Prosper, I'm convinced your high: You don't, apparently. Turkey bag, thats about it. WTF?! FACEPALM!!! WTF? FACEPALM! <- just one exclaimation mark this time. We don't want to preach it, but you gotta learn somehow! Its special Prosper grade irony. You won't find this anywhere else.
Biology is the study of life, yes, but who says that life outside our atmosphere doesn't follow the same rules? The fact that if life outside of our atmosphere didn't follow the rules, it would not be life. YOU and I are not any more lifelike than clouds. Yes we are, we follow the rules, clouds do not. I think you are trying to say that there are different levels of organization that are not life but emulate some certain aspects of it. This still is not life. If it was, we would call it life. The definition of life is constant. If we found something that does not follow the definition, we would call it something new.
I just came here to say that anyone who supports this thread must support that anything can be made out of anything. Example: h2h looks like a duck (which it does). Just because similarities do exist doesn't mean that they don't at all; that being similar doesn't mean being exactly the same.
You ignore everything I say! Earth was once considered flat by society, and the fact you keep saying "STARS ARE NOT ALIVE" shows that you have lost and fail badly. I already said that they are not, yet you bring it up and ignore my last posts because you know your wrong!.... You are even worse than the last guy! I roflmaool at your failure. It can outsmart and beat us at everything, it has billons of years higher technology than us yet it's animate! YAY WHERE DUMBER THAN A ROCK IN EVERY WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I could try show you your faults to no prevail, like I have in other posts, but I'm going to stick to my more sensible previous statement: I'm done with this nonsense.
Same. Even though I am relatively new to this thread, I can already foresee where this is going for me. I just can't be arsed to deal with the idiots who support the OP and the stupid OP himself, who probably has only a primary school education. You'll see, when you study proper biology, kids, that you were completely stupid.
Oh my God. Have you no sense? Listen to me. Scientists have defined life in the way you are currently preaching. They defined it for classification purposes, and there is a good chance it's wrong. Imagine it like this, life is like tennis. Imagine no one knew how to play tennis (no biologist knew how to define life), and some people (biologists) came up with some rules on how to play(biological definition of life). There is no guarantee they are actually the rules of tennis (what life is), but it just makes sense at the moment. Now, this discussion is about the actual rules of tennis (analogy continued), and whether or not the real rules could include stars.
Running just shows that you lost. No one what so ever has replayed to my main point here. That is because you know your wrong and you fail! 1) 2 things that anyone would think are the same yet one is alive and one is animate. I would expect a 5 year old to have better theory's than that! 2) With one view, Earth looks flat. With many it does not. Same with life. Our view of life is worst than 1 persons view of earth. Think of the size of Earth then the size of the universe.
Doesn't matter if in the future we find out it's wrong. Right now it's right. Same goes for every other piece of knowledge you've ever accumulated. Just stating that it could be wrong doesn't make it wrong. Your argument is invalid Prosper. I am in no way backpedaling. How did you come to that conclusion? Turkey, work on your grammar, I can't even understand your argument. From previous examples though I'm just going to assume it's more babbling nonsense.
Giant space sheep taking over Earth make more sense than what your saying! It's called common sense. You know? The thing that got us this far! We know it's wrong, do you really think that everywhere in the universe is the same? Even a 1 cm cube is different, and you think the infinity of space is the always the same? YOU FAIL!!!!! I came to that conclusion with a brain! When yours gets past what a 5 year old should have you'll understand.
I'm just going to point out that common sense has no place in science, unless it is backed by proof and at that point it is not really common sense. If you need an example I shall point to the 'earth is flat' that you keep referencing. Common sense made people believe that it was flat because it looked flat, in the same way just because something looks animate does not mean it is.
Xylom is right. Your missing the point. Life is defined as what we define it as. You can't say that we are defining it wrong, or that it is isnt really what it's defined. It's definition is not absolute. No science is absolute. Just like the rules of tennis. We create our own understandings and definitions of life, and currently, although there is slight debate on the full definition of life, never will a star fall into that definition. Arguing that one day the definition of life might go bi-polar and somehow encompass the process of a star is as likely as there being a forest in your wardrobe.
So what if it can be compared to being alive, ****ing anything has one trait or another in common with life. That's a stupid thing to debate about.
Sigh.... In the beginning common sense is what keep us alive and grew on to create science. A single view is what made Earth look flat. Common sense is the main reason we know it isn't today. Once more we are not about a definition that can define life on earth, we are talking about a definition that can define all life. My point was that stars have a lot of thing in common with us not just one or two. Learn to think for yourself. I will ask the same thing again since no one has replied to it (because you fail and you know it!) 1) 2 things that anyone would think are the same yet one is alive and one is animate. Explain how that works! 2) With one view, Earth looks flat. With many it does not. Same with life. Our view of life is worst than 1 persons view of earth. Think of the size of Earth then the size of the universe. This messes you up doesn't it!
But Mich is exactly right. Our definition of life is one that has encompassed everything we have seen in our time on this Earth, and has remained unchanged or unchallenged for thousands of years. It doesn't matter what other possibilities are out there. It's our definition! We have called it what we want, and your arguement is as tangiable as saying Coca Cola should actually be called Pepsi.
I will ask you to reread my post. I clearly explained why common sense is the thing that made us believe the earth was flat, because to them duh it looks flat so it is. Science did not grow form common sense, it grew from speculation and the such. Furthermore science is what proves the earth is not flat today. So to clarify, a 'single view' is what common sense is. Common sense is looking at a problem and then coming up with the answer with little to no proof, and more of intuition. Obviously without proof it has no place in science. I swear, in this thread, I think there is not one point that you ever concede to, you always assume you are right for some reason and it is very irritating as you can no doubt tell from the insults you are getting. Even if we got both biology and physics Doctorates in this thread, and they all explained to you how you were wrong, would you then change your mind and concede?
Common sense is a form of information. Science is a form of reasoning. You do not question common sense, which is why it is Not science. Infact you shouldn't use the term common sense. It is stupid.