51–60 of 329 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get your point, but the idea that life originates on Asteroids and populates planets on impact is, imo, likely. It does shift the question to “how did it start there” :)
do asteroids even have all the elements / compounds necessary to support the building blocks of life?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get your point, but the idea that life originates on Asteroids and populates planets on impact is, imo, likely. It does shift the question to “how did it start there” :)
do asteroids even have all the elements / compounds necessary to support the building blocks of life?
But they don't have nearly as many opportunities to react as in a hot planet with an atmosphere. So pushing that life started there instead of only recognizing it's a very unlikely (but still possible) possibility isn't sustained by evidence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But then how did life get on mars?
I get your point, but the idea that life originates on Asteroids and populates planets on impact is, imo, likely. It does shift the question to “how did it start there” :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mars had 3/4 billion more years to develop, compared with the Earth. Mars formed first, and cooled first due to its smaller size. One of the outstanding problems in astrobiology I mention is that the Earth was inhospitable until 3.8Gya, and the oldest fossils of presumably DNA based life (since it matches existing life we can study) was 3.7Gya. Mars was hospitable ~4.5Gya. So either life emerged IMMEDIATELY on Earth…
How does earth get seeded?
Maybe we are about to discover that we came to Earth after messing up Mars.
You jest, but I seriously believe we are likely martians. Early panspermia from Mars settles a LOT of astrobiological questions about origin of life and LUCA complexity. To be clear, Mars’ descent into inhospitality was totally natural and the result of a smaller planet with stripped atmosphere just outside the habitable zone as the Sun cooled. I doubt Martian life developed to be multicellular. But I bet when we go…
Why don’t we just drill into mars and look for fossils? Easy peasy.
Why don’t we just drill into mars and look for fossils? Easy peasy.
Why don't we just teach kids music by having them buy a cheap $3 plastic recorder and simply glue a mic to it that connects to a 13-minute-and-48-second delay line which feeds into to an expensive pair of noise-cancelling headphones that they wear during all practice sessions? Easy peasy. :)
Beethoven’s ear trumpet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You jest, but I seriously believe we are likely martians. Early panspermia from Mars settles a LOT of astrobiological questions about origin of life and LUCA complexity. To be clear, Mars’ descent into inhospitality was totally natural and the result of a smaller planet with stripped atmosphere just outside the habitable zone as the Sun cooled. I doubt Martian life developed to be multicellular. But I bet when we go…
But then how did life get on mars?
I think it was maybe from this source? https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B97801...
Why don’t we just drill into mars and look for fossils? Easy peasy.
I don't remember where I read it, but somebody wrote that a geologist with a hammer could do more science in an afternoon than all our mars probes have done combined. Its hard to do science with a rc car, even if said car is cutting edge.