Panspermia.org

Cosmic Ancestry, asks and answers(?) some important questions regarding the origin of Life on Earth, as well as Life in Space.

I personally find such a scenario as that presented as more plausible than any other, and see the evidence leading us in such a direction.

And you?

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

So you are arguing from a religious point of view? I've looked over this site, and it is about religion, not science.

For instance, from Evolution versus Creationism:

In one important respect Cosmic Ancestry is fundamentally different from both Darwinism and the prevailing western religions. Both hold that life arises and evolves from simpler beginnings. Darwinism explains this process with material causes, religions do so with supernatural causes. In Cosmic Ancestry life neither arises nor evolves to more highly organized forms from simpler beginnings. With only material causes, it just doesn't work. But life can, with only material causes, descend from prior life at least as highly evolved as itself. Thus in Cosmic Ancestry life only descends. We acknowledge that this difference is profound.

As for where this life comes from "in the first place," the question may be misguided. Science cannot answer every question. For example, why is there anything instead of nothing at all? The existence of the physical world, with or without a beginning, is a phenomenon that science cannot reduce. We are suggesting that highly evolved life is a phenomenon of similar magnitude that science cannot reduce.

So, there is highly organized life "just because," there is no evolution, there is only descent from these "Just Because" creatures. It's a variation on ID.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

what I want to know is, what does the word 'pan' mean? I know that 'sperm' means seed but I can't find out what 'pan' means.

[Greek panspermiā, mixture of all seeds : pan-, pan- + sperma, seed; see sperm1.]


I first came across this while researching spores.......

__________________
Far out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the Western Spiral arm of the Galaxy lies a small unregarded yellow sun. Orbiting this at a distance of roughly ninety-eight million miles is an utterly insignificant little blue-green planet whose ape-descended life forms are so amazingly primitive that they still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea ...

As a prefix, it means "all" or "whole."

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Sounds familiar.

Are you serious????

Here are the first few questions/answers from the FAQ of that page...

So will you be "attempting" to argue that these ideas are reasonable?

I can't wait...

Certainly not, and neither am I arguing.

That site contains a lot of science from known and working scientists, and is well referenced.
A "once over" will hardly suffice to convince me that you know more than these guys.

Is it not possible, since the elements for Life in the universe are abundant that the universe itself is simply just geared toward developing (read evolving?) Life? You know, just because?

But do you, like most Darwinists, hold that Life started accidentally in a
warm puddle on a rock and evolved from there? In a closed system as such?

I ask because I doubt Science itself will ever be able to show how Life arose accidentally by bumping around in a soup.

I think Cosmic Ancestry does well to ask these questions.
Not because I feel there should be accepted a "just because" answer, but because the evidence apparently is leading us there.

But I certainly see why panspermia is shunned (is it, is it really?) by the mainstream.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Do you believe the start of life was purposeful??? I believe that's called religion.

What evidence??? Ya know, the more you post on this subject, the more obvious it becomes that you are basing your conclusions on personal biased beliefs and not on the evidence...

...so I will ask again...by what criteria (other than personal belief and a "cherry picking" of websites that say what you want to hear) are you judging the evidence?

Nah, I won't be "attempting to argue" anything; I'd much rather some decent discourse for a change (but you simply can't ignore me).

But you, can you refute either Hoyle or Wichramasingh?

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

I see you've come here playin "police" again but I didn't really expect you to try to refute the scientists' work whose website we're discussing.
You can't.
Your words are aimed at my person rather than the idea we're discussing; again, ad hominem.



Wrong; I said nothing of the sort.

On what subject? Life? On earth and in space?
And what conclusions?

Do you deny the evidence for Life's elements being abundant in the universe?
Do you deny the earth is bombarded regularly with material that may contain these Life elements?

RAF, I answered this question on the other thread.

Now, answer my questions.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

I think the whole cosmic ancestry thing is an easy way out from the problem how life began. If you conclude that life on Earth originated in space and came here via meteors(or even worse, aliens) you don't have to trouble yourself with how life began in space or rather just in general since there's no reason to think life on Earth didn't begin here.
From the article:
Cosmic Ancestry does not attempt to explain the origin of life in the first place. What a surprise...

Once again this is something that in theory is possible but that doesn't make it probable let alone true.

No...an example of an ad hominum would be "you are wrong because you are an idiot", and I have said nothing of the sort...stop throwing around that accusation...STOP IT NOW!!!

I'd be happy too...can you ask a "reasoned" question...free from your personal bias?

Sorry, RAF; I call it as I see it.

Both posts #7 and #9 (your only other in this thread) are aimed at me and not the idea of panspermia or the respective scientists' work.

So practice what you're preaching here, eh?



Edited to add: yet another aimed at my person and not the idea here... my alleged bias that Life is plentiful in the unieverse???
What in hell are you talking about, RAF?

I'm here finished here today...

Moderators!!!

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

A.DIM wrote:
The word scientist obviously doesn't carry the same weight it used to. How can you call the contents of the site scientific? At best it's nothing but wild speculation.

It is stating that certain things cannot occur through science, that sophisticated life just appeared, but provides no evidence, and argues against evolution, despite the vast amount of evidence in support. That is a religious argument. You seem to support this argument.

So do many ID and Creationist sites. That doesn't make the central argument any less religious. Edited to add: The quality of this "science" is often lacking, however. The references in:

http://www.panspermia.org/mechansm.htm

are illuminating even on first glance. I especially like the "Related Reading by Creationists and Other Sceptics" section. The top three items:

Michael J. Behe, Darwin's Black Box
Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis.
Phillip E. Johnson, Darwin on Trial

Hoo, boy! Behe, right at the top of the list.

"Just because" is not science. Now, it could be because molecules fit some ways better than others, and simple life can develop out of complex chemical processes, then develop further from there. How do you propose that sophisticated life just came to be? Further, what is your evidence for this?

I'm not a Darwinist, a Newtonist, an Einsteinist, a Crickist, or any other -ist. I follow science based on the evidence. The proposed process of abiogenesis (not evolution of species) has non-random constraints, and the system is not closed. And, wow! For someone who isn't arguing from a religious point of view, those sure sound like Creationist/ID comments.

Again, abiogenesis isn't purely accidental. Molecules go together some ways but not others. The environment places many constraints on chemical processes. What I find fascinating is that you apparently consider this (and evolution) as impossible, but you are arguing for something far, far more difficult, which again, sounds like a religious point of view.

What evidence???

Don't mix panspermia into this "Cosmic Ancestry" argument! Panspermia is a hypothesis that life could spread between worlds. Panspermia in itself says nothing about evolution or abiogenesis, all it does is increase the playing field.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser