by Derek Cantrell
A close look at our biology reveals that we are a chemical process. This is the best way to define humanity. In fact, the term chemical process is the best way to define all living things. We currently define life, as an entity that contains DNA or RNA. As we’ve learned much about the origins of life, we can thus far conclude that life originated in the oceans. With this information, we can also conclude that DNA/ RNA, is necessary for life that derives from water, but cannot conclude that DNA/ RNA is necessary for theoretical life that formed out of oceans. This means that if we were to encounter extra-terrestrial life, there is sufficient reason to believe that DNA/ RNA, would not be a necessity for them. We also identify a characteristic of life as, having a drive to thrive. For example: Plants will grow toward sunlight and produce seeds, animals will eat nourishment and procreate.
Through acknowledgement of evolution, we can also determine that we as a chemical process, derived from chemical processes, derived from chemical processes, and so forth. We must also conclude that we derived from an original chemical process. Using this method, we can trace our origins. The oldest living chemical process in existence today, are bacteria that emerge onto the ocean floor, from tunnels connected to the Earth’s mantle, called Smokers. These bacteria contain RNA, which is the predecessor to DNA. RNA is also more UV resistant than DNA. The RNA’s UV resistance is useful, as the bacteria derive from the vicinity of the Earth’s mantle, where molten rock and fire is present, thus UV radiation is abundant.
The bacteria flows from the Smokers, as if emerging from the fiery lava itself. Fire, though not considered to be alive, displays many behaviors of living organisms. For example, fire consumes gases such as oxygen, and consumes various elements to produce energy. It also emits waste, through smoke and ash. Fire displays other predictable and unpredictable behaviors, just as we find in living entities. Fire is a chemical process just as we are, and while primitive in many respects to humans, it is also much more advanced in other respects. Fire can reproduce instantly, fire can digest many more elements, and it emits waste far more efficiently than we do. Another characteristic of living entities is we create anomalies to potentially gain advantages to environment. This is how we define evolution.
If we can theorize that the fire from our Earth’s mantle is capable of evolution, it’s conceivable that fire would produce RNA, as a UV and liquid resistant anomaly, in order to efficiently navigate the water environment. Once we omit our current, and possibly outdated, definition of living, we see that fire is a much older predecessor to our species, than the bacteria from the ocean floor.
Perhaps a microscopic flame existed in a nutrient rich droplet of oil, for a brief moment in time. Soon millions of flames existed in millions of droplets. The fire’s interaction with the oils eventually formed the first RNA. This may sound like a farfetched idea, but this is what life does. Life struggles and explores until it finds a more efficient way to exist in its environment. The harsher the environment, the more extreme the evolution needed to continue life. We as humans, came from fish. Whales from a wolf-like creature that walked the Earth on all fours. Fire was once confined to the Earth’s mantle, but soon became the first life at sea. Fire has since continued its great crusade to master every environment. We are a product of that crusade.
We are born of fire. As a product of fire, we have a drive to survive, reproduce and evolve. Just as vast particles of fire, we are driven to thrive in unison. This doesn’t promote conformity, for each particle of fire is driven to explore the environment. It simply means that we are all potentially, equally important to our existence as a species. Not only should we find solace in our species, but if we as living things, are all evolutions of fire, then all living entities should attempt to live in unison.
Segregation is irrelevant. Social expectations are irrelevant. Religions are inaccurate and irrelevant. We are all here to explore and to benefit life, not just ours, but all life.
A very quick recap: Humans are chemical processes. Evolution suggests that we derived from the simplest chemical process. Fire is a chemical process that predates the oldest living thing on our planet. Fire is also in the immediate vicinity of these bacteria. If we employ Occam’s Razor to draw our conclusion, the answer is quite obvious.
Do I have proof that fire made the jump to ancient bacteria? Do I have the power to place fire into interaction with water and wait millions, or billions of years? Obviously the answer is no, but apply scientific method or mathematics to current belief systems and note which hypothesis comes out on top.
I agree we are “chemical processes”, however the second to last paragraph goes into woo territory. (Even though its a cool description.)
I agree we are "chemical processes", however the second to last paragraph goes into woo territory. (Even though its a cool description.)I’ll admit that the hypothesis has a radical concept and radical implications. Chemical Analysis II was obviously an expansion of Chemical Analysis. The original intention of Chemical Analysis was to adjust those with creationist positions, to the idea that we originated from a chemical reaction. I believe the adjustment would prevent many wars and challenge many destructive groups that hinder humanity today. I can’t prove humanity came from thermal energy, any more than we can prove any theory of origin, but considering the beliefs of the creationists, I believe I have some merit. With that being said; I posted my hypothesis on this site, as I find a lot of merit, from individuals like yourself, and encourage feedback that challenges my manuscripts. I was particularly pleased that you were fair with your analysis of my work. I posted on here, as I would much rather be judged by those who have knowledge of what they’re talking about, than those who judge because of insecurity in their own beliefs. I also posted it on here, as I’m proud of it, so thanks for not roasting me. I also have a manuscript titled A Kink in the Armor posted on this site, and I would love feedback. Don’t worry, it’s just as radical of a proposal, but again, I find merit in it. You seem to have a lot of entries on here, and I currently have limited reading time, so let me know if there are ones that you’re particularly fond of, or ones that you wish feedback for, and I’ll try my best. I find this site far more invigorating than classes and seminars I’ve attended. It’s like television, but with interesting shows, and they’re all interactive.
The chemical reaction, totally agree with. The fire, not quite there. But I see where you are coming from. Fire, being a chemical process, has the chemical process stimulated which in turn opens doors for more chemical process that otherwise would not occur. Chemical reaction combined with a controlled electrical relationship is needed.
Technically, everything on the planet is in a chemical process.
The chemical reaction, totally agree with. The fire, not quite there. But I see where you are coming from. Fire, being a chemical process, has the chemical process stimulated which in turn opens doors for more chemical process that otherwise would not occur. Chemical reaction combined with a controlled electrical relationship is needed.The manuscript was originally written to introduce those of a theistic type of belief, to the concept that we came from a chemical process. I realize the variables and current lack of scientific proof, but I think it puts most, on a more accurate train of thought.
Technically, everything on the planet is in a chemical process.Not only is everything a chemical process, but everything originates from a chemical process. My manuscript's primary purpose was to offer those of theist belief systems, a new train of thought. If everything including us, originates from a chemical process, then we can qualify chemistry as a god of superiority over any theist belief. I think if we could convey this idea to the vast theist believers, many wars and situations of famine, would be things of the past.
Got ya, understand now what you are shooting for. Note of interest. In some of the oldest (religious) saying that have been passed down. The Rig Vega states that man and earth are made from star dust. First earth was formed, then man appeared, then man created god. As far as the universe, the Rig Vega says mankind may never know how the universe was formed. All this was stated in pre-history. Early man may not have known of chemical processes, but they knew where the chemicals originally came from.
The Rig Vega states that man and earth are made from star dust.Citation please. And even if you have one, this doesn't mean that knowledge was widely transmitted, understood, or properly contextualized.
Hoping to get my big computer fixed and back soon. I have a lot of data including the Rig Vega stuff. Mainly, if you research “god" and follow the evolution of “god" though all the step of evolving. Before god was an item in the sky, or an animal. God was a term that meant the “knowledge of man". As you know the Christian religion says that the “word" was the power and created everything. Do you think that the verbal “word" is what is being stated? Or do you think the translation could mean the “knowledge of mankind"?
But that was just evolving from the Egyptian religion that said the same thing. But what I find interesting is that the OT was put together in Babylon, and did not match the general thinking of genesis stories that we know of today from that area. Then what was picked up has not been touched by the church. You know, Adam, being made a noun. Too many paths to follow here. Just look at the language and burial methods.
One could conclude the bible is following the Rig Vega if you translate “god" to the “knowledge of mankind". Then look at the domestication of all vegetables, nuts, fruits, birds, farm animals, sugar, cotton and many more items. “god/knowledge of mankind" did create earth for man during the period of domestication of earth. So does it make sense that the bible story should have a little bit of truth in it? Was Mary a virgin? We find the bible is poorly translated on many facts.
Remember every timeline in history has had major changes in the last twenty years. And it is still going on. So, how much do we really understand about history for that to happen?
Now take something like what our DNA is telling us and reduce the human population to 500/5,000 people on earth and see how much of that knowledge is passed on and how the stories must have been changed for the next generations.
Hoping to get my big computer fixed and back soon. I have a lot of data including the Rig Vega stuff. Mainly, if you research “god" .You've given me a lot of info and concepts to contemplate. Thanks for the replies.