Science Do you believe in Panspermia?

[statickid]

I think that even though there will be plenty of variation in Alien life on a macroscopic level it will still be easy to find similarities no matter what environment they come from. Life on earth comes from a huge variety of environments and conditions and there are only so many ways to do certain things if the life is a physical entity. I highly doubt that the first intelligent life encountered will be bipedal and 4-8 feet tall. I'm betting an alien life form would have SOME resemblance to SOME kind of earth creature even if it was wildly chemically different.

 

[dgatsoulis]

If you take a look at the Cosmos, it turns out that the most popular elements in the Universe, are the same as the ones that made life on Earth possible. (With the exception of Helium, which, eventhough is the second most abundant element, it's also chemicaly inert).

Panspermia is an interesting hypothesis, but that's all it is. It would be very nice to find evidence that supports it (evidence of microbial life , similar to life on Earth, on another planet), but no such evidence has been conclusively found yet.

In the end, Panspermia is an "exotic" explanation of the origins of life and eventhough it could be true, you don't have to resort to it, to explain the origin of life on Earth.

 

[Frogisis]

I don't find it convincing at all, at least in terms of how life arose on Earth, but I'd be very surprised if it never happens anywhere, ever. Kind of like parthenogenesis, or other kinds of asexual reproduction among metazoa, it's probably something that happens from time to time but is nevertheless the exception.

 

[DanM]

There hasn't really been any proof or disproof. I can't really say I accept it yet. I also am annoyed when people say they do or don't "believe" in something related to science, especially theories like evolution and gravity.

 

[dgatsoulis]

There hasn't really been any proof or disproof. I can't really say I accept it yet. I also am annoyed when people say they do or don't "believe" in something related to science, especially theories like evolution and gravity.

I think that this comes from the meaning the word "Theory" has, in American-English. Somehow, it's being thought of as a synonym to the word hypothesis or something similar to a personal belief.
In Greek the word theory comes from the verb (θεωρώ = theon-oro) which literary means "to view God". Even at the time when it was first used in writtings, it meant nothing else than "to see the (absolute) truth".

Theories in science are always backed up by data derived from observations and evidence. You don't have to believe "in" it, you HAVE to believe it, because of the evidence. If there's no data backing it up, or if there is no universality in the data provided, it's just a hypothesis (like Panspermia).

 

[Urwumpe]

No kidding?? :blink:

No kidding, I disassembled windows system DLLs on a Atari ST during my teen years. The Atari simply had the better programming languages available at that time. :lol:

The Atari ST does care for the endian flag in the floppy disk header, Windows and MS DOS do not.

 

[Jarvitä]

That's not how science works. Panspermia is a hypothesis, which may be possible or even probable given certain assumptions. But scientists don't do research to validate their belief, they do research to find the truth. "Believing" in a hypothesis just doesn't make sense. It's well to be aware of it and the arguments for/against it, though.

 

[DanM]

I think that this comes from the meaning the word "Theory" has, in American-English. Somehow, it's being thought of as a synonym to the word hypothesis or something similar to a personal belief.
In Greek the word theory comes from the verb (θεωρώ = theon-oro) which literary means "to view God". Even at the time when it was first used in writtings, it meant nothing else than "to see the (absolute) truth".

Theories in science are always backed up by data derived from observations and evidence. You don't have to believe "in" it, you HAVE to believe it, because of the evidence. If there's no data backing it up, or if there is no universality in the data provided, it's just a hypothesis (like Panspermia).

Thank you.

 

[Keatah]

I always like to say that life here began out there.. And that some space aliens came by in their spaceship and had a picnic here. One of them took a dump behind the bushes. And we grew from that bacteria.

 

[SiberianTiger]

I always like to say that life here began out there.. And that some space aliens came by in their spaceship and had a picnic here. One of them took a dump behind the bushes. And we grew from that bacteria.

Be consistent: it should have happened behind a rock!

 

[Keatah]

Be consistent: it should have happened behind a rock!

Toche' !! So much for intelligent life, eh?

ahhhhbbarrrrrooooOOOOOOoooppppfffff!!! bwaaahahhaaaa!!

 

[T.Neo]

But maybe they brought the bushes with them... alien bushes specially engineered for that very purpose. :lol:

 

[Urwumpe]

But maybe they brought the bushes with them... alien bushes specially engineered for that very purpose. :lol:

And they have mastered the three seashells, right?

 

[Keatah]

But maybe they brought the bushes with them... alien bushes specially engineered for that very purpose. :lol:

Perhaps.. Maybe the bushes started the plant life here. And the solid feces waste rolled off into the sea to start life there. As it rolled, bits and pieces broke off and evolved into insects and other land-dwelling creatures. The urine evaporated to make all forms of airborne flu's and the common cold.

I also propose them alien dudes had a 20 meter intestine to make all that complex chemistry.

 

[T.Neo]

:rofl:

The only problem with your hypothesis, is that it doesn't fit into the currently accepted fossil record. :lol: