Jump to content
|Topic||Stats||Last action by|
|Windows 10 Technical Preview||
|PS4 and Xbox One resolution / frame rate discussion||
|The Big Wrestling Thread!||
|Official Dogs vs Cats||
|The Kojima Rumors Are True, Says Metal Gear Singer||
Posted 11 March 2013 - 17:44
Posted 11 March 2013 - 17:54
I LOL'd. Religion is the hugest scam in human history. Oh here, pass this basket around and put your money in it. You'll go to heaven when you die. LOL!
Posted 11 March 2013 - 17:55
Posted 11 March 2013 - 19:59
There’s also the fact that the research was published in the Journal of Cosmology, a peer-reviewed journal that has come under critical scrutiny numerous times since it was established in 2009. The journal faced a lot of controversy when it published a paper by NASA engineer Richard Hoover claiming to have found fossils “similar to cyanobacteria” in meteorites.
Posted 11 March 2013 - 20:11
Originated wasn't the right word to use so you're right. It's possible that life on Earth could be the result of abiogenesis and/or panspermia. We'll never know for sure until we find irrefutable evidence which is highly unlikely. The Earth is 4.6 billion years old and the first signs of life, as far as we know, came into existence over 3 billion years ago. The chances of finding the preserved remains of prokaryotes (simple cells) of that age are extremely unlikely. I think it's more likely that we'll find evidence of newer forms of life on meteoroids, asteroids, or comets which would support the panspermia hypothesis.
It actually doesn't confirm life came from outer space. It just confirms a possible transportation method, and doesn't answer the question of how THAT life came about (probably still abiogenesis). In fact, life still could've initiated on our planet without comet involvement.
Posted 11 March 2013 - 20:32
Posted 11 March 2013 - 21:03
That said I don't understand the conclusion that this somehow validates or strongly supports panspermia. Fossils are not living beings and cannot cause life to appear anywhere, as far as I'm aware. This doesn't prove or even suggests that living beings may travel in space through meteorites; that they could survive extreme conditions including landing through the earth's atmosphere and crashing at thousands of kilometers per hour onto the ground, and then reproduce and adapt on an alien planet. This seems quite far-fetched even for simple bacteria.
Posted 11 March 2013 - 21:07
Posted 11 March 2013 - 21:17
So hypothetically speaking if I were to have sex with the meteor, could I be entered into the Guinness book of records for first inter planetary love making session?
Posted 12 March 2013 - 00:55
This is the strongest evidence yet of cometary panspermia — that life on Earth began when a meteorite containing simple organisms landed here, billions of years ago — and, perhaps more importantly, that there’s life elsewhere in the universe.
Posted 12 March 2013 - 03:10
I tend to think money is the biggest scam as we seem to spend our whole lives building it up only to die and not being able to take it with us and some how the lack of it stops us from bettering ourselves.
Posted 12 March 2013 - 11:33