We came from Martians

Page 4 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

origin

Guest
Here is one question that no one has ever been able to answer for me, if a God or creator exists, then who created the creator?
Since there was no time before God created the universe it is most likely that God simply created himself - since there was no time there was no cause and effect so he could have existed before his intial existemce since there was no 'before' and therefore created his existence after his prior existence exisisted because he existed before he existed.

This is rather obvious don't you think?
 
Q

quantumnumber

Guest
I don't think that one could create oneself. I don't think there is a god at all.
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
quantumnumber":10om7k70 said:
I don't think that one could create oneself. I don't think there is a god at all.
How is this relevant to the subject?

Jon
 
Q

quantumnumber

Guest
JonClarke":kwrw7lgm said:
quantumnumber":kwrw7lgm said:
I don't think that one could create oneself. I don't think there is a god at all.
How is this relevant to the subject?

Jon
I was just responding to what Origin said.
 
O

origin

Guest
JonClarke":177op0go said:
quantumnumber":177op0go said:
I don't think that one could create oneself. I don't think there is a god at all.
How is this relevant to the subject?

Jon
It is rather difficult to derail a train wreck...
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
origin":2m2nr9er said:
JonClarke":2m2nr9er said:
quantumnumber":2m2nr9er said:
I don't think that one could create oneself. I don't think there is a god at all.
How is this relevant to the subject?

Jon
It is rather difficult to derail a train wreck...
Train wrecks usually are derailed.

Jon
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
quantumnumber":7lal213v said:
JonClarke":7lal213v said:
quantumnumber":7lal213v said:
I don't think that one could create oneself. I don't think there is a god at all.
How is this relevant to the subject?

Jon
I was just responding to what Origin said.
So that makes it alright to go off topic?
 
Q

quantumnumber

Guest
JonClarke,

You are the one getting off topic by discussing getting off topic. I haven't seen you post one thing that is relevent to "We came from martians" either. I am sorry for commiting such a horrible felony.
 
S

supn

Guest
Interesting topic. Where does life on Earth come from? Artificially seeded is more plausible than naturally evolved DNA.

According to a line in our cultural tradition, Martian refugees seeded Earth 3.8 billion years ago.
video excerpt (10.63 MB .wmv) Facial resemblances between the depicted Martian envoy and Zeta Reticulian people are striking.
 
Q

quantumnumber

Guest
supn,

That was a very interesting video clip, I liked it. It makes me wonder, if aliens were to have seeded the Earth, why wouldn't they seed it with aliens just like themselves?
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
quantumnumber":1bh46g10 said:
JonClarke,

You are the one getting off topic by discussing getting off topic. I haven't seen you post one thing that is relevent to "We came from martians" either. I am sorry for commiting such a horrible felony.
There are forum rules about not hijacking threads. It would be good for you (and others) to remember them. Reminding you of them is not hijacking but pointing out the need to get the conversation on track.

You want a contribution? OK.

We might be decended from martian bacteria transferred via meteorite(s) more than 3.5 Gy ago. We might not. We can't realistically assess the possibility until we know a lot more about Mars and the ability of organisms to survive in space. To start with we have no evidence one way or the other that there ever was life on Mars.

There is no way that humans (or our immediate ancestors) are descended on martians. Any suggestions that there was an indigeous martian civilisation is completely nuts.

Jon
 
S

supn

Guest
4,6 billion years ago, at the start of the solar system formation, Earth was too hot. All evidence shows that Mars was a cooled off waterworld 1 billion years before Earth.
Mars back then: liquid lakes

Life on Mars could have evolved quickly, hundreds of millions of years later followed a civilization to develop. Judging by the video excerpt I posted above, apparently upon meteorite impact -- much more frequent back then, survival became difficult. They then fled and seeded Earth with DNA.

Remember, we're talking over billions of years here. Consider your own lifetime in that scale.
 
Q

quantumnumber

Guest
"There are forum rules about not hijacking threads."

"To start with we have no evidence one way or the other that there ever was life on Mars."


I did not hijack a thread. I was simply responding to a post. Also, here is an interesting article about life on Mars. (http://www.marsnews.com/focus/life/) There is possible evidence that there is or may have been life on Mars.
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
supn":2s1u2wbx said:
4,6 billion years ago, at the start of the solar system formation, Earth was too hot. All evidence shows that Mars was a cooled off waterworld 1 billion years before Earth.
Mars back then: liquid lakes
Actually all we know was that Mars has preserved crust from that time (in thre form of ALH84001). We don't know that it was a "water world" although some liquid water was likely. However Earth wasn't far behind. The oldest mineral grains date from about that time, in the Jack Hills in Australia, the oldest rocks are ~4 Ga in Canada. If Mars had a head start it was only by a few hundred My. Well preserved primary textures date from ~3.5 Ga in the Pilbara.

However just because Mars probably had water at ~4.5 Ga does not mean it had life.

Life on Mars could have evolved quickly, hundreds of millions of years later followed a civilization to develop. Judging by the video excerpt I posted above, apparently upon meteorite impact -- much more frequent back then, survival became difficult. They then fled and seeded Earth with DNA.
The only evidence we have is that it takes 4.5 Gy for a species capable of civilisation to appear. There is no reason at all to think that such a species could evolve in hundreds of My. That is't enough even to evolve eukaryotes. Unfortunately Mars has much as we see it now for the past 3.5 Gy. Not the place where species capable of civilisation to evolve.

As for seeding the Earth with DNA, not by Martians but by some other (i.e. interstellar) species that alone would not start life. DNA by itself doesn't to anything, it needs complex cellular machinery to run.

Remember, we're talking over billions of years here. Consider your own lifetime in that scale.
Since I am a geologist I routinely think on these time scales.

Jon
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
quantumnumber":13jq7ryt said:
"There are forum rules about not hijacking threads."

"To start with we have no evidence one way or the other that there ever was life on Mars."


I did not hijack a thread. I was simply responding to a post. Also, here is an interesting article about life on Mars. (http://www.marsnews.com/focus/life/) There is possible evidence that there is or may have been life on Mars.
I was speaking generally. No need to think it was intended personally. But it is good to see that this topic is now back on track.

ALH84001 is certainly a very interesting discovery. I have had the pleasure of meeting several of the key players in its story. But it is not generally accepted to have shown that life did exist on Mars. So at best it is possible evidence that life once existed. But it might not have.

At best microbes from Mars might have seeded Earth via meteorites. But they might not have as well. We need to kinow a lot more about Mars before we can lean one way or the other. An about how life survives (or not) in space.

Jon
 
S

supn

Guest
quantumnumber":1qk9ru4p said:
Also, here is an interesting article about life on Mars. (http://www.marsnews.com/focus/life/) There is possible evidence that there is or may have been life on Mars.
Good link, thank you. With a positive probability, Mars contains at least microbiological life. A replenishing source of methane in Mars' atmosphere can only be created by digesting bacteria. The alternative is active volcanism -- there is none.

This find by the European Space Agency isn't put under intensive scrutiny anymore, yet rather obfuscated (see Dr. Formisano's ordeal with the press*). The discovery is shun all over the internet, not to mention hard-copy media.

In my opinion, either this is

  • because fear surged that this scientific find would aliment public conscience about life in the galaxy
  • a first indication for succesful terraforming of Mars with bacteria.

-----
* Formisano video interview
 
Q

quantumnumber

Guest
JonClarke":3ftu1225 said:
quantumnumber":3ftu1225 said:
"There are forum rules about not hijacking threads."

"To start with we have no evidence one way or the other that there ever was life on Mars."


I did not hijack a thread. I was simply responding to a post. Also, here is an interesting article about life on Mars. (http://www.marsnews.com/focus/life/) There is possible evidence that there is or may have been life on Mars.
I was speaking generally. No need to think it was intended personally. But it is good to see that this topic is now back on track.

ALH84001 is certainly a very interesting discovery. I have had the pleasure of meeting several of the key players in its story. But it is not generally accepted to have shown that life did exist on Mars. So at best it is possible evidence that life once existed. But it might not have.

At best microbes from Mars might have seeded Earth via meteorites. But they might not have as well. We need to kinow a lot more about Mars before we can lean one way or the other. An about how life survives (or not) in space.

Jon
Indeed there is still much to learn about life itself and Mars before a conclusion about life on Mars can be reached. Hopefully one day, a definitive conclusion can be reached. Perhaps they can test for the possible presence of DNA of microbes in meteorites on Mars?
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
quantumnumber":2jbsh4vm said:
Indeed there is still much to learn about life itself and Mars before a conclusion about life on Mars can be reached. Hopefully one day, a definitive conclusion can be reached. Perhaps they can test for the possible presence of DNA of microbes in meteorites on Mars?
In theory yes, but none as been found. the tiny amounts of organic matter found in the SNC meteorites are heavily degraded, and there is much debate as to whether it is original or terrestrial contamination.

We would ahve better chances on Mars, but first we havew to find sites with organic molecules. That is proving harder than we first thought. Once we have them (and shown they are potentially biological in origin through tests like their isotope ratio chirality (handedness), and diversity) and found there are nucleic acids present, we can look for specific genetic markers.

Jon

PS This will be my last post for three weeks because I will be in the field for work
 
Z

ZenGalacticore

Guest
We came from Martians?

No. We didn't. There are most likely no Martians. Whatever Martians there are, are microbes locked up in Martian permafrost or rock layers. Why should we have come from them? Perhaps the Martian microbes came from Earth.

Mars may once have harbored life, even abundant life. It now shows no trace of that life and is in fact a barren planet. Earth is abundantly rippling, ubiquitously filled with life, and it all came from dead, barren Mars. Sure, it's possible. But highly unlikely.
 
D

dragon04

Guest
I find it unlikely that life was seeded on Earth with "cross-contamination" from Mars in the form of an impactor or Martians zooming over to Earth and pouring some goo in the water.

Note that I said unlikely. It is not impossible nor is it absolutely certain without further proofs. Therefore, it is either likely or unlikely to varying degress. In this case, and especially because we do not know that there was ever life ON Mars, it is more unlikely as opposed to less unlikely. When or if we FIND evidence of past life on Mars, then it may or may not be more likely.

That said, considering that we've discovered organic compounds in space (including ethanol!), how is it unlikely that life on Earth started on Earth? Not very. Why? Because we KNOW there are organic compounds floating around in space and that they might find their way to any planet where further synthesis leads to RNA, then DNA, and life.

Those organic compounds would likely have been present in great quantity in the early Solar System and sucked up by forming planets as they accreted. If Venus were "habitable" in the Early Solar System. perhaps life started there as well. The same with Mars and Earth.

One could make the argument that Mars, due to its lower mass and greater distance from the Sun would have cooled before Earth and therefore had life before Earth, but that's speculation. Before we can even entertain the idea of Martian Life somehow seeding Earth, we have to prove there WAS (or is) life on Mars to begin with. That. we have not (obviously) done yet.
 
Z

ZenGalacticore

Guest
Good points Dragon. My take on all this though is that if life could originate on Mars independently, then it could sure as heck arise independently on Earth.
 
B

bowman316

Guest
How can we be so sure that, for example, veloso-raptors did not have an advanced civilization. All evidence of our technology will be long gone a million years after we are gone. Our bones may be fossilized, but a computer, i think not.

All digital data will not stand up to the test of time. So how can we be sure what technologies past people had?
 
E

et_earth

Guest
bowman316":3fiwdb8g said:
How can we be so sure that, for example, veloso-raptors did not have an advanced civilization. All evidence of our technology will be long gone a million years after we are gone. Our bones may be fossilized, but a computer, i think not.

All digital data will not stand up to the test of time. So how can we be sure what technologies past people had?
We haven't found any veloso-raptor coins encased in stone. You know with their faces on the coins. Money makes the world go around. If the raptors had developed an advanced civilization then money would have been there for them too. :)
 
Y

yevaud

Guest
I for one have to note that the concept is a zero-sum game. Supposing life on Earth originated on Mars, then where did life on Mars originate from? Nothing is really answered, the goalposts have merely been moved a bit. That's the problem with Panspermia as a concept: it cannot truly answer this question, "how did life on Earth begin," it just keeps pushing off all of the hard questions into some vague, amorphous "out there."

As JonClarke said, wrt Mars, there was insufficient time for any species to develop even rudimentary limbs, let alone an entire civilization, before a reducing atmosphere, spotty geomagnetic field, and consequent irradiation of the surface by UV made such an event impossible anyways.
 
Z

ZenGalacticore

Guest
That was my point too. Why is it so believable to people that life originated on Mars, or in comets, which then seeded Earth through panspermia? Why can't people accept that life ORIGINATED, somehow, on Earth because of favorable conditions. For 3.5 billion years it was anearobic bacteria for God's sake! It took damn near forever to get to the Cambrian explosion, and still hundreds of milllions of years after that 'event' to get to amphibians and dinosaurs.

Oh no. It couldn't happen here on its own. Life had to originate on some freezing-ass absoulute zero comet orbiting Sedna. It would NEVER occur on warm, wet, volcanically active Earth. Horsefeathers!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY