astronomy-chat.net
Promoting astronomy discussion.



Main
Date: 02 Dec 2006 17:03:20
From: Rich
Subject: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
scientists of this theory?

Hollow spheres found in a primordial meteorite could yield clues to the
origin of life on Earth.

Scientists say that "bubbles" like those in the Tagish Lake meteorite
may have helped along chemical processes important for the emergence of
life.

The globules could also be older than our Solar System - their
chemistry suggests they formed at about -260C, near "absolute zero".

Details of the work by Nasa scientists are published in the journal
Science.

Analysis of the bubbles shows they arrived on Earth in the meteorite
and are not terrestrial contaminants.

These hollow spheres could have provided a protective envelope for the
raw organic molecules needed for life.

Dr Lindsay Keller of Nasa's Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston,
Texas, told BBC News that some scientists believed such structures were
"a step in the right direction" to making a cell wall.

But he emphasised that the globules in Tagish Lake were in no way
equivalent to a cell. The hollow spheres seem to be empty, but they do
have organic molecules on their surfaces.

Mike Zolensky, a Nasa mineralogist, commented: "If, as we suspect, this
type of meteorite has been falling on to Earth throughout its entire
history, then the Earth was seeded with these organic globules at the
same time life was first forming here."

Co-author Keiko Nakamura-Messenger of JSC told BBC News: "We reported
only 26 globules in this paper, because they are small and hard to
analyse. But we have seen hundreds in a small area. We can estimate
that there are billions of them in this meteorite."

The ratios of different forms, or isotopes, of the elements hydrogen
and nitrogen in the meteorite are very unusual, which suggests the
structures did not come from Earth, say the scientists.

"The isotopic ratios in these globules show that they formed at
temperatures of about -260C, near absolute zero," said co-author Scott
Messenger, also from Johnson Space Center.

"The organic molecules most likely originated in the cold molecular
cloud that gave birth to our Solar System, or at the outermost reaches
of the early Solar System."

The Tagish Lake meteorite was collected immediately after its fall over
Canada in 2000. It has been maintained in a frozen state, minimising
the potential for terrestrial contamination.





 
Date: 02 Dec 2006 20:45:00
From: William Styron
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 17:03:20 -0800, Rich wrote:

> Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
> and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
> scientists of this theory?
>

Rather than suggest you may be intellectually impaired, let us prove or
disprove you have anger management issues.

Q:Was you father a prick?



  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


  
Date:
From:
Subject:


 
Date: 02 Dec 2006 19:11:22
From: RMOLLISE
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"



Jan Owen wrote:
> ESPECIALLY if there's any chance it ever touched RICH...
>


Oh. My. GOD!

;-)



 
Date: 02 Dec 2006 18:40:23
From: Rich
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"



Jan Owen wrote:
> "Chris L Peterson" <clp@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote in message
> news:nt94n21rn3p7be7pr3phh6n1sll0om93r0@4ax.com...
> > On 2 Dec 2006 17:03:20 -0800, "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
> >>and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
> >>scientists of this theory?
> >
> > Because if material can move between planets, provide an environment
> > where primitive life or complex biochemicals can survive, and the
> > material can be ejected under conditions that wouldn't sterilize the
> > contents, than any _responsible_ scientist has to consider this as a
> > viable possibility, even if it isn't the most likely. In fact, all of
> > these conditions appear to be true; I, for one, am very happy that a few
> > scientists are pursuing research in this area.
> >
> > _________________________________________________
> >
> > Chris L Peterson
> > Cloudbait Observatory
> > http://www.cloudbait.com
>
> Just try really hard not to get anyonya!!!
> --
> Jan Owen

"Beat that dead horse harder..."



 
Date: 03 Dec 2006 01:29:59
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


On 2 Dec 2006 17:03:20 -0800, "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com > wrote:

>Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
>and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
>scientists of this theory?

Because if material can move between planets, provide an environment
where primitive life or complex biochemicals can survive, and the
material can be ejected under conditions that wouldn't sterilize the
contents, than any _responsible_ scientist has to consider this as a
viable possibility, even if it isn't the most likely. In fact, all of
these conditions appear to be true; I, for one, am very happy that a few
scientists are pursuing research in this area.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com


  
Date: 02 Dec 2006 19:01:03
From: Jan Owen
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


"Chris L Peterson" <clp@alumni.caltech.edu > wrote in message
news:nt94n21rn3p7be7pr3phh6n1sll0om93r0@4ax.com...
> On 2 Dec 2006 17:03:20 -0800, "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
>>and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
>>scientists of this theory?
>
> Because if material can move between planets, provide an environment
> where primitive life or complex biochemicals can survive, and the
> material can be ejected under conditions that wouldn't sterilize the
> contents, than any _responsible_ scientist has to consider this as a
> viable possibility, even if it isn't the most likely. In fact, all of
> these conditions appear to be true; I, for one, am very happy that a few
> scientists are pursuing research in this area.
>
> _________________________________________________
>
> Chris L Peterson
> Cloudbait Observatory
> http://www.cloudbait.com

Just try really hard not to get anyonya!!!
--
Jan Owen

To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address...
Latitude: 33.6
Longitude: -112.3
http://community.webshots.com/user/janowen21




  
Date: 02 Dec 2006 18:48:59
From: Jan Owen
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


Just try REALLY hard not to get any ON you, Chris!!!

ESPECIALLY if there's any chance it ever touched RICH...

ACK!!!

Transcumbagia!!! GAG!!! And of course, TRANSCUMBAGIA!!!

--
http://community.webshots.com/user/janowen21
"Chris L Peterson" <clp@alumni.caltech.edu > wrote in message
news:nt94n21rn3p7be7pr3phh6n1sll0om93r0@4ax.com...
> On 2 Dec 2006 17:03:20 -0800, "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
>>and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
>>scientists of this theory?
>
> Because if material can move between planets, provide an environment
> where primitive life or complex biochemicals can survive, and the
> material can be ejected under conditions that wouldn't sterilize the
> contents, than any _responsible_ scientist has to consider this as a
> viable possibility, even if it isn't the most likely. In fact, all of
> these conditions appear to be true; I, for one, am very happy that a few
> scientists are pursuing research in this area.
>
> _________________________________________________
>
> Chris L Peterson
> Cloudbait Observatory
> http://www.cloudbait.com




 
Date: 03 Dec 2006 11:04:54
From: Rick Evans
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


"Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1165107800.277133.74870@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
> and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
> scientists of this theory?

Grant$ from NA$A?

--
Rick Evans
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lat +42° 11' 07"
Lon -71° 04' 35"
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.chempensoftware.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://mysite.verizon.net/hiltonevans33050/astroimaging/astroimaging.htm




 
Date: 03 Dec 2006 21:00:25
From: Glenn Holliday
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


Rich wrote:
> Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
> and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
> scientists of this theory?

The story you cite is about a meteorite that only contained organic
molecules, not organisms. It's pretty well accepted that all the
chemical components of Earth came from elsewhere - either from the
original birth cloud, or from later bombardment.

If organic molecules are widespread in extra-Earth matter, then
it's reasonable to ask if that is a significant source of organic
chemistry on Earth.

That's very different from asking if life originated here or came
here from elsewhere. It may also be reasonable to ask if life
fell to Earth from elsewhere. So far, there is physical evidence
for organic molecules falling to Earth, but nothing solid for life
falling to Earth.

--
Glenn Holliday holliday@acm.org


 
Date: 03 Dec 2006 20:23:26
From: Johnny Borborigmi
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


On 2006-12-02 20:03:20 -0500, "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com > said:

> Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
> and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
> scientists of this theory?


It's a theory. They know that. It's certainly possible. The Allende
meeorites contain CIAs which means they formed BEFORE the planets did.
Mind blowing stuff! Murchison contains what, over 75 different amino
acids, life making material. It is certainly possible that meteorites
and/or comet material deposited life here. It's theory at the moment
but someday it may be proven...





 
Date: 03 Dec 2006 11:01:24
From: Rich
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"



Rick Evans wrote:
> "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1165107800.277133.74870@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> > Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
> > and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
> > scientists of this theory?
>
> Grant$ from NA$A?

Good point. Rather than choose the less complex, and less convoluted
theory that life simply originated on Earth.



  
Date: 03 Dec 2006 23:29:05
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


On 3 Dec 2006 11:01:24 -0800, "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com > wrote:

>> Grant$ from NA$A?
>
>Good point. Rather than choose the less complex, and less convoluted
>theory that life simply originated on Earth.

Sure, lets just fund the simplest ideas. That sounds like a good way for
knowledge to progress!

(BTW, if you looked closely, I think you'd find that there is
considerably more research going into investigating how life originated
on Earth than there is into panspermia.)

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com


  
Date: 03 Dec 2006 12:48:04
From: Pat O'Connell
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


Rich wrote:
> Rick Evans wrote:
>> "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1165107800.277133.74870@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>> > Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
>> > and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
>> > scientists of this theory?
>>
>> Grant$ from NA$A?
>
> Good point. Rather than choose the less complex, and less convoluted
> theory that life simply originated on Earth.

Well, since the panspermia (ewwww) idea can be considered to be somewhat
consistent with the Bible, there's probably funding for it in this
administration. Kinda like the sexual abstinence programs for singles...

--
Pat O'Connell
[note munged EMail address]
Take nothing but pictures, Leave nothing but footprints,
Kill nothing but vandals...


 
Date: 04 Dec 2006 02:15:28
From: KLM
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


except to point out that the very atoms which make up Earth, the
Sun, and the solar system, et cetera were seeded -



Rich wrote:

> Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
> and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
> scientists of this theory?
>
> Hollow spheres found in a primordial meteorite could yield clues to the
> origin of life on Earth.
>
> Scientists say that "bubbles" like those in the Tagish Lake meteorite
> may have helped along chemical processes important for the emergence of
> life.
>
> The globules could also be older than our Solar System - their
> chemistry suggests they formed at about -260C, near "absolute zero".
>
> Details of the work by Nasa scientists are published in the journal
> Science.
>
> Analysis of the bubbles shows they arrived on Earth in the meteorite
> and are not terrestrial contaminants.
>
> These hollow spheres could have provided a protective envelope for the
> raw organic molecules needed for life.
>
> Dr Lindsay Keller of Nasa's Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston,
> Texas, told BBC News that some scientists believed such structures were
> "a step in the right direction" to making a cell wall.
>
> But he emphasised that the globules in Tagish Lake were in no way
> equivalent to a cell. The hollow spheres seem to be empty, but they do
> have organic molecules on their surfaces.
>
> Mike Zolensky, a Nasa mineralogist, commented: "If, as we suspect, this
> type of meteorite has been falling on to Earth throughout its entire
> history, then the Earth was seeded with these organic globules at the
> same time life was first forming here."
>
> Co-author Keiko Nakamura-Messenger of JSC told BBC News: "We reported
> only 26 globules in this paper, because they are small and hard to
> analyse. But we have seen hundreds in a small area. We can estimate
> that there are billions of them in this meteorite."
>
> The ratios of different forms, or isotopes, of the elements hydrogen
> and nitrogen in the meteorite are very unusual, which suggests the
> structures did not come from Earth, say the scientists.
>
> "The isotopic ratios in these globules show that they formed at
> temperatures of about -260C, near absolute zero," said co-author Scott
> Messenger, also from Johnson Space Center.
>
> "The organic molecules most likely originated in the cold molecular
> cloud that gave birth to our Solar System, or at the outermost reaches
> of the early Solar System."
>
> The Tagish Lake meteorite was collected immediately after its fall over
> Canada in 2000. It has been maintained in a frozen state, minimising
> the potential for terrestrial contamination.



 
Date: 04 Dec 2006 21:15:41
From: Rich
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"



Glenn Holliday wrote:
> Rich wrote:
> > Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
> > and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
> > scientists of this theory?
>
> The story you cite is about a meteorite that only contained organic
> molecules, not organisms. It's pretty well accepted that all the
> chemical components of Earth came from elsewhere - either from the
> original birth cloud, or from later bombardment.
>
> If organic molecules are widespread in extra-Earth matter, then
> it's reasonable to ask if that is a significant source of organic
> chemistry on Earth.
>
> That's very different from asking if life originated here or came
> here from elsewhere. It may also be reasonable to ask if life
> fell to Earth from elsewhere. So far, there is physical evidence
> for organic molecules falling to Earth, but nothing solid for life
> falling to Earth.
>

Yes, we all know there are organic molecules in space, but the question
remains, why think that space-borne organic molecules infalling and not
ones present on Earth already resulted in life?



 
Date: 04 Dec 2006 21:13:06
From: Rich
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"



Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On 3 Dec 2006 11:01:24 -0800, "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Grant$ from NA$A?
> >
> >Good point. Rather than choose the less complex, and less convoluted
> >theory that life simply originated on Earth.
>
> Sure, lets just fund the simplest ideas. That sounds like a good way for
> knowledge to progress!

How about disproving the simple one before going of on what might be
nothing more than a wild goose chase, make-work project for scientists?

>
> (BTW, if you looked closely, I think you'd find that there is
> considerably more research going into investigating how life originated
> on Earth than there is into panspermia.)

Good to know.



  
Date: 05 Dec 2006 05:34:53
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


On 4 Dec 2006 21:13:06 -0800, "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com > wrote:

>How about disproving the simple one before going of on what might be
>nothing more than a wild goose chase, make-work project for scientists?

Because there's nothing wrong with pursuing more than one avenue of
research at the same time. Sometimes it's the wild goose chase that pays
off in a big way. Panspermia doesn't have to have occurred in order for
research into the subject to be valuable.

Generally, research grants sort themselves out in a logical way- the
work with the greatest chance of yielding important results naturally
tends to attract the most funding. The long shots live on the margins.
Seems pretty reasonable to me.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com


   
Date: 06 Dec 2006 00:50:07
From: Drunken Jay Walker
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"



"Chris L Peterson" <clp@alumni.caltech.edu > wrote in message
news:fu0an2pfgd50vh6ho9nlrkjcc3puumoue2@4ax.com...
> On 4 Dec 2006 21:13:06 -0800, "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>How about disproving the simple one before going of on what might be
>>nothing more than a wild goose chase, make-work project for scientists?
>
> Because there's nothing wrong with pursuing more than one avenue of
> research at the same time. Sometimes it's the wild goose chase that pays
> off in a big way. Panspermia doesn't have to have occurred in order for
> research into the subject to be valuable.
>
> Generally, research grants sort themselves out in a logical way- the
> work with the greatest chance of yielding important results naturally
> tends to attract the most funding. The long shots live on the margins.
> Seems pretty reasonable to me.
>
> _________________________________________________
>
> Chris L Peterson
> Cloudbait Observatory
> http://www.cloudbait.com

well, you at least appear to be an expert. But that's all.




    
Date: 05 Dec 2006 17:14:18
From: Martin R. Howell
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:50:07 GMT, Drunken Jay Walker wrote:

> "Chris L Peterson" <clp@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote in message
> news:fu0an2pfgd50vh6ho9nlrkjcc3puumoue2@4ax.com...
>> On 4 Dec 2006 21:13:06 -0800, "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>How about disproving the simple one before going of on what might be
>>>nothing more than a wild goose chase, make-work project for scientists?
>>
>> Because there's nothing wrong with pursuing more than one avenue of
>> research at the same time. Sometimes it's the wild goose chase that pays
>> off in a big way. Panspermia doesn't have to have occurred in order for
>> research into the subject to be valuable.
>>
>> Generally, research grants sort themselves out in a logical way- the
>> work with the greatest chance of yielding important results naturally
>> tends to attract the most funding. The long shots live on the margins.
>> Seems pretty reasonable to me.
>>
>> _________________________________________________
>>
>> Chris L Peterson
>> Cloudbait Observatory
>> http://www.cloudbait.com
>
> well, you at least appear to be an expert. But that's all.


Drunk Jay Walker. . .
well, you at least appear to be a troll. But that's all.


--
Martin R. Howell
Worldwide Amateur Astronomers


     
Date: 06 Dec 2006 04:54:38
From: Drunken Jay Walker
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"



"Martin R. Howell" <martinhowell@ilikestarsisp.com > wrote in message
news:14obqxawbbqgv$.1uo3q2jdsa4sn.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:50:07 GMT, Drunken Jay Walker wrote:
>
>> "Chris L Peterson" <clp@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote in message
>> news:fu0an2pfgd50vh6ho9nlrkjcc3puumoue2@4ax.com...
>>> On 4 Dec 2006 21:13:06 -0800, "Rich" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>How about disproving the simple one before going of on what might be
>>>>nothing more than a wild goose chase, make-work project for scientists?
>>>
>>> Because there's nothing wrong with pursuing more than one avenue of
>>> research at the same time. Sometimes it's the wild goose chase that pays
>>> off in a big way. Panspermia doesn't have to have occurred in order for
>>> research into the subject to be valuable.
>>>
>>> Generally, research grants sort themselves out in a logical way- the
>>> work with the greatest chance of yielding important results naturally
>>> tends to attract the most funding. The long shots live on the margins.
>>> Seems pretty reasonable to me.
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________
>>>
>>> Chris L Peterson
>>> Cloudbait Observatory
>>> http://www.cloudbait.com
>>
>> well, you at least appear to be an expert. But that's all.
>
>
> Drunk Jay Walker. . .
> well, you at least appear to be a troll. But that's all.
>
>
> --
> Martin R. Howell
> Worldwide Amateur Astronomers

You live in a wheelchair.




 
Date: 05 Dec 2006 05:33:21
From:
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


Rich wrote:
> Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
> and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
> scientists of this theory?

The original (Svante Aarhenius) theory of panspermia is not at issue
here.

How life originated is certainly an interesting question, for which an
answer is desired.

The news item you quoted wasn't about spores from space that were
complete living organisms, but just micro-globules in a carbonaceous
chondrite meteorite.

Some time back, the theory has been advanced that instead of the first
complex organic molecules forming on the surface of the ocean, or in
ponds, lakes, or puddles, better conditions might have existed under
the ground in certain clays. Others have considered the possibility
that space might have been a better place for the first molecules of
life to form.

Since Earth does come into contact with debris from space, this
possibility can't be dismissed out of hand. A local Solar System origin
for some of life's early molecules is different from the notion that
life originated once in the Universe, and spread by spores from one
star to another - and perhaps from one galaxy to another.

DNA studies and fossil evidence, of course, mean that the "ancient
astronauts" variation of panspermia, where higher life forms were
brought here by aliens - or where humans were created by inseminating
chimpanzees with Grey sperm - indeed *is* utterly disproven nonsense,
fit only for ridicule.

But while that version of panspermia is indeed disgusting nonsense, and
the historical spore version of panspermia by Svante Aarhenius is now
just a historical curiosity (along with the theory that the planets
were formed by an extremely rare encounter between two stars), that
extraterrestrial activity local to the Solar System might have somehow
contributed to the early emergence of life's chemistry isn't really
"pan"spermia, and is still fit for serious investigation.

John Savard



 
Date: 05 Dec 2006 17:59:17
From: RichIsaTroll
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


How ironic that RichA the TROLL, so neatly mirrors the Panspermia
model?

TROLLspermia is the theory that the the seeds of TROLLS are ubiquitous
in USENET, that they may have delivered TROLLS to S.A.A., and that they
may deliver or have delivered TROLLS to other host newsgroups.

Yo mama should've swallowed you TROLL.

AstroHoney




Rich wrote:
> Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
> and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
> scientists of this theory?
>
> Hollow spheres found in a primordial meteorite could yield clues to the
> origin of life on Earth.
>
> Scientists say that "bubbles" like those in the Tagish Lake meteorite
> may have helped along chemical processes important for the emergence of
> life.
>
> The globules could also be older than our Solar System - their
> chemistry suggests they formed at about -260C, near "absolute zero".
>
> Details of the work by Nasa scientists are published in the journal
> Science.
>
> Analysis of the bubbles shows they arrived on Earth in the meteorite
> and are not terrestrial contaminants.
>
> These hollow spheres could have provided a protective envelope for the
> raw organic molecules needed for life.
>
> Dr Lindsay Keller of Nasa's Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston,
> Texas, told BBC News that some scientists believed such structures were
> "a step in the right direction" to making a cell wall.
>
> But he emphasised that the globules in Tagish Lake were in no way
> equivalent to a cell. The hollow spheres seem to be empty, but they do
> have organic molecules on their surfaces.
>
> Mike Zolensky, a Nasa mineralogist, commented: "If, as we suspect, this
> type of meteorite has been falling on to Earth throughout its entire
> history, then the Earth was seeded with these organic globules at the
> same time life was first forming here."
>
> Co-author Keiko Nakamura-Messenger of JSC told BBC News: "We reported
> only 26 globules in this paper, because they are small and hard to
> analyse. But we have seen hundreds in a small area. We can estimate
> that there are billions of them in this meteorite."
>
> The ratios of different forms, or isotopes, of the elements hydrogen
> and nitrogen in the meteorite are very unusual, which suggests the
> structures did not come from Earth, say the scientists.
>
> "The isotopic ratios in these globules show that they formed at
> temperatures of about -260C, near absolute zero," said co-author Scott
> Messenger, also from Johnson Space Center.
>
> "The organic molecules most likely originated in the cold molecular
> cloud that gave birth to our Solar System, or at the outermost reaches
> of the early Solar System."
>
> The Tagish Lake meteorite was collected immediately after its fall over
> Canada in 2000. It has been maintained in a frozen state, minimising
> the potential for terrestrial contamination.



 
Date: 05 Dec 2006 23:27:12
From: Phil Wheeler
Subject: Re: I'm SICK of the theory of "panspermia"


Rich wrote:
> Why would they think Earth was "seeded" with life? Why not start with
> and prove or disprove life originated here? What is the attraction for
> scientists of this theory?
>

Please be sick in private.

Phil