I think I know what your thinking, but first, calm the hell down! I'm the one educating you, and predicing what the world would be like if everyone was like me, as an insult, isn't smart, because i can do the same with you, the one I'm trying to talk sense into. And second of all, if the next 2 lifeforms we find do not have cells, then they are not lifeforms!!! Okay, what your probably thinking is that stars are lifelike, which could very well be true in a person's opinion. The 'lifelike' characteristics you talk about have been considered, along with many other characteristics. Because these traits didn't match that of life, and again, they did not, because these traits did not match that of life, they didn't call stars life, they called them stars. Stars are luminous cosmic body, not a form of life, I cannot be any clearer.
So if we find something that can move, talk and think we paint it to look like a human no one can tell the difference but it's still not alive?! I would expect a 5 year old to do better than you! Oh and if everything was "fact" then Earth would still be flat and at the centre of the universe because it was considered fact so it couldn't possibly wrong!
Really? Get it through your thick skull. There is a definition of what life is. If something is to be classified as life (if something is life), then it has to have cells. Trait #1 - Cells: Life has cells. If it does not have cells, it is not life. Fact by definition. Now if this human you found, if it has cells, test number one passed. We can examine if it has cells usually by taking a sample and placing it under a microscope. It has been proven that stars are not made of cells, therefore they are not life. There are six traits that define life. If you would like to research these traits farther, you can find them here. Six characteristics of life
If we find something that can move, talk and think, that's painted to look like a human, we would either add it to the definition of being alive, which would be dumb in my opinion, or we would find a name for it. You say that if no one could tell the difference between the real person and the knock off, it is the same thing... By appearance the earth looks flat, undoubtedly, so it is flat? I am truly appalled by your oblivious.
Damn Xylom, I've never communciated with a more immature forgehubber, and that says something. We ARE NOT talking about the biological definition of life, if we were, we would have listened to you, and you would have seemed less like a dumbass. Viruses, that's something not made of cells, yet is alive, it's biologically inanimate, but any idiot with head up his. . .clouds . . could tell you it is alive. Once again, this is philosophical, not scientific in nature. Physical determinism prevents there to be what most interpret as "life" without some form of metaphysical organ existing, who's to say that isn't in a star?
Viruses ain't alive, for your information. This is an interesting fact about viruses, because of their deceivingly lifelike properties. Point failed, you just made a fool of yourself, and dug a deep hole for yourself by ruthlessly attacking Xylom, who necessarily argues Turkey Bag viably. If I were you I would start backpedaling, starting with apologising to Xylom. And physical determinism does not prevent there to be what most interpret as "life", physical determinism prevents delusional fantasies powered my logic and reason. Metaphysics is vague and untrue.
Physical determinism summarized: If you knew the location and properties of every atom in the universe at the beginning of time, the laws of physics would allow you to calculate and predeclared the future forever on. Viruses are scientifically inanimate, but once again, any idiot with a muffin could tell you they are alive.
There is a reason the idiot with a muffin you talk of is an idiot, thats because he believes viruses are alive. Well, it's easily confused, so I wouldn't call him an idiot. Here are a few sources, get educated then talk to me. Are Viruses Alive? Viruses Virus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Viruses Micro-organisms - viruses Viruses Molecular Expressions Cell Biology: Virus Structure General Biology/Classification of Living Things/Viruses - Wikibooks, collection of open-content textbooks Enough? And thank you for summarizing physical determinism, I confused it with physics, but very determined physic. Physical determination is false, by the way.
The guy that put them up got suspended. An object that acts in a way that the laws of physics can't predict. No I said "So if we find something that can move, talk and think we paint it to look like a human no one can tell the difference but it's still not alive?!". What your saying is that there's 2 things that are identical to the untrained eye yet one is alive and one is animate. Earth was once conceded/defined flat and was that true? Nope, life is conceded/defined to have cells and that may also be false. With one veiw, Earth looks flat. With many it does not. Same with life.
You show no signs of learning, please don't waste my time, listen to me, and prove to me I'm not babbling to myself. Actually, the laws of physics can very well predict the ways life acts, just we can't yet. If there was a computer that could simulate the brain's activity, we could closely predict how the organism would act. We don't have the understanding of organic thought process or the computer to suport this, but there is potential. Come to think of it, simple single cellular organisms may be predicted this present day, but I'm not sure. This is very complicated and I don't blame you if you don't understand. Regardless, you are wrong, here is what's right: Your saying that something that is not a human but looks like a human is a human. Is not a human but is a human. I don't see how you don't see how stupid this sounds? It's just logic, something that isn't, is not, even if it looks like it. Concider the following: The was something that looked human, so it was. The Earth looked flat, so it was.
You are right to quote this because it's true, but i get the feeling, and correct me if I'm wrong, that you think this means viruses are alive. What you have have discovered is what I said earlier, that people, like many early scientists, mistake viruses for being alive because they display lifelike properties. They do not, however, display all the properties, so they are definitively not alive. Why won't you accept this? This really bugs me. You two, Turkey Bag and Prosper, have been refuting obvious facts as if they actually mattered in the first place. Why? Why can't you see whats right in front of you? Why are you two so determined to prove stars are alive?
You get one time of detail and need to predict lets say, 5 hours into the future. That can not help you with a human. And we get only physics, not biology or anything like that. No I'm say that a human and something that looks like a human can't be told apart from each other yet one is alive and one never was. You also skipped my main point, "With one view, Earth looks flat. With many it does not. Same with life." Oh and if viruses match my definition at any point, they are alive!!!!!!
YOUR DEFINITION OF LIFE IS NOT SOCIETY'S DEFINITION OF LIFE. CHOOSE YOUR DELUSIONAL MIND OR REALITY. Seriously, choose your view or society's view. Your view is whatever you want it to be, society's view is this: STARS ARE NOT ALIVE. I'm done with this nonsense.
I concur. You can't make statements like stars are alive and then not accept the answer when we provide factual evidence that stars are, in fact, not alive.
WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT BIOLOGY. Jesus, people. Can you not understand that? We know what the biological definition of life is. OK? Do you understand? Biology is the study of life, yes, but who says that life outside our atmosphere doesn't follow the same rules? Once again, I state to you the very simplified summary of physical determinism: If you knew the position and properties of every atom in the universe at the beginning of time, you could predeclared the the future forever on via el lawso de physicos. (If you call me on bad spanglish, I swear. . .) YOU and I are not any more lifelike than clouds. We are both just moving about according to the laws of physics, albeit we do in a much more complex manner. So what is life? I say a metaphysical organ defines it, while you and Xylom continue to preach the 9th grade biology vocabulary study sheet, instead of taking the time to consider what you're talking about, and putting in your 2 cents. IS THAT CLEAR? I'm sorry, I'm all cooled down now, but damn it, there hasd to be some kind of rule against trolling at forgehub.