Panspermia

[Lancer]

http://www.panspermia.org/

Are we ET?

[DRoseDARs]

[Beavis and Butthead]
Uh, huhuhuhuh. Sperm.
[/Beavis and Butthead]

[Urban Ranger]

Yes, no, maybe.

Ultimately it doesn't matter - life had to orginate on some planet.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs
[Beavis and Butthead]
Uh, huhuhuhuh. Sperm.
[/Beavis and Butthead]

I'm glad you said it first.

I voted pro-panspermia.

[Boris Godunov]

It's a completely unneccessary theory.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
It's a completely unneccessary theory.

From a religious POV you are quite correct.

[Last Conformist]

As far as we can tell today, BG is right.

[Solver]

It's something that can suit both evolutionists and creationists. Panspermia doesn't deny the theory of evolution, so I don't see why evolutionists should have a problem with it. Also, some panspermists say that life is seeded from outer space, as in an advanced alien race did that - which can suit creationists because, at least as far as I can see, there's really no difference between God seeding life here or an alien race doing so.

[Whaleboy]

I have to disagree with BG, in that it's a fascinating hypothesis. Quite simply, we have no evidence either way since we don't know yet how life started on Earth... it's a case of tossing a coin. All we can do is speculate while we wait for better evidence. The danger here is that the religious will use the fact that we don't have a clear picture yet to support their own theories.

Of course, lack of evidence "for" does not constitute evidence "against". That we don't know is the premise for endeavouring to understand so it's an own goal for the religious to attack here because in doing so they accept scientific method, with it's natural bias against bull****.

Scientific method

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
I have to disagree with BG, in that it's a fascinating hypothesis. Quite simply, we have no evidence either way since we don't know yet how life started on Earth... it's a case of tossing a coin.

That's why it's an unnecessary theory.

[Whaleboy]

No, that's the point, it's not a theory. It's a hypothesis, and we need hypotheses so that they can evolve into theories (hypothesis + evidence = theory), who's usefulness depends upon the strength of evidence for obvious reasons.

[Last Conformist]

Call it whatever you want; this far, it doesn't explain anything that's not just as easily explained without it, and is thus unnecessary.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
Call it whatever you want; this far, it doesn't explain anything that's not just as easily explained without it, and is thus unnecessary.

Bingo.

I suppose it gives SciFi geeks something to fantasize about, but there's really no point to it at the moment, since there's not a shred of evidence for it. Until there is, the more logical explanation is that life started here, since this is where life actually is.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Solver
It's something that can suit both evolutionists and creationists. Panspermia doesn't deny the theory of evolution, so I don't see why evolutionists should have a problem with it. Also, some panspermists say that life is seeded from outer space, as in an advanced alien race did that - which can suit creationists because, at least as far as I can see, there's really no difference between God seeding life here or an alien race doing so.

Since Creationists (including IDers) insist that YHWH created life on earth, so life coming from another planet is equally unacceptable to them. Okay, make that Christian Creationists, since I realise there are also Islamic Creationists.

As for evolutionists, we don't care one way or another how life first arose on earth. That is the domain of abiogenesis.

[Lancer]

Huh, an absolutely deadlocked poll. At this point, 9 to 9, with three bananas.