I was watching a show the other day that mentioned panspermia as the current theory explaining the origin of life on Earth.
I don't have an issue with the theory (if it is REALLY a theory; hypothesis if it's not there yet) I do have a question that nobody seems to answer...
It's obvious that life started somewhere (duh.) Why are they speculating that life had to start somewhere else and then move to Earth? Is it not more likely that life just began here as the simplest form imaginable rather than the alternative: Live evolved elsewhere to the extent that it could survive a massive meteor impact and many years of space travel to be transplanted here?
Obviously life had to start and evolve in either scenario; but, panspermia seems to necessitate even more 'long odds' events to happen than if life just evolved here to begin with. There may be some evidence that I haven't been made aware of in which case I welcome any references.
Thoughts?
I don't have an issue with the theory (if it is REALLY a theory; hypothesis if it's not there yet) I do have a question that nobody seems to answer...
It's obvious that life started somewhere (duh.) Why are they speculating that life had to start somewhere else and then move to Earth? Is it not more likely that life just began here as the simplest form imaginable rather than the alternative: Live evolved elsewhere to the extent that it could survive a massive meteor impact and many years of space travel to be transplanted here?
Obviously life had to start and evolve in either scenario; but, panspermia seems to necessitate even more 'long odds' events to happen than if life just evolved here to begin with. There may be some evidence that I haven't been made aware of in which case I welcome any references.
Thoughts?
