4 ms·
That doesn't really change the question if how life originated though, does it? It only proposes another place of origin, not a method of origin.
by roelschroeven 4y ago
That doesn't really change the question if how life originated though, does it? It only proposes another place of origin, not a method of origin.
- hutzlibu 4y agoYes indeed. But maybe the conditions for life to form are so exotic, that they are not to be found on earth?
- andrewflnr 4y agoWhy would we believe that, though? Why bother with the extra layer of indirection, through an environment we know even less about? Then there's the fact that life appeared on earth almost as soon as it was possible for it to exist. Either it was easy and formed really quickly on Earth, or space is/was so full of it that earth got contaminated almost immediately... which still implies life is common and easy. Panspermia just doesn't help.
- hutzlibu 4y ago"Panspermia just doesn't help." It helps exploring other options, since we are still unable to create artificial life. No one is saying to stop those experiments. But maybe they cannot succed, in the same way the alchimists could not create gold in the middle ages - because some fundamental understanding or ingredient is missing. (today we can create gold, but it is not worth it with our current technology) "Either it was easy and formed really quickly on Earth, or space is/was so full of it that earth got contaminated almost immediately" Or it was just random chance, that a "contaminated" comet hit earth at the right time, or an alien vessel passed by and planted life seeds. We simply don't know. So we cannot rule those options out at this moment. And "almost immediately" is still in the timespan of millions of years, so plenty of time for many asteroids to hit the earth and possibly bring life.