ever heard of this dumb blond joke? About the one girl in biology class?) :P

Re:Sugar (dumb blonde joke actually happened) by akiaki007 · 2001-12-20 06:38 · Score: 2, Funny

This actually happened at Harvard.

--
"Time is long and life is short, so begin to live while you still can." -EV

Apparently there are silicon-rich rocks... by SIGFPE · 2001-12-20 07:51 · Score: 2

...on Mars. Silicon is an important ingredient in the manufacturing of computers and according to some experts it is possible to construct artificial life using computers. The inescapable conclusion is that this is evidence that life once inhabited the Martian surface.

--
-- SIGFPE

So it is true! by xinu · 2001-12-20 09:04 · Score: 1

Girls are made of sugar and spice and everything nice!

Nature by Schwamm · 2001-12-20 09:55 · Score: 2, Informative

There are also a couple of articles over at Nature.

Meteoritics: Life's sweet beginnings?

and

Carbonaceous meteorites as a source of sugar-related organic compounds for the early Earth

Mmmm.... by waldoj · 2001-12-20 14:42 · Score: 2

...aaaaa-steroids.

So... by sean23007 · 2001-12-20 15:54 · Score: 1

I won't care about what they find in a meteor until they can prove that that is where the Egyptians actually came from. Until then, though, I'm much more interested in actual space missions. Those Ancient Egyptians... oh man.

--

Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.

Re:Sugar (dumb blonde joke actually happened) by Anonymous Coward · 2001-12-20 21:19 · Score: 0

I have been using that joke for at least 15 years.
I suspect it never happened, but is urban legend.

Once again by Anonymous Coward · 2001-12-21 01:19 · Score: 0, Interesting

Slashdot posts an article by someone else which I had submitted 12 hours previously.

*sigh*

I guess only those who have accounts get to post stories

Re:Sugar (dumb blonde joke actually happened) by coasterfreak · 2001-12-21 01:37 · Score: 1

Sorry man, it ain't true(www.snopes2.com), or at least never been confirmed for those

--
Your pain is funny

Re:The key is . . . by JJ · 2001-12-21 01:42 · Score: 2

If a certain set of sugars and amino acids are found in space and delivered to our planet in its primordial state, then this implies that other planets capable of reaching the primordial state couls also have the same origin. This boosts the odds on SETI and would tie Earth-bound life closer to any other that could be found. (Apart from the force that is.)

--
So long and thanks for all the fish . . . !!!

One Question by Anonymous Coward · 2001-12-21 07:49 · Score: 1, Interesting

Simply because we know these processes can occur in space, does that mean that they necessarily did not occur on Earth independently?

It seems the "life on Earth was seeded from space" is possible, but is meaningless speculation at this point since life on Earth could just as easily have originated here independently. What's intriguing about this is not that Earth needed Asteroids for life, but that bodies other than Earth are turning out to have more and more of the prerequisite ingredients.

D00d!! by Anonymous Coward · 2001-12-21 09:34 · Score: 0

What drugs are you smokin'? Other than the penicillin, that is?

Solution by Renraku · 2001-12-21 12:19 · Score: 1

Were the asteroids pink and did they have "Sweet'n'Low" written on the side?

--
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?

Asteroids May Have Brought Sugar to Earth by Birger+Johansson · 2001-12-22 17:26 · Score: 1

Although Sir Fred Hoyle proposed *complete* organisms might have developed in space, this is a partial vindication of his ideas.
He was sometimes ridiculed for some of his wilder ideas, which caused his more resonable ideas to be ignored; It is a pity he did not live a few additional months, to read this news.

Immanual Velikovsky by Anonymous Coward · 2001-12-22 19:03 · Score: 0

This adds even more credibility to the theories of Immanual Velikovsky, He proposed similar idea's in his book "Collision Of Worlds" in 1950! He was also correct about the atmospheric composition and temperature of the planet Venus.

Pushing it... by Anonymous Coward · 2001-12-23 19:14 · Score: 0

These people are really pushing it. Heh... we used to think the moon was made of cheese and that was considered "science".

First contact: by Alsee · 2001-12-27 01:31 · Score: 2

Pardon me, can we borrow a cup . . .

-

--
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.

Slashdot Mirror

Asteroids May Have Brought Sugar to Earth

65 comments