> Jim wrote: > My point isn't that it shouldn't be considered seriously AT ALL, but that it > shouldn't be considered seriously for life on Earth (until there's some > evidence that Earth would need such help).
Maybe just a different approach then as I don't see a reason to exclude anything until we have reason to do so. I completely agree that reason would indicate that there's no reason life couldn't have started on Earth, but maybe it did. For example, I read somewhere that there were 4 genetic ancestors until deep ocean vents were discovered and typed. That made 5 ancestors with humans being closed to deep ocean life rather than the other 4. If that's true I could easily see that while early Earth's oceans may have been able to start life, that start could easily have been leaped by meteor bombardment. What I'm suggesting is that current life could easily be BOTH! It may be that humans are products of meteors and some other life is products of Earth developed life. In short, there's no reason to include, exclude, or weight any possibility over another from what I can see. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:250168 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
