Extraterrestrial Origin of Life on Earth

Discussion in 'Alien Hub' started by wwkirk, Nov 29, 2018.

  1. wwkirk

    wwkirk Noble

    Messages:
    537
    Our DNA Was Brought Here By Extraterrestrials – Says Nobel Prize Winner

    Francis Crick (8 June 1916 — 28 July 2004) was an English scientist who was most noted for being a co-discoverer of the structure of our DNA in 1953 alongside James D. Watson.

    Francis Crick Watson and Maurice Wilkins were jointly awarded the 1962 Nobel Prize for Physiology for Medicine “for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material.”

    He was clearly a brilliant scientist who unfortunately, like many other brilliant minds who came up with theories that challenged the accepted frameworks at the time, wasn’t given much ‘press.’

    In his book published in 1982, Life Itself, he argues that there is no possible way that our DNA could have gotten its start here on Earth and that it had to have come here from somewhere else.


    Within the mainstream scientific community, the generally accepted theory is that we are the result of a bunch of molecules accidentally bumping into each other, creating life. However, according to Francis, we are the result of what is now known as Directed Panspermia. Crick and a British chemist, Leslie Orgel, published their paper on it in July of 1973.

    Their theory explains that,
    “organisms were deliberately transmitted to earth by intelligent beings on another planet. We conclude that it is possible that life reached the earth in this way, but that the scientific evidence is inadequate at the present time to say anything about the probability. We draw attention to the kinds of evidence that might throw additional light on the topic.”

    As far as Crick’s thoughts on the theory that we are the result of accidentally bumping into each other, he thinks this was as likely as the assembly of a jumbo jet hit by a hurricane in a junk yard. In other words, he thought the theory held little to no credibility.

    When it comes to Crick’s theory, there have been some who expanded upon his work and have actually found evidence of it. Perhaps Crick had some evidence or he was able to connect some dots? After all, theories like this aren’t just born out of nowhere and this gentleman won the Nobel Prize for the study of our DNA.

    Thoughts like this should not be taken lightly and evidence should be examined to see if it’s a plausible hypothesis.

    Please keep in mind while reading this article that, although we’ve discovered much, we have yet to identify the biological functions of large portions of our DNA. There is so much mystery wrapped in what could possibly hold the answer to life itself and the origins of the human race.

    A few years ago, Chandra Wickramasinghe, the Director of the Buckingham Centre for Astrobiology at the University of Buckingham in the U.K., published a paper regarding their supposed findings of the first-ever evidence of extraterrestrial life found in a celestial body.

    At the time, Wickramasinghe pointed out to Huffington Post how, in 1962:

    “Hoyle and I pioneered the theory of carbon grains in space to replace the old ice grain theory. This was vehemently resisted by the astronomical community at the outset, but with the dawn of infrared spectroscopy, the ice grain theory gave way to the carbon dust theory.

    Over a few years, after a great deal of model-fitting, we came to the conclusion that material similar to biomaterial fitted all the available data in astronomy. We considered the possibility that microbiology had a universal character, and no observations in astronomy or new information from biology has provided contrary evidence.

    If only ideas that are considered orthodox are given support through award of grans or publication opportunities, it is certain that the progress of science will be stifled as it was throughout the middle age.”


    English Astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle and Wickramasinghe are considered co-developers of the panspermia theory.

    In another paper that Wickramasinghe co-authored in 2012 titled “Non-terrestrial origin of life: a transformative research paradigm shift,” he points out that:

    “For nearly five decades, evidence in favor of a non-terrestrial origin of life and panspermia has accumulated which has not been properly assessed. A point has now been reached that demands the serious attention of biologists to a possibly transformative paradigm shift of the question of the origin of life, with profound implications across many disciplines.”
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Kchoo

    Kchoo Celestial

    Messages:
    1,584
    ...Ourselves...

    This will be the proof we need.
     
  3. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    9,722
    To me this is an argument that cannot be proven anytime in the near future if at all, most likely life on this planet got help from meteor strikes that perhaps contained organic microbes which survived impact in my opinion...There's been many claims of ETs helping develop human lifeforms on this planet but that theory is not supported by any evidence...

    ...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Carl Grove

    Carl Grove Adept

    Messages:
    16
    The best general into to this work is Fred Hoyle's book, the Intelligent Universe, which looked into panspermia but went further in considering the fine tuning in physical constants necessary to produce the stable universe that we inhabit and the possible life forms. One of his arguments, can't recall the detailed figures, but it demonstrated that even if the entire visible universe was composed of the primeval soup that biologists traditionally saw as generating primitive life, it still hasn't been around long enough for even one single cell organism to develop.
     
  5. wwkirk

    wwkirk Noble

    Messages:
    537
    Then how did he think life arose?
     
  6. Carl Grove

    Carl Grove Adept

    Messages:
    16
    He didn't mention God, but he considered that there was a hierarchy of intelligences capable of creating life, capable of setting physical constants etc.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  7. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Honorable

    Messages:
    150
    While I have nothing against panspermia, I would completely disagree with the above statement. Famous British mathematician Freeman Dyson, who was a part of the Manhattan project, wrote a book just about probability of life accidentally boot-strapping itself. If you are scientifically inclined, book Origns of Life is available on Amazon in eBook format, it got 4.4 starts out of 5 and it's really easy read, more like an essay.

    This is the shortest short of the book: in shallow & warm paddles of organic and mineral rich water (beaches, lakes, swampy areas) exposed to strong sunlight organic molecules can assemble themselves in what's called 'dustbin bags'. The same goes with oceanic floor volcanic vents, obviously minus the sunlight. Such molecules do exist and they do form dustbin bags. These 'dustbin bags' form membranes and natural barriers that protect other organic molecules that accidentally stumble inside bags.

    Primitive life is very different from developed life in a number of DNA code lines that are needed, difference being in a region of 1:100 to 1:1000. They took a well know virus, that had (I forgot exact number) say 10,000 lines of DNA code and put it into 5 star hotels for viruses. In an actual experiment scientist gave to that virus all the nutrients that otherwise it needs to fight for. In a just a few generations number of lines of DNA code inside virus dropped from 10,000 to say 100. That is to say that to kick start a very primitive life you need just 100 lines of DNA code, not 10,000 what we see today in over the time more evolved virus. That's where Crick was wrong and Freeman Dyson right, because one would need much more accidental bumps to assemble 10,000 lines of DNA, than for just 100.

    Now, when we put together 'dustbin bags' with primitive viruses, than we both have a protective environment and reduced number of lines of biological code to kick start self-replicating organic molecule with smaller number of permutations.

    If you want more info read Freeman Dayson's book.

    Panspermia is good idea as well. Mostly because star like Sun has a huge layer of carbon halfway between the surface and the iron core. When stars explode into supernovae that carbon is thrown out everywhere. That's why most of the asteroids are stuffed full of organic molecules in form of some kind of tar. Most likely that Earth's oil reserves actually originate from tar that accumulated on the early Earth's crust during meteoric bombardment in early solar system. Most likely there was a combination of 'dustbin bag', short DNA code and asteroid panspermia that helped create self-replicating organic molecules within relatively small number of permutations. Dyson actually calculated it, but I don't have time to dig it now.

    Indeed, there seems to be very little need for aliens to bring in DNA. As well that would rise a question who brought DNA for the planet where aliens were born? And so on ad infinum.

    It's far more likely that we live in an 'life neutral' universe, meaning wherever there are life friendly conditions life will spontantaneously spring up and hold on. I'll repeat once more a fact discussed before in other threads that 77% of Sun like stars in Milky Way are 3.5 billion years older than our Sun. Sun is 4.5 billion years old and these other Suns would be 8 billon years old. That's lots of fertile places very close, that are ahead of us.

    Our own neighboroud, Milky Way galaxy, holds no shortage of opportunities for both primitive and intelligent life to arise and it's most likely teaming with life.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2018
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  8. Carl Grove

    Carl Grove Adept

    Messages:
    16
    So in a way it doesn't matter exactly where our planet's DNA came from. If the potential for life was built in at the Big Bang, it may arise anywhere and may be transferred anywhere. That doesn't rule out the possibility of alien races deliberately seeding planets either.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    9,722
    If there was evidence of deliberate seeding, the question arises, seeding for what purpose?...

    ...
     
  10. Carl Grove

    Carl Grove Adept

    Messages:
    16
    If said aliens were operating at a high intellectual and, dare I say "spiritual" level, they might have understanding way beyond ours, including when or if to intervene in this way.
     
  11. Kchoo

    Kchoo Celestial

    Messages:
    1,584
    Maybe we are here by accident...
    A crash, or a failed colony...
     

Share This Page