{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
originally posted in:Secular Sevens
4/6/2014 7:27:26 PM
17
Panspermia of basic life, organic compounds, amino acids, and/or other "building blocks" is becoming a significant possibility/probability.
Not to the extent of the video, and not with the life intentionally firing itself into the cosmos, but rather being spread about by large-scale impact events and Oort cloud type objects.
English
-
A flower that can launch a seed out of the planet's pull of gravity without getting burned up through the atmosphere? I'm skeptical, at the very best.
-
deGrasse touched on this issue in the new [i]Cosmos[/i] series. I always thought that transpermia was more or less "passing the buck." Sure, it is possible, but I don't see why it's more likely that life developed on another planet then landed on this planet, which is well suited for hosting life. Apparently, as described in [i]Cosmos[/i], fossil records predate large extinction level events caused by cosmic impact, so life most likely would have had to been blasted off into space when large asteroids sterilized the surface, only to be reintroduced back into oceans once things cooled. Definitely an interesting possibility. I don't really like the idea of transpermia, but I don't dismiss it.
-
Life would be so pointless if this was true
-
You rely on a particular "origin of life" in order for life itself to have a point? Interesting. Odd, but interesting.
-
With God, there's a purpose and a reward. Thus there is meaning.
-
Purpose and potential reward for certain species based on kneeling, holding hands together and singing isn't within the scope of this thread.
-
This does not in any way exclude God. Who is to say that God was not involved in processes such as panspermia, if they really did happen?
-
I was thinking the same thing actually
-
Who's to say that God didn't create the Universe? He didn't have to create "life" directly.
-
I never said he didn't create the universe bud.
-
As I interpreted it, you were stating that life would be meaningless if it didn't originate from God himself. I assumed you were talking about God directly creating life instead of Him creating the Universe itself. Then again, that's basically saying He created life.
-
[quote]The secrets of evolution Are time and death. There's an unbroken thread that stretches From those first cells to us. Every cell is a triumph of natural selection And we're made of trillions of cells (Within us is a little universe) Those are some of the things that molecules do, Given four billions years of evolution (We are, each of us, a multitude)[/quote]
-
I don't disagree. My point is that the organic compounds that are a part of the process are common throughout the universe. As to whether or not life here on Earth was completely "home-brewed" or was due to a "starter culture" coming in on an asteroid or comet? Either seems plausible to me.
-
Did you ever see an article or study detailing how it's probable that terrestrial life originated on Mars?
-
That's the thing about the theory of panspermia. When the idea is that it "came from elsewhere" the origin is open to anywhere that either has/had life or the organic compounds. In order to reliably link life on one planet to life on another, there would need to be a commonality and shared root in those organic molecules (which when we look at the basic ones, they are everywhere). So in order to say "Planet X seeded Planet Y" with any amount of certainty, we would need to find commonality in complex molecules in both locations. I am unaware of complex organic molecules (such as DNA, RNA or something similar yet related) being found on Mars. Finding less complex molecules (such as amino acids) there "could" indicate Mars-to-Earth panspermia, but it could also indicate the inverse, or the fact that both were impacted with object that had the organic molecules in them.
-
That's the article I was thinking of, if you care to read it over.
-
Edited by Recon Number 54: 4/6/2014 8:23:28 PMIt's a proposal, but there is currently no evidence to bring it into the realm of "probable". The higher concentrations of boron and molybdenum on Mars is intriguing (as it relates to creation of carbohydrates and ribose), but it is not evidence of Mars-to-Earth panspermia. As I said, we would need to find DNA or RNA on Mars and then establish commonality between the Martian molecules and the Terran ones. So far? No discoveries of DNA, RNA or other similarly complex organic molecules on Mars. I am open to the idea, but I would not use the term "probable". Feasible? Yes. Possible? Sure. But probable? Not with just a "we have a theory that it could have happened" statement from scientists.
