Nobel Prize winner, Francis Crick ,advanced civilisation transported seeds of life in a spacecraft

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
By the way Soylent, didn't mean to reply to you. Something went wrong when I hit the button. Apologies, this comment was meant for a different member.

Thanks for the clarification!
I was about to go back and re-read my post to see what I said!

[edit on 1/31/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]

I would still like people to answer what I talked about before:

Why do people doubt the idea of accidental panspermia so much?

I realize that we don't have enough information to say that it's definitely possible, but it seems that the more we learn about extremophiles, the more attractive the possibility of life coming from a comet gets.

Why are people defending Crick's doubt about accidental panspermia?

[edit on 1/31/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


I don't doubt one or the other, Soylent.
And I really don't think anyone else is either.

Potato
Potato

Isn't evolution just a theory without real hard evidence as he said he finds it hard to think we came from a soup mix of micro organisms.

Isn't alot of things on here just theories wasn't the story about the earth passing through the central plane and the earths magnetic field dropping just a theory until some scientists are starting to agree now.

Without theories we don't move ahead just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And yes this is something i have long believed.

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

I don't doubt one or the other, Soylent.
And I really don't think anyone else is either.

Potato
Potato

Well, that's fine, but why were others (not you) criticizing me for saying that Crick's ideas needed to be revised slightly because of new discoveries -- specifically his whole premise that directed panspermia must be more likely because accidental panspermia and abiogenesis are highly unlikely.

I questioned this part of his argument, and people jumped all over me for doubting the word of a Nobel Laureate. Crick said those things about accidental panspermia over 30 years ago, and I just thought that with new discoveries regarding extremophiles and abiogenesis that have occurred since that time that it should be revisited.

Crick himself thought so. Later in his life, after new discoveries had been made by others, he admitted that he was "too pessimistic" about the chances of abiogenesis spontaneously producing life. He admitted that abiogenesis was more likely than he had originally thought several year earlier.

I don't think anyone has out-and-out said that directed panspermia is all bunk. However, some people (such as myself) have taken exception to Crick's original idea that directed panspremia is more likely than abiogenesis or accidental panspermia.



[edit on 1/31/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply to post by Phage


You are wrong. Your statement is disinformation. We do have evidence of life on another planet in our solar system. (Bacterial) Courtesy of your good friends at NASA:

marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov...

Originally posted by Paradox.
reply to post by Phage

 

You are wrong. Your statement is disinformation. We do have evidence of life on another planet in our solar system. (Bacterial) Courtesy of your good friends at NASA:

marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov...

It may be true that this is evidence for life on Mars, but this specific evidence (magnetotactic bacteria in the ALH84001 meteorite) is still highly contested -- i.e., nothing is known for sure yet.

[edit on 1/31/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]

An international team of nine researchers collaborated on the three-year study. The team, led by Thomas-Keprta of Lockheed Martin at Johnson Space Center, was funded by the NASA Astrobiology Institute. Co-authors of the study are Clemett and Susan Wentworth of Lockheed Martin at JSC; Dennis Bazylinski of Iowa State University (funded by the National Science Foundation); Joseph Kirschvink of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena; David McKay and Everett Gibson of JSC; Hojatollah Vali of McGill University in Canada; and Christopher Romanek of the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory

I find these sources more credible than you and Phage. And I would like to add also that this theory put forward in the video with regards to DNA holding the full evolutionary potential of any organism was first suggested by Marko Rodin, In the Quantum Theory of DNA. Years ago.

This is an amazing thread.. I appreciate you bringing this topic to our attention. It is wonderful to see people looking for answers.

This is an amazing thread.. I appreciate you bringing this topic to our attention. It is wonderful to see people looking for answers.

Originally posted by Paradox.

An international team of nine researchers collaborated on the three-year study. The team, led by Thomas-Keprta of Lockheed Martin at Johnson Space Center, was funded by the NASA Astrobiology Institute. Co-authors of the study are Clemett and Susan Wentworth of Lockheed Martin at JSC; Dennis Bazylinski of Iowa State University (funded by the National Science Foundation); Joseph Kirschvink of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena; David McKay and Everett Gibson of JSC; Hojatollah Vali of McGill University in Canada; and Christopher Romanek of the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory

I find these sources more credible than you and Phage. And I would like to add also that this theory put forward in the video with regards to DNA holding the full evolutionary potential of any organism was first suggested by Marko Rodin, In the Quantum Theory of DNA. Years ago.

All I said was that nothing is known for sure at this time, which is absolutely true.

I don't know what you mean by "sources more credible" than me. I'm not in a position to confirm or deny that these are truly magnetotactic bacteria -- and neither are you. I'm only telling you what I know about the analysis of the ALH84001 meteorite -- and what I know is that nothing has been confirmed yet regarding signs of life in that rock; there are still others who are contesting the results that you mentioned. That's the way science works -- it's a slow process sometimes.

Trust me, when they confirm life elsewhere, we will all know about it. You won't need me or anyone else as a credible source for that story. It will be all over the news.

I'm not doubting that this meteorite shows signs of Martian life -- in fact I'm inclined to believe that it does. But what I believe does not matter. I can believe all I want, but that won't change the outcome of the Mars meteorite analysis.

People need to be a bit more objective about these kinds of things and stop letting what they "want to believe" cloud their judgment.

Is the evidence compelling? Some say it is. I think it is. NASA scientist David McKay thinks it is. Is the evidence absolute? No -- some have valid doubts. We have to wait until all sides chime in.



[edit on 1/31/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply to post by OShtey


I must admit I am enjoying watching the twists and turns of the debate.
I believe Francis Crick would have enjoyed it as well .

[edit on 31-1-2010 by gortex]

Originally posted by gortex
reply to post by OShtey

 

I must admit I am enjoying watching the twists and turns of the debate on this thread .
I believe Francis Crick would have enjoyed it as well .

Yes...great OP article.

As I said, I have no problem with Crick's directed panspermia idea in general. I think it is possible that an alien race seeded the Earth with life.

However, as I said, I do take issue with the idea that directed panspermia is more likely than accidental panspermia or abiogenesis.


[edit on 1/31/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply to post by gortex


Great thread and ive always believed the seeds of life were transported here from a far away place hence the current visitation, it's you're parents checking up on their children.

S & F mate good stuff

"It's like molecular choreography" was once uttered and guttered.

“Remarkably, it transformed into the ribonucleotide!”

Lightening should be the obvious catalyst.

If something does not make sense, more than likely it was not meant to, whether 'by design' or by ignorance.

Truth is the foundation for any Great society.
The blind, deaf and dumb process information in unique ways in which, if examined, may provide clues to one's unknown abilities.

~hydrogen, water, methane, and ammonia~

Amino acids become the catalyst of life for the building of proteins>cells>organs>organIsm.

Starseeds of life on a lonely journey to create a new beginning.

'Sometimes' Reuters delivers the Truth.
Reminds myself of one fishing in a well known infested pond with the idea of catching a clean fish.

The 'clean' fish often developed an immunity.
Such is life itself; to adapt and overcome a being's prior programming from a prior existence to a new double helix program in a new world.

Natural Law Is what 'common' law never was; multidimensional in scope and comprehension.

Humans need one another to discover the truth in the world around them for without the collusion of body and mind among your Brethren, how is one to communicate via experiential learning? Why would one choose ignorance over collective experience?

Without this, one still has the capacity to envision the outer limits or 'blueprints' of life. This requires the 'divine' gift of intellect of which separates man from the animal kingdom. One should be inclined to Use the unique gifts inherent in all life for their own Good.

What did you create, for it's never to late.


[edit on 31-1-2010 by Perseus Apex]

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

I don't doubt one or the other, Soylent.
And I really don't think anyone else is either.

Potato
Potato

yes ... everything is just speculation

Anyone here fans of Battlestar Galactica? The old or new show?

Same idea.

Additionally, I would like to add this quote from the author/speaker Terence McKenna -- I think it fits in well:

I am old, older than thought in your species, which is itself fifty times older than your history. Though I have been on earth for ages I am from the stars. My home is no one planet, for many worlds scattered through the shining disc of the galaxy have conditions which allow my spores an opportunity for life. The mushroom which you see is the part of my body given to sex thrills and sun bathing, my true body is a fine network of fibers growing through the soil. These networks may cover acres and may have far more connections than the number in a human brain.

My mycelial network is nearly immortal--only the sudden toxification of a planet or the explosion of it's parent star can wipe me out. By means impossible to explain because of certain misconceptions in your model of reality all my mycelial networks in the galaxy are in hyperlight communication through space and time.

The mycelial body is as fragile as a spider's web but the collective hypermind and memory is a vast historical archive of the career of evolving intelligence on many worlds in our spiral star swarm. Space, you see, is a vast ocean to those hardy life forms that have the ability to reproduce from spores, for spores are covered with the hardest organic substance known.

Across the aeons of time and space drift many spore forming life-forms in suspended animation for millions of years until contact is made with a suitable environment. Few such species are minded, only myself and my recently evolved near relatives have achieved the hyper-communication mode and memory capacity that makes us leading members in the community of galactic intelligence. How the hyper-communication mode operates is a secret which will not be lightly given to humans.

But the means should be obvious: it is the occurence of psilocybin and psilocin in the biosynthetic pathways of my living body that opens for me and my symbiots the vision screens to many worlds. You as an individual and Homo sapiens as a species are on the brink of the formation of a symbiotic relationship with my genetic material that will eventually carry humanity and earth into the galactic mainstream of the higher civilizations.

Since it is not easy for you to recognize other varieties of intelligence around you, your most advanced theories of politics and society have advanced only as far as the notion of collectivism. But beyond the cohesion of the members of a species into a single social organism there lie richer and even more baroque evolutionary possibilities. Symbiosis is one of these. Symbiosis is a relation of mutual dependence and positive benifits for both species involved.

Symbiotic relationships between myself and civilized forms of higher animals have been established many times and in many places throughout the long ages of my development. These relationships have been mutually useful; within my memory is the knowledge of hyperlight drive ships and how to build them. I will trade this knowledge for a free ticket to new worlds around suns younger and more stable than your own.

To secure an eternal existence down the long river of cosmic time, I again and again offer this agreement to higher beings and thereby have spread throughout the galaxy over the long millenia.

A mycelial network has no organs to move the world, no hands; but higher animals with manipulative abilities can become partners with the star knowledge within me and if they act in good faith, return both themselves and their humble mushroom teacher to the million worlds to which all citizens of our starswarm are heir.


[edit on 1-2-2010 by MystikMushroom]

The concept of both 'directed' and 'accidental' panspermia is quite an intriguing hypothesis, particularly in view of the fossilised bacteria found on meteorites, but of course, the meteoritic fossil is still in the realm of contestation, and until it can be fully verified that the rock does indeed hold the fossil remains of bacteria...the accidental-side of panspermia remains hypothetical, but probably less so than directed panspermia.

As for directed panspermia, I should not think it to be beyond the realm of possibility. I do follow the idea that they are other intelligent life forms out there in the universe, but of course the kicker, is there one or more that have evolved to an extent that they have managed to develop space flight and expanded beyond the confine of their own planet?

Our own species, will one day have to leave earth in search of another life-sustaining planet similar to our own, or die with the earth many years into the future...so for the survival of our species, our future destiny does lay in space flight. No planet remains a home forever, and I should think that a species like ours with its voracious appetite for the planet's fossil and mineral resources, will long make it unsustainable for itself before the star around which it orbits swallows it up. Who can say that such a scenario has not occurred many times already for other life forms elsewhere in the universe, and that it is they who are the authors of directed panspermia on planets in early development such as ours once was?

Physically, the vast distances between planets like ours make it practically impossible to traverse the distance as a commute, so I should think that an evolved species would venture out into space, knowing that the inhabitants of the craft would not be returning to their own planet. Their mission would be one of colonisation, environmental bioengineering, and life incubation.

They would not necessarily stay on the planet, but would help to set the process of life evolution on its way. Self-replicating and self-repairing drones could be left to robotically monitor the planet, and record how things evolve, or they would be no monitoring of any kind, but possible future visits.

The possible scenarios for inter-space colonisation would follow many paths. A space-faring civilisation, particularly an advanced one, would not just colonise a single planet, they would colonise many for practical purposes.

The problem for the theories of panspermia is that their ultimate origin had to have begun with abiogenesis, maybe not just on one planet, but on many around the same time, if we are to believe in the Big Bang. The fact that we are existing, and alive to that self-awareness, is indeed a pround puzzle.

S & F

This has ALWAYS been the most logical, senisble theory of human life origin EVER....

The reason why people tend to immediatley debunk and dismiss this is because....

IT SHATTERS RELIGION

time to pull the blanket from above your head folks

Well, if I were God and I had just created the universe I would think that seeding the whole universe by dispersing the building blocks of life abundantly throughout this newly created space would be a good idea. And then if at some point the intelligent beings that resulted from this seeding decided themselves to seed the universe further with life God would certainly not be surprised as the created tends to resemble the Creator.