All Life on Earth Could Have Come From Alien Zombies;

Yes zombies i know but i think that is just a metaphor.This is a very interesting theory , that life as we know it could have possible come from space, i feel that this area of investigation could lead to some if not one big revelation on our possible origins.

Wesson argues that even if the actual microbes are dead on arrival, the information they carry could allow life to rise from the charred remains, an idea he calls necropanspermia. “The vast majority of organisms reach a new home in the Milky Way in a technically dead state,” Wesson wrote. “Resurrection may, however, be possible.”

source; www.wired.com...

Life on Earth could have grown from the broken remains of alien viruses that, although dead, still contained enough information to give rise to new life. Scientists have speculated that life could have come to Earth from space — a notion called panspermia — since the 1870s, when Lord Kelvin suggested microbes could have ridden here on a comet or meteor. Others have suggested tiny organisms could cross the galaxy embedded in dust grains, which could be nudged from one planetary system to another by the slight pressure of stars’ radiation.

source; www.wired.com...


Again the above quote has always fascinated me since i first came across it.Still too much to know and find out about ourselves and this massive and beyond present comprehension universe that the perceptions that we could have been seeded here either by the above processes or by ET intelligences is to me still alive and a very real possibility. What do you guys and gals think.

reply to post by K-PAX-PROT


At first glance your post seemed to be speculative and sensationalistic, but with all of the recent extra-solar Planet hunting and the likelihood that Mars or some other close-by Planet will be found to harbor life, it seems certain that we will have confirmation of life sooner than later. Once we have evidence of life, the floodgates will open, if there is or ever has been, life on Mars, it becomes almost certain that life is ubiquitous, (common), in the universe. Then the next logical question will be; What are the origins of life the producing stuff? It's a stretch to think that life began only here on Earth.

I sometimes wonder if some of the atoms that compromise our bodies may have already been incorporated into a complex life-form many millions of years ago, and they will again be recycled into some other life form in the far distant future. The atoms in my left ear could someday be part of an alien species who's planet has not even been formed yet.

I think panspermia is as good an origin story as any, but it sort of sidesteps the real question, which is, "how did life begin?" This theory provides a quasi-answer for life on earth, but then the question becomes, "how did life begin wherever it began?"

reply to post by K-PAX-PROT


man please change the Thread name. and btw. this theory is not really new. Actually ive learend about this theory in school a long time ago...

reply to post by OnceReturned
Hiya OR. As usual you cut through to the substance of the idea.

I agree that panspermia, or whatever term is current, is a reasonable idea and should remain open to discussion. At the same time, as you point out, it defers the contemplation of the 'where, when and hows' of life originating....abiogenesis.

Until there's evidence to support the notion that life came here from 'elsewhere,' it's reasonable to investigate abiogenesis on the premise that it began within our own biosphere. If we don't do that, panspermia runs the risk of becoming caught in a logical feedback loop in the same way Creationism has...God created us...who created God?

Wickramasinghe, Hoyle and Louis have published fascinating ideas that may well be part of the answer to the beginnings of life on Earth. Focusing our attention on 'where, when and how' it started here should be the best basis for discerning if it came from anywhere else.