The idea that we are alone in the universe seems absurd to me.

To me, life seems like a perfectly natural and normal accurance in a universe that only gets more complex as it goes along. The idea that it springs about only once makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Amirite?

yes


Edit, is this true:
"a universe that only gets more complex as it goes along"?

I wonder how Christians would explain it if we do make some type of contact with other life forms.

How do you know we're not just a really long shot fluke?

How do they explain it when they come in contact with other humans with a 'different' religion?

They just pray for them.

The problem is, there is no real understanding of what's required for life to begin - so no understanding of how likely it is that that state of affairs will exist elsewhere. Similarly, even if the necessary conditions exist somewhere else in the universe, we have no idea how likely it is that life will actually eventuate. Perhaps the original spark is incredibly unlikely, despite the prerequisites occuring all over the place.

We're not in any position to say whether it's almost a certainty there's life elsewhere, it's almost an impossibility or anywhere in between. I think people assume that because one of the variables (the number of stars) is known to us and seems big enough to almost guarantee life - the rest of the variables wont be small enough to negate this near certainty. That's an unjustified position.

Its probable that we do understand what's required for life and that's stuff going on with a balance between a stable environment and a changing one - there's plenty of technical literature on the subject, can't recall references but Kaufman rings a bell.

Its possible there's more to it than that but there doesn't seem any reason to think so. There's nothing mysterious about life except that we can't pinpoint when non-life becomes life (always a clue its nothing special).

It's an even better clue that no such point exists.

an even better clue that that the point is that no such point exists, and as no-one would deny that self-replicating processes will develop it inevitably follows that so will life.

I would deny this.

It's more justifiable than saying the opposite.

go on then

This is so poorly defined as to be meaningless. If a prion exists on Jupiter, does it follow that life is inevitable? If a prion surrounded by brine and a lipid wall exists underground on Venus, is life inevitable? What if it's in a soup of ample prions and lipids, such that copies can be made?

I think you're claiming way too much. There are steps beyond self replication that we don't even know is possible on earth. We don't know how good the surrounding chemistry has to be, or what the energy requirements are, or what the radiation thresholds are, or how long stability is required, before robust life can emerge. It's far from a given that life is probable to exist once replication exists, let alone inevitable.

I gave you a very vague outline (though its fairly obvious stuff) and recommended you read the techical literature if you want the dots filled in.