From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul> Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 16:22:04 +0100 Archived: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 11:58:37 -0400 Subject: Re: Could Aliens Have Created Life On Earth? >From: Gerald O'Connell <goc.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 15:18:11 +0100 >Subject: Re: Could Aliens Have Created Life On Earth? >>From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul> >>To: <post.nul> >>Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 14:25:24 +0100 >>Subject: Re: Could Aliens Have Created Life On Earth? >>>From: Gerald O'Connell <goc.nul> >>>To: <post.nul> >>>Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 22:02:45 +0100 >>>Subject: Re: Could Aliens Have Created Life On Earth? >><snip> >>Here's Prof. Chandra Wickramasinghe, speaking to Stuart Miller: >>The full interview is republished, by permisssion, at www.perceptions.couk.com/panspermia.html <snip> >My point was a very basic one: we don't settle the question of >how life starts by deciding that it starts somewhere other >than>on our own planet. Where it comes from may indeed be a >matter of probability, and will remain so right up to the point >where we can be wholly certain. <snip> >Of course, this idea is going to leave a lot of folk decidedly >uneasy. However, I would hope, Ray, that as a fellow iconoclast, > >you might find it rather appealing. <snip> Hello Gerald, Right, I agree with all your points and have done for a while, especially about mainstream `unease' on these matters. Here's the Profs Hoyle & Wickramasinghe again with in-depth analysis of the `origin of life'. [Quotation Begins] "The outstanding question ... 2000 or more enzymes are crucial across a wide spectrum of [Earth] life ... the chance of obtaining the necessary total of 2000 enzymes by randomly assembling amino acid chains is ... p to 1 against, with p minimally an enormous superastrononomical number equal to 10^40,000 [1 followed by 40,000 zeros]. The odds we have thus computed are only for the enzymes, and of course correct arrangements with many other important macromolecules - histone-4 and cytochrome-c are two such examples, each with exceedingly small probability of being obtained by chance. If all these other relevant molecules for life are also taken account of in our calculation, the situation for conventional biology becomes doubly worse. The odds of one in 10^40,000 against are horrendous enough, but that would have to be increased to a major degree. Such a number exceeds the total number of fundamental particles through the observed Universe by very, very many orders of magnitude. So great are the odds against life being produced in a purely mechanistic way that the difficulties for an Earthbound, mechanistic biology are in our view intrinsically insuperable." Quotation ends Prof. Sir Fred Hoyle & Prof. Chandra Wickramasinghe in `Cosmic Life-Force' However, as you hint, mainstream science seems unwilling to examine the question objectively (or is `warned-off - see footnote). So I've collected opinions from some notable scientists - including Francis Crick, Roger Penrose, Lee Smolin, S.J. Gould etc. - who were willing to stick their necks out, at www.perceptions.couk.com/creation.html (the page name is irony) Their views raise some serious questions about Life on Earth, Life Origins Anywhere, and even the structure of the (local?) Universe. All maybe summed up by James P Hogan: [Quotation Begins] "Either these programs which defy human comprehension in their effectiveness and complexity wrote themselves accidentally out of mindless matter acting randomly; or something wrote them for a reason. There is no third alternative." [Quotation Ends] James P. Hogan - `Kicking The Sacred Cow' - 2004 Footnote - Hoyle was famous for his stubborn individualism and honesty (which was why, although he earned two or more Nobel prizes he was denied any, by fuddy-duddy and corrupt establishments. Even the science histories are often censored when reviewing his achievments), and I think Wickramasinghe follows in his footsteps. He has received death threats for discussing science honestly (threats from who? - now there's a question) and both men came under pressure from (shadowy) Gov't or quasi-gov't agencies. See: www.perceptions.couk.com/panspermia.html#pursuit So maybe we should be careful where we express doubts on these matters - there seems to be some toxic cans of worms hidden under the `science consensus'. Cheers Ray D Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp