https://uapro.tumblr.com/post/692166849732935680/the-fermi-paradox-bites-snails-from-a-spirited
It's a screenshot of an exchange, a snippet out of a thread,
from over in Talk.Origins dating to 2005...
I for one positively love, Love, LOVE the potential found in
alien life forms. And it doesn't have to be hyper advanced,
super intelligent, technological life either. No little green
men landing and asking that someone "Take me to your
leader."
No, microbes will do just fine. At least for a while. Generations,
maybe.
See, we only have one model for evolution, the earth, and
it's SEVERELY limited by the stupidity of human.
All humans. No exceptions.
Humans aren't an intelligent species, we are an emotional
species that also includes an element of intelligence. But,
to call humans "Intelligence" is just plain wrong.
THE OCEAN
Choose one characteristic by which to describe the ocean.
Just one.
It's going to be water. Unless you're an twit, it's water. Saying
that the ocean is "A large body of water" isn't entirely inaccurate
but if we were to choose one and only one characteristic then
water it is.
"The ocean is a large body of salt."
Nope. Grossly inaccurate.
So we call it "Water" even if it's also salt, and life and of course
other minerals but "Water" is close enough."
And calling humans "Emotional" is like calling the ocean "Water."
It's not entirely accurate, there's other components, certainly
very important components, but all are dwarfed in their
contribution by emotions... in humans... or water, in the ocean.
Humans are emotional twits.
Yes, even you. There are no exceptions.
Want proof?
Darwin didn't "Invent" or "Discover" evolution. His greatest
impact on science was to hold it back for several decades,
by becoming the face of naturalism and rejecting Mendel, and
it is DEFINITELY a case that if Darwin had hung himself before
writing his first book that Wallace & others would have
published just the same, with extremely little chance of making
the same errors that Darwin made.
You knew that?
Well, Darwin didn't even believe in evolution. Oh, sure, he used
the word by if you ever heard of this thing called usenet, and
played on it long enough, you're totally accustomed to people
using words wrong. You don't even need to be on usenet, it
happens often enough in real life, we frequently encounter
people using words wrong, saying things wrong...
misunderstanding words...
I mean, when Darwin said "Evolution" he wasn't thinking of
evolution. No, what he had in his head exactly matched what
those who REJECTED evolution thought of in it's place.
Stalin & Mao made Lysenkoism the official "Science" of the
communist world. People risked their life and certainly their
freedom for teaching (or even practicing) the Capitalist
VooDoo of evolution. They taught Lysenkoism in it's place,
and Lysenkoism was virtually identical to Darwin's one and
only theory -- Pangenesis -- both being little more than
plagiarized copies of Lamarckism...
So, there. Your EMOTIONAL rejection of reality supersedes
any intelligence you may have. Though you are intellectually
capable of dealing with the Darwin hoax, you could probably
even figure it all out on your own, no help from me, you are
EMOTIONALLY castrated. You can't do.
Must.. Defend... Darwin...
Darwin... god...
Science... Incarnate...
And that's the problem right there, lady.
So if we had alien life, any alien life, we could study it and in
so doing confirm or dispel a great many notions we now take
for granted.
It's not that we humans, all of us humans, impose our a-priori
assumptions on data & observations, it's that we often (usually,
always) don't know that we're doing it!
So from this perspective, it's actually quite possible that so
called "lower life forms" would be more valuable to us. After all,
the more highly advanced a species is, the more likely that they
have shaped the genetics of life on their planet, assuming that
our concept of "Genetics" even applies...
So life, even bacterial life from Mars or Ganymede, could harbor
the potential to completely rewire the human brain, as far as
leading with our assumptions goes. Or defending a favorite idea
instead of the soundest conclusion.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/692867215050047488
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 1:27:56 PM UTC-7, JTEM wrote:
https://uapro.tumblr.com/post/692166849732935680/the-fermi-paradox-bites-snails-from-a-spirited
It's a screenshot of an exchange, a snippet out of a thread,
from over in Talk.Origins dating to 2005...
I for one positively love, Love, LOVE the potential found in
alien life forms. And it doesn't have to be hyper advanced,
super intelligent, technological life either. No little green
men landing and asking that someone "Take me to your
leader."
No, microbes will do just fine. At least for a while. Generations,
maybe.
See, we only have one model for evolution, the earth, and
it's SEVERELY limited by the stupidity of human.
All humans. No exceptions.
Humans aren't an intelligent species, we are an emotional
species that also includes an element of intelligence. But,
to call humans "Intelligence" is just plain wrong.
THE OCEAN
Choose one characteristic by which to describe the ocean.
Just one.
It's going to be water. Unless you're an twit, it's water. Saying
that the ocean is "A large body of water" isn't entirely inaccurate
but if we were to choose one and only one characteristic then
water it is.
"The ocean is a large body of salt."
Nope. Grossly inaccurate.
So we call it "Water" even if it's also salt, and life and of course
other minerals but "Water" is close enough."
And calling humans "Emotional" is like calling the ocean "Water."
It's not entirely accurate, there's other components, certainly
very important components, but all are dwarfed in their
contribution by emotions... in humans... or water, in the ocean.
Humans are emotional twits.
Yes, even you. There are no exceptions.
Want proof?
Darwin didn't "Invent" or "Discover" evolution. His greatest
impact on science was to hold it back for several decades,
by becoming the face of naturalism and rejecting Mendel, and
it is DEFINITELY a case that if Darwin had hung himself before
writing his first book that Wallace & others would have
published just the same, with extremely little chance of making
the same errors that Darwin made.
You knew that?
Well, Darwin didn't even believe in evolution. Oh, sure, he used
the word by if you ever heard of this thing called usenet, and
played on it long enough, you're totally accustomed to people
using words wrong. You don't even need to be on usenet, it
happens often enough in real life, we frequently encounter
people using words wrong, saying things wrong...
misunderstanding words...
I mean, when Darwin said "Evolution" he wasn't thinking of
evolution. No, what he had in his head exactly matched what
those who REJECTED evolution thought of in it's place.
Stalin & Mao made Lysenkoism the official "Science" of the
communist world. People risked their life and certainly their
freedom for teaching (or even practicing) the Capitalist
VooDoo of evolution. They taught Lysenkoism in it's place,
and Lysenkoism was virtually identical to Darwin's one and
only theory -- Pangenesis -- both being little more than
plagiarized copies of Lamarckism...
So, there. Your EMOTIONAL rejection of reality supersedes
any intelligence you may have. Though you are intellectually
capable of dealing with the Darwin hoax, you could probably
even figure it all out on your own, no help from me, you are
EMOTIONALLY castrated. You can't do.
Must.. Defend... Darwin...
Darwin... god...
Science... Incarnate...
And that's the problem right there, lady.
So if we had alien life, any alien life, we could study it and in
so doing confirm or dispel a great many notions we now take
for granted.
It's not that we humans, all of us humans, impose our a-priori
assumptions on data & observations, it's that we often (usually,
always) don't know that we're doing it!
So from this perspective, it's actually quite possible that so
called "lower life forms" would be more valuable to us. After all,
the more highly advanced a species is, the more likely that they
have shaped the genetics of life on their planet, assuming that
our concept of "Genetics" even applies...
So life, even bacterial life from Mars or Ganymede, could harbor
the potential to completely rewire the human brain, as far as
leading with our assumptions goes. Or defending a favorite idea
instead of the soundest conclusion.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/692867215050047488It's not clear what this has to do with paleontology, or aliens, for that matter. In any event
you'll have to wait until at least next Monday. Our resident alienist is a very busy man, and
he doesn't work weekends.
It's not clear what this has to do with paleontology, or aliens, for that matter.
https://uapro.tumblr.com/post/692166849732935680/the-fermi-paradox-bites-snails-from-a-spirited
It's a screenshot of an exchange, a snippet out of a thread,
from over in Talk.Origins dating to 2005...
I for one positively love, Love, LOVE the potential found in
alien life forms. And it doesn't have to be hyper advanced,
super intelligent, technological life either. No little green
men landing and asking that someone "Take me to your
leader."
No, microbes will do just fine. At least for a while. Generations,
maybe.
See, we only have one model for evolution, the earth, and
it's SEVERELY limited by the stupidity of human.
All humans. No exceptions.
Humans aren't an intelligent species, we are an emotional
species that also includes an element of intelligence. But,
to call humans "Intelligence" is just plain wrong.
THE OCEAN
Choose one characteristic by which to describe the ocean.
Just one.
It's going to be water. Unless you're an twit, it's water. Saying
that the ocean is "A large body of water" isn't entirely inaccurate
but if we were to choose one and only one characteristic then
water it is.
"The ocean is a large body of salt."
Nope. Grossly inaccurate.
So we call it "Water" even if it's also salt, and life and of course
other minerals but "Water" is close enough."
And calling humans "Emotional" is like calling the ocean "Water."
It's not entirely accurate, there's other components, certainly
very important components, but all are dwarfed in their
contribution by emotions... in humans... or water, in the ocean.
Humans are emotional twits.
Yes, even you. There are no exceptions.
Want proof?
Darwin didn't "Invent" or "Discover" evolution. His greatest
impact on science was to hold it back for several decades,
by becoming the face of naturalism and rejecting Mendel, and
it is DEFINITELY a case that if Darwin had hung himself before
writing his first book that Wallace & others would have
published just the same, with extremely little chance of making
the same errors that Darwin made.
You knew that?
Well, Darwin didn't even believe in evolution. Oh, sure, he used
the word by if you ever heard of this thing called usenet, and
played on it long enough, you're totally accustomed to people
using words wrong. You don't even need to be on usenet, it
happens often enough in real life, we frequently encounter
people using words wrong, saying things wrong...
misunderstanding words...
I mean, when Darwin said "Evolution" he wasn't thinking of
evolution. No, what he had in his head exactly matched what
those who REJECTED evolution thought of in it's place.
Stalin & Mao made Lysenkoism the official "Science" of the
communist world. People risked their life and certainly their
freedom for teaching (or even practicing) the Capitalist
VooDoo of evolution. They taught Lysenkoism in it's place,
and Lysenkoism was virtually identical to Darwin's one and
only theory -- Pangenesis -- both being little more than
plagiarized copies of Lamarckism...
So, there. Your EMOTIONAL rejection of reality supersedes
any intelligence you may have. Though you are intellectually
capable of dealing with the Darwin hoax, you could probably
even figure it all out on your own, no help from me, you are
EMOTIONALLY castrated. You can't do.
Must.. Defend... Darwin...
Darwin... god...
Science... Incarnate...
And that's the problem right there, lady.
So if we had alien life, any alien life, we could study it and in
so doing confirm or dispel a great many notions we now take
for granted.
It's not that we humans, all of us humans, impose our a-priori
assumptions on data & observations, it's that we often (usually,
always) don't know that we're doing it!
So from this perspective, it's actually quite possible that so
called "lower life forms" would be more valuable to us. After all,
the more highly advanced a species is, the more likely that they
have shaped the genetics of life on their planet, assuming that
our concept of "Genetics" even applies...
So life, even bacterial life from Mars or Ganymede, could harbor
the potential to completely rewire the human brain, as far as
leading with our assumptions goes. Or defending a favorite idea
instead of the soundest conclusion.
Your post says some good things, some incorrect things and some worg
things
This means
an OP about evolution and origins fits better in talk.origins. That
you put "talk.origins" in the title suggests even you know this.
emotions
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
See? This! This is what I was talking about.
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.Are you autistic?
emotions "
"Dishonest.
"JTEM trolled...
emotions "
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how scienceSo that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
So that's why you
The word 'madness' is sometimes also associated with the
word 'anger', and 'anger' is sometimes considered to be
an 'emotion'. In theory the interchange could be interpreted
as JTEM saying 'the statements of jillery are false because
jillery is an angry person' and then
So that's why you gave your OP its topic title
Trolidan7 wrote:
The word 'madness' is sometimes also associated with the
word 'anger', and 'anger' is sometimes considered to be
an 'emotion'. In theory the interchange could be interpreted
as JTEM saying 'the statements of jillery are false because
jillery is an angry person' and then
Honey, you flew *Way* off the rails here!
Science was created to eliminate the human element. That's why
we have science. BECAUSE people are crazy like you, imagining
all sorts of words instead of the ones right in front of you.
People are bigoted, biased. People are emotional. People are
narcissistic. People are lazy. People base "Findings" on a-priori
assumptions and aren't even aware of it, and then rudely defend
what they're doing.
There are potential, eventual "Finds" that could expose these
humans flaws, this pollution in science. Alien microbes is certainly
one of them.
-- --
https://uapro.tumblr.com/post/643978236931538944/paranormal-activity-i-have-actually-experienced
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote: >>> On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of >> it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim.
I did. JTEM did not. Instead, JTEM exercised the same kind of
dishonest snippage you and the peter do. But you don't let things
like facts get in the way of posting more mindless noise.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
Since you raise the issue of "pollute", why don't you do your thing
and spam about the number of posts I have done to SBP? Why don't you compare that to the number of *your* posts to SBP? Why aren't you and
your fellow bluenoses twisting your knappies over JTEM's potty mouth?
Honor among trolls?
Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to have gone on sabbatical.
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennSheldon@msn.com>
wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote: >>> On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of
it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim.
I did. JTEM did not. Instead, JTEM exercised the same kind of
dishonest snippage you and the peter do. But you don't let things
like facts get in the way of posting more mindless noise.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
Since you raise the issue of "pollute", why don't you do your thing
and spam about the number of posts I have done to SBP? Why don't you
compare that to the number of *your* posts to SBP? Why aren't you and
your fellow bluenoses twisting your knappies over JTEM's potty mouth?
Honor among trolls?
On Wednesday, August 24, 2022 at 7:34:45 AM UTC-7, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to >> have gone on sabbatical.
wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of >> >> it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim.
I did. JTEM did not. Instead, JTEM exercised the same kind of
dishonest snippage you and the peter do. But you don't let things
like facts get in the way of posting more mindless noise.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
Since you raise the issue of "pollute", why don't you do your thing
and spam about the number of posts I have done to SBP? Why don't you
compare that to the number of *your* posts to SBP? Why aren't you and
your fellow bluenoses twisting your knappies over JTEM's potty mouth?
Honor among trolls?
Get it fixed! Mine is easy; I just skip the thread. JTEM is in a class by himself.
On Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 2:14:02 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 08:09:17 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson <eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 24, 2022 at 7:34:45 AM UTC-7, *Hemidactylus* wrote: >> jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to
wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of
it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim.
I did. JTEM did not. Instead, JTEM exercised the same kind of
dishonest snippage you and the peter do. But you don't let things
like facts get in the way of posting more mindless noise.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
Since you raise the issue of "pollute", why don't you do your thing
and spam about the number of posts I have done to SBP? Why don't you >> > compare that to the number of *your* posts to SBP? Why aren't you and >> > your fellow bluenoses twisting your knappies over JTEM's potty mouth? >> > Honor among trolls?
have gone on sabbatical.
I haven't replied to JTEM is a long time.Get it fixed! Mine is easy; I just skip the thread. JTEM is in a class by himself.FWIW your reply to JTEM convinced me to emphasize your point.
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 08:09:17 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 24, 2022 at 7:34:45 AM UTC-7, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to >> have gone on sabbatical.
wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of
it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim.
I did. JTEM did not. Instead, JTEM exercised the same kind of
dishonest snippage you and the peter do. But you don't let things
like facts get in the way of posting more mindless noise.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
Since you raise the issue of "pollute", why don't you do your thing
and spam about the number of posts I have done to SBP? Why don't you
compare that to the number of *your* posts to SBP? Why aren't you and
your fellow bluenoses twisting your knappies over JTEM's potty mouth?
Honor among trolls?
Get it fixed! Mine is easy; I just skip the thread. JTEM is in a class by himself.FWIW your reply to JTEM convinced me to emphasize your point.
On Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 2:14:02 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 08:09:17 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 24, 2022 at 7:34:45 AM UTC-7, *Hemidactylus* wrote: >> >> jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:FWIW your reply to JTEM convinced me to emphasize your point.
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to
wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of
it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim.
I did. JTEM did not. Instead, JTEM exercised the same kind of
dishonest snippage you and the peter do. But you don't let things
like facts get in the way of posting more mindless noise.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
Since you raise the issue of "pollute", why don't you do your thing
and spam about the number of posts I have done to SBP? Why don't you >> >> > compare that to the number of *your* posts to SBP? Why aren't you and >> >> > your fellow bluenoses twisting your knappies over JTEM's potty mouth? >> >> > Honor among trolls?
have gone on sabbatical.
Get it fixed! Mine is easy; I just skip the thread. JTEM is in a class by himself.
I haven't replied to JTEM is a long time.
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 1:27:56 PM UTC-7, JTEM wrote:
It's not clear what this has to do with paleontology, or aliens, for that matter. In any event************************************
you'll have to wait until at least next Monday. Our resident alienist is a very busy man, and
he doesn't work weekends.
On Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 7:04:48 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 15:33:53 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson <eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 2:14:02 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote: >> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 08:09:17 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 24, 2022 at 7:34:45 AM UTC-7, *Hemidactylus* wrote:FWIW your reply to JTEM convinced me to emphasize your point.
jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com> >> >> > wrote:Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> >> >> >>> wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of
it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim. >> >> >
I did. JTEM did not. Instead, JTEM exercised the same kind of
dishonest snippage you and the peter do. But you don't let things >> >> > like facts get in the way of posting more mindless noise.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
Since you raise the issue of "pollute", why don't you do your thing >> >> > and spam about the number of posts I have done to SBP? Why don't you
compare that to the number of *your* posts to SBP? Why aren't you and
your fellow bluenoses twisting your knappies over JTEM's potty mouth?
Honor among trolls?
have gone on sabbatical.
Get it fixed! Mine is easy; I just skip the thread. JTEM is in a class by himself.
You got me, and I'm sorry. I won't do it again.I haven't replied to JTEM is a long time.ummm....
**********************************
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2022 14:25:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <030c8ca0-16b5-433a...@googlegroups.com>
On Sat, 20 Aug 2022 14:25:02 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson <eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 1:27:56 PM UTC-7, JTEM wrote:[...]
It's not clear what this has to do with paleontology, or aliens, for that matter. In any event************************************
you'll have to wait until at least next Monday. Our resident alienist is a very busy man, and
he doesn't work weekends.
On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 15:33:53 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 2:14:02 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote: >> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 08:09:17 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 24, 2022 at 7:34:45 AM UTC-7, *Hemidactylus* wrote: >> >> jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:FWIW your reply to JTEM convinced me to emphasize your point.
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com> >> >> > wrote:Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> >> >> >>> wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of
it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim.
I did. JTEM did not. Instead, JTEM exercised the same kind of
dishonest snippage you and the peter do. But you don't let things
like facts get in the way of posting more mindless noise.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
Since you raise the issue of "pollute", why don't you do your thing >> >> > and spam about the number of posts I have done to SBP? Why don't you >> >> > compare that to the number of *your* posts to SBP? Why aren't you and >> >> > your fellow bluenoses twisting your knappies over JTEM's potty mouth? >> >> > Honor among trolls?
have gone on sabbatical.
Get it fixed! Mine is easy; I just skip the thread. JTEM is in a class by himself.
I haven't replied to JTEM is a long time.ummm....
**********************************
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2022 14:25:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <030c8ca0-16b5-433a...@googlegroups.com>
On Sat, 20 Aug 2022 14:25:02 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 1:27:56 PM UTC-7, JTEM wrote:[...]
It's not clear what this has to do with paleontology, or aliens, for that matter. In any event************************************
you'll have to wait until at least next Monday. Our resident alienist is a very busy man, and
he doesn't work weekends.
JTEM wrote:
Science was created to eliminate the human element. That's why
we have science.
Yes you are an advocate for the belief system known of
as 'psychology'.
I haven't
Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to have gone on sabbatical.
On Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 7:04:48 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 15:33:53 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 2:14:02 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 08:09:17 -0700 (PDT), erik simpsonummm....
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 24, 2022 at 7:34:45 AM UTC-7, *Hemidactylus* wrote:FWIW your reply to JTEM convinced me to emphasize your point.
jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com> >> >> >> > wrote:Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >>> wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of
it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim. >> >> >> >
I did. JTEM did not. Instead, JTEM exercised the same kind of
dishonest snippage you and the peter do. But you don't let things >> >> >> > like facts get in the way of posting more mindless noise.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
Since you raise the issue of "pollute", why don't you do your thing >> >> >> > and spam about the number of posts I have done to SBP? Why don't you
compare that to the number of *your* posts to SBP? Why aren't you and
your fellow bluenoses twisting your knappies over JTEM's potty mouth?
Honor among trolls?
have gone on sabbatical.
Get it fixed! Mine is easy; I just skip the thread. JTEM is in a class by himself.
I haven't replied to JTEM is a long time.
**********************************
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2022 14:25:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <030c8ca0-16b5-433a...@googlegroups.com>
On Sat, 20 Aug 2022 14:25:02 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 1:27:56 PM UTC-7, JTEM wrote:[...]
It's not clear what this has to do with paleontology, or aliens, for that matter. In any event************************************
you'll have to wait until at least next Monday. Our resident alienist is a very busy man, and
he doesn't work weekends.
You got me, and I'm sorry. I won't do it again.
*Hemidactylus* wrote:
Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to have gone on sabbatical.
For the sake of some future psychology thesis, you could always try to explain what triggered you this time.
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 19:30:33 -0700 (PDT), JTEM spammed:
See? This! This is what I was talking about.
So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you'reReally? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim.
I did.
JTEM did not.
Instead, JTEM exercised the same kind of
dishonest snippage you and the peter do.
But you don't let things
like facts get in the way of posting more mindless noise.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
Since you raise the issue of "pollute", why don't you do your thing
and spam about the number of posts I have done to SBP?
Why don't you compare that to the number of *your* posts to SBP?
Why qaren't you and
your fellow bluenoses twisting your knappies over JTEM's potty mouth?
Honor among trolls?
On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 19:28:27 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 7:04:48 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote: >> On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 15:33:53 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 2:14:02 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:ummm....
On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 08:09:17 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 24, 2022 at 7:34:45 AM UTC-7, *Hemidactylus* wrote:FWIW your reply to JTEM convinced me to emphasize your point.
jillery <69jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to
wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you're >> >> >> >>> autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
Really? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of
it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim. >> >> >> >
I did. JTEM did not. Instead, JTEM exercised the same kind of
dishonest snippage you and the peter do. But you don't let things >> >> >> > like facts get in the way of posting more mindless noise.
Better yet, take your own medicine and admit you pollute this ng more than anyone.
Since you raise the issue of "pollute", why don't you do your thing
and spam about the number of posts I have done to SBP? Why don't you
compare that to the number of *your* posts to SBP? Why aren't you and
your fellow bluenoses twisting your knappies over JTEM's potty mouth?
Honor among trolls?
have gone on sabbatical.
Get it fixed! Mine is easy; I just skip the thread. JTEM is in a class by himself.
I haven't replied to JTEM is a long time.
**********************************
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2022 14:25:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <030c8ca0-16b5-433a...@googlegroups.com>
On Sat, 20 Aug 2022 14:25:02 -0700 (PDT), erik simpson
<eastsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 1:27:56 PM UTC-7, JTEM wrote:[...]
It's not clear what this has to do with paleontology, or aliens, for that matter. In any event************************************
you'll have to wait until at least next Monday. Our resident alienist is a very busy man, and
he doesn't work weekends.
You got me, and I'm sorry. I won't do it again.Not meant as a gotcha; easy to forget things. But you were so sure,
you didn't do an easy check to see if you did.
BUT your posts since the OP here are really off topic
for s.b.p. so far.
What might help is if you could address the question of how alien life
could have evolved differently than earth life.
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
BUT your posts since the OP here are really off topicJust replying to the sock puppets.
for s.b.p. so far.
What might help is if you could address the question of how alien life could have evolved differently than earth life.
My position was that FINDING ALIEN LIFE, even just microbes, would
answer that question.
It would redefine our parameters, so to speak,
expose our assumptions for what they were even as confirming many
ideas.
This was all quite trigging, as time has proved.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/693572982046588928
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 1:45:36 PM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
BUT your posts since the OP here are really off topicJust replying to the sock puppets.
for s.b.p. so far.
What might help is if you could address the question of how alien life could have evolved differently than earth life.
My position was that FINDING ALIEN LIFE, even just microbes, wouldIf we find microbes whose genetic code is substantially different from ours, that would be a slam-dunk.
answer that question.
However, if it is not too far from earth life, then the issue of them being descended
from earth life that was transported there by comets or other non-human means becomes a serious one. Recall how a meteorite originating on Mars
set off a flurry of excitement when something resembling a string of microbes was found on it.
IIRC that hypothesis has been rejected by most serious planetary scientists, but that does not eliminate the possibility of "alien" microbes originating from earth
life, or earth life originating from microbes on Mars, as one popular sci-fi film
[not "The Martian," but one that came out several years earlier] had it.
Trolidan7 wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Science was created to eliminate the human element. That's why
we have science.
Yes you are an advocate for the belief system known of
as 'psychology'.
Sorry. I should have said: I'm not interested in your multiple personality disorder or any of your other faults.
Science exists because people are fucked in the head. They assume
things. They believe things. What morons can't seem to do is TEST
those assumptions/beliefs.
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/693572982046588928
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 1:42:10 AM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:
*Hemidactylus* wrote:
Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to >> > have gone on sabbatical.
For the sake of some future psychology thesis, you could always try to
explain what triggered you this time.
Don't expect self-reflection from Scott "Hemidactylus" Chase. His posting >record on sci.bio.paleontology this year is FAR worse than that of Glenn.
And much more emotional.
BUT your posts since the OP here are really off topic for s.b.p. so far. >What might help is if you could address the question of how alien life
could have evolved differently than earth life. Pick a starting point >between 3500 million years and 10 million years and hypothesize how
things might have turned out on another planet if conditions had been identical
up to that point.
Over in talk.origins, I've given powerful evidence for there being
a vast multiverse with "island universes" [1] virtually identical with ours, >so this is not a farfetched scenario. Whether it is still off topic for s.b.p. >is something I'm leaving for other readers to help me decide.
On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 08:58:40 -0700 (PDT), Peter Nyikos
<peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, August 23, 2022 at 11:46:59 PM UTC-4, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote: >> On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 02:13:08 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
wrote:
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 10:46:00 PM UTC-7, 69jp...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 23:24:51 -0700 (PDT), JTEM <jte...@gmail.com>
wrote:
69jp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2022 19:30:33 -0700 (PDT), JTEM spammed:
See? This! This is what I was talking about.
So that's why you gave your OP its topic title, because you'reReally? Your OP talks about talk.origins and aliens.
Are you autistic? My post was talking about how science
is limited by human nature.
autistic and have no idea what you're talking about. Got it.
But inquiring minds would want to know why you omitted 'and are proud of it' from your "cliche".
But perhaps you should stick with responding to the actual claim.
I did.
Even after restoring two lines at the beginning that Glenn had snipped, >that still isn't obvious.To quote someone who you regard so highly, "GIGO"
Psychology has
If we find microbes whose genetic code is substantially different from ours, that would be a slam-dunk.
However, if it is not too far from earth life, then the issue of them being descended
from earth life that was transported there by comets or other non-human means becomes a serious one.
...
Humans are flawed, to say the least. Humans are an emotional
species which does contain an element of intelligence, in much
the same fashion that the ocean contains an element of salt,
but we are an emotional species. We lead with our emotions.
This can (and does) take the form of any type of bias, any pride
getting in the way, any favorite notions placed ahead of the
most supportable... etc.
...
I will thus take it
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 2:35:35 PM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 1:45:36 PM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
BUT your posts since the OP here are really off topicJust replying to the sock puppets.
for s.b.p. so far.
What might help is if you could address the question of how alien life could have evolved differently than earth life.
My position was that FINDING ALIEN LIFE, even just microbes, wouldIf we find microbes whose genetic code is substantially different from ours,
answer that question.
that would be a slam-dunk.
However, if it is not too far from earth life, then the issue of them being descended
from earth life that was transported there by comets or other non-human means
becomes a serious one. Recall how a meteorite originating on Mars
set off a flurry of excitement when something resembling a string of microbes
was found on it.
IIRC that hypothesis has been rejected by most serious planetary scientists,
but that does not eliminate the possibility of "alien" microbes originating from earth
life, or earth life originating from microbes on Mars, as one popular sci-fi film
[not "The Martian," but one that came out several years earlier] had it.
The Blob? Steve McQueen, wow does that bring back memories.
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 6:11:28 PM UTC-4, Glenn wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 2:35:35 PM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 1:45:36 PM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
BUT your posts since the OP here are really off topicJust replying to the sock puppets.
for s.b.p. so far.
What might help is if you could address the question of how alien life
could have evolved differently than earth life.
My position was that FINDING ALIEN LIFE, even just microbes, would answer that question.If we find microbes whose genetic code is substantially different from ours,
that would be a slam-dunk.
However, if it is not too far from earth life, then the issue of them being descended
from earth life that was transported there by comets or other non-human means
becomes a serious one. Recall how a meteorite originating on Mars
set off a flurry of excitement when something resembling a string of microbes
was found on it.
I think the film I was referring to came out at most two decades ago.IIRC that hypothesis has been rejected by most serious planetary scientists,
but that does not eliminate the possibility of "alien" microbes originating from earth
life, or earth life originating from microbes on Mars, as one popular sci-fi film
[not "The Martian," but one that came out several years earlier] had it.
How long ago was the following flick made, Glenn?
The Blob? Steve McQueen, wow does that bring back memories.If that film was like what I think, it was a horror film with a thin veneer of sci-fi.
The one of which I am thinking was mainstream sci-fi, and a good one.
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
If we find microbes whose genetic code is substantially different from ours,
that would be a slam-dunk.
Absolutely.
Unfortunately, if we found microbes that pair well to known earth microbes that opens a whole can of worms: "Did they evolve independently or did
a version of Panspermia occur where cross contamination brought life from
one world in our solar system to others?"
However, if it is not too far from earth life, then the issue of them being descendedYes. "PanspermiaLite."
from earth life that was transported there by comets or other non-human means
becomes a serious one.
The potential there is for life to be abundant across the galaxy. After all, microbes
are known to have lied dormant for longer than it would take to travel to the nearest solar systems.
Once established there, it need only travel to the solar
system nearest to THAT new world... and so on & so forth.
So it does open the potential for a Star Trek universe,
where all these Humanoids
are distantly related to each other.
On Saturday, August 27, 2022 at 3:31:24 PM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
If we find microbes whose genetic code is substantially different from ours,
that would be a slam-dunk.
Absolutely.
Unfortunately, if we found microbes that pair well to known earth microbes that opens a whole can of worms: "Did they evolve independently or did
a version of Panspermia occur where cross contamination brought life from one world in our solar system to others?"
However, if it is not too far from earth life, then the issue of them being descendedYes. "PanspermiaLite."
from earth life that was transported there by comets or other non-human means
becomes a serious one.
The potential there is for life to be abundant across the galaxy. After all, microbesThe nearest is the Alpha Centauri system, some 6 trillion miles away. Assuming travel towards that bullseye at the rate of 6 million miles a year, it would take a million years to get there. Do you know of any microbes
are known to have lied dormant for longer than it would take to travel to the
nearest solar systems.
that have been generally accepted to have lived dormant for that long?
I'm almost certain that no eukaryote, not even a tardigrade, can
live dormant that long.
Once established there, it need only travel to the solar
system nearest to THAT new world... and so on & so forth.
So it does open the potential for a Star Trek universe,Not universe -- galaxy. The Large Magellanic Cloud is already
about 40,000 times as distant as the Alpha Centauri system.
where all these HumanoidsThere are great odds against microbes evolving to our level
are distantly related to each other.
of intelligence. Are you familiar with the theory in the following webpage?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis
As for "humanoids", their physical resemblance to us probably
won't even be as close to us as Bugs Bunny's.
Peter Nyikos
Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
Univ. of South Carolina in Columbia
http://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos
On Saturday, August 27, 2022 at 3:31:24 PM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
If we find microbes whose genetic code is substantially different from ours,
that would be a slam-dunk.
Absolutely.
Unfortunately, if we found microbes that pair well to known earth microbes that opens a whole can of worms: "Did they evolve independently or did
a version of Panspermia occur where cross contamination brought life from one world in our solar system to others?"
However, if it is not too far from earth life, then the issue of them being descendedYes. "PanspermiaLite."
from earth life that was transported there by comets or other non-human means
becomes a serious one.
The potential there is for life to be abundant across the galaxy. After all, microbesThe nearest is the Alpha Centauri system, some 6 trillion miles away.
are known to have lied dormant for longer than it would take to travel to the
nearest solar systems.
Assuming travel towards that bullseye at the rate of 6 million miles a year,
it would take a million years to get there. Do you know of any microbes
that have been generally accepted to have lived dormant for that long?
I'm almost certain that no eukaryote, not even a tardigrade, can
live dormant that long.
Once established there, it need only travel to the solar
system nearest to THAT new world... and so on & so forth.
So it does open the potential for a Star Trek universe,Not universe -- galaxy. The Large Magellanic Cloud is already
about 40,000 times as distant as the Alpha Centauri system.
where all these HumanoidsThere are great odds against microbes evolving to our level
are distantly related to each other.
of intelligence. Are you familiar with the theory in the following webpage?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis
As for "humanoids", their physical resemblance to us probably
won't even be as close to us as Bugs Bunny's.
Peter Nyikos
Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
Univ. of South Carolina in Columbia
http://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 10:27:48 AM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 6:11:28 PM UTC-4, Glenn wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 2:35:35 PM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 1:45:36 PM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
BUT your posts since the OP here are really off topicJust replying to the sock puppets.
for s.b.p. so far.
What might help is if you could address the question of how alien life
could have evolved differently than earth life.
My position was that FINDING ALIEN LIFE, even just microbes, would answer that question.If we find microbes whose genetic code is substantially different from ours,
that would be a slam-dunk.
However, if it is not too far from earth life, then the issue of them being descended
from earth life that was transported there by comets or other non-human means
becomes a serious one. Recall how a meteorite originating on Mars
set off a flurry of excitement when something resembling a string of microbes
was found on it.
I think the film I was referring to came out at most two decades ago.IIRC that hypothesis has been rejected by most serious planetary scientists,
but that does not eliminate the possibility of "alien" microbes originating from earth
life, or earth life originating from microbes on Mars, as one popular sci-fi film
[not "The Martian," but one that came out several years earlier] had it.
How long ago was the following flick made, Glenn?
The Blob? Steve McQueen, wow does that bring back memories.If that film was like what I think, it was a horror film with a thin veneer of sci-fi.
The one of which I am thinking was mainstream sci-fi, and a good one.
The Red Planet?
I'd say there was a good deal of horror in that as well as a thin veneer of sci fi. But it didn't include "microbes".
The Blob came out decades before that, though. And about as mainstream as one could get, in my opinion, with regards to reasonable speculation.
But yes, science fiction, and when the subject is aliens, almost always comes with a healthy dose of horror. I'm surprised you didn't recognize it.
"The film concerns a carnivorous amoeboidal alien that crashes to Earth from outer space inside a meteorite,"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blob
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 2:00:33 PM UTC-4, Glenn wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 10:27:48 AM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote: >>> On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 6:11:28 PM UTC-4, Glenn wrote:
The Red Planet?On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 2:35:35 PM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 1:45:36 PM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:How long ago was the following flick made, Glenn?
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:If we find microbes whose genetic code is substantially different from ours,
BUT your posts since the OP here are really off topicJust replying to the sock puppets.
for s.b.p. so far.
What might help is if you could address the question of how alien life >>>>>>> could have evolved differently than earth life.
My position was that FINDING ALIEN LIFE, even just microbes, would >>>>>> answer that question.
that would be a slam-dunk.
However, if it is not too far from earth life, then the issue of them being descended
from earth life that was transported there by comets or other non-human means
becomes a serious one. Recall how a meteorite originating on Mars
set off a flurry of excitement when something resembling a string of microbes
was found on it.
IIRC that hypothesis has been rejected by most serious planetary scientists,
but that does not eliminate the possibility of "alien" microbes originating from earth
life, or earth life originating from microbes on Mars, as one popular sci-fi film
[not "The Martian," but one that came out several years earlier] had it. >>> I think the film I was referring to came out at most two decades ago.
The Blob? Steve McQueen, wow does that bring back memories.If that film was like what I think, it was a horror film with a thin veneer of sci-fi.
The one of which I am thinking was mainstream sci-fi, and a good one.
What I read in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Planet_(film) does not seem anything like
what I saw. The astronauts in the film I have in mind discover records of aliens who
lived on Mars at the time earth life began, and the climax was joyful: "They seeded earth!"
IIRC that was the last line in the film, and thus it reminds me of Charlton Heston's
(VERY different!) last line in "Planet of the Apes":
"You idiots! You blew it up! God damn you all to hell!"
I'd say there was a good deal of horror in that as well as a thinveneer of sci fi. But it didn't include "microbes".
Like I said, I suspect you are once again thinking of the wrong film.
The Blob came out decades before that, though. And about as mainstream
as one could get, in my opinion, with regards to reasonable speculation.
The presumed indestructibility of the Blob [see your Wiki link] is a dead giveaway that it is, at best, grade-B pulp fiction.
Theodore Simonson is light years away from Theodore Sturgeon or Robert Silverberg [see below].
But yes, science fiction, and when the subject is aliens, almost always
comes with a healthy dose of horror. I'm surprised you didn't recognize it. >>
"The film concerns a carnivorous amoeboidal alien that crashes to Earth
from outer space inside a meteorite,"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blob
Back in the 1950's, horror films were such a rage that a whole issue of a leading SF magazine
was devoted to stories focused on monsters. But Robert Silverberg took an unexpected tack in
his virtually forgotten contribution, "Mournful
Monster." The best reference I could come up
with using either Yahoo or Google search engines was the following:
http://majipoor.com/works/display/mournful-monster-novelette
The picture of the magazine cover is lurid, but the webpage says nothing about the story itself.
Here is what I remember of it from having borrowed the magazine from a classmate
when it first came out.
Astronauts land on a cooler part of an uncomfortably hot planet. There they encounter
a 60-foot reptilian-looking creature, which eats one of the astronauts.
Towards the end of the story, when the others get together to turn their blasters on the monster,
it establishes telepathic contact with them, apologizing for what he had done, explaining
"I never thought such small creatures could be intelligent."
Then he telepathically tells his story: he was the last of his kind,
and with his death his race will die. He knows he is mortally wounded, and asks them
to finish him off. They are filled with compassion and resist the invitation, but seeing in
what agony he is in, they finally accede to his wish. He thanks them for
"a good quick death."
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 2:00:33 PM UTC-4, Glenn wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 10:27:48 AM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 6:11:28 PM UTC-4, Glenn wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 2:35:35 PM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 1:45:36 PM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
BUT your posts since the OP here are really off topicJust replying to the sock puppets.
for s.b.p. so far.
What might help is if you could address the question of how alien life
could have evolved differently than earth life.
My position was that FINDING ALIEN LIFE, even just microbes, would answer that question.If we find microbes whose genetic code is substantially different from ours,
that would be a slam-dunk.
However, if it is not too far from earth life, then the issue of them being descended
from earth life that was transported there by comets or other non-human means
becomes a serious one. Recall how a meteorite originating on Mars set off a flurry of excitement when something resembling a string of microbes
was found on it.
I think the film I was referring to came out at most two decades ago. How long ago was the following flick made, Glenn?IIRC that hypothesis has been rejected by most serious planetary scientists,
but that does not eliminate the possibility of "alien" microbes originating from earth
life, or earth life originating from microbes on Mars, as one popular sci-fi film
[not "The Martian," but one that came out several years earlier] had it.
The Blob? Steve McQueen, wow does that bring back memories.If that film was like what I think, it was a horror film with a thin veneer of sci-fi.
The one of which I am thinking was mainstream sci-fi, and a good one.
The Red Planet?What I read in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Planet_(film) does not seem anything like
what I saw. The astronauts in the film I have in mind discover records of aliens who
lived on Mars at the time earth life began, and the climax was joyful: "They seeded earth!"
IIRC that was the last line in the film, and thus it reminds me of Charlton Heston's
(VERY different!) last line in "Planet of the Apes":
"You idiots! You blew it up! God damn you all to hell!"
I'd say there was a good deal of horror in that as well as a thin veneer of sci fi. But it didn't include "microbes".Like I said, I suspect you are once again thinking of the wrong film.
The Blob came out decades before that, though. And about as mainstream as one could get, in my opinion, with regards to reasonable speculation.The presumed indestructibility of the Blob [see your Wiki link] is a dead giveaway that it is, at best, grade-B pulp fiction.
Theodore Simonson is light years away from Theodore Sturgeon or Robert Silverberg [see below].
But yes, science fiction, and when the subject is aliens, almost always comes with a healthy dose of horror. I'm surprised you didn't recognize it.
"The film concerns a carnivorous amoeboidal alien that crashes to Earth from outer space inside a meteorite,"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_BlobBack in the 1950's, horror films were such a rage that a whole issue of a leading SF magazine
was devoted to stories focused on monsters. But Robert Silverberg took an unexpected tack in
his virtually forgotten contribution, "Foghorn Leghorn." The best reference I could come up
with using either Yahoo or Google search engines was the following:
http://majipoor.com/works/display/mournful-monster-novelette
The picture of the magazine cover is lurid, but the webpage says nothing about the story itself.
Here is what I remember of it from having borrowed the magazine from a classmate
when it first came out.
Astronauts land on a cooler part of an uncomfortably hot planet. There they encounter
a 60-foot reptilian-looking creature, which eats one of the astronauts.
Towards the end of the story, when the others get together to turn their blasters on the monster,
it establishes telepathic contact with them, apologizing for what he had done, explaining
"I never thought such small creatures could be intelligent."
Then he telepathically tells his story: he was the last of his kind,
and with his death his race will die. He knows he is mortally wounded, and asks them
to finish him off. They are filled with compassion and resist the invitation, but seeing in
what agony he is in, they finally accede to his wish. He thanks them for "a good quick death."
The nearest is the Alpha Centauri system, some 6 trillion miles away. Assuming travel towards that bullseye at the rate of 6 million miles a year, it would take a million years to get there. Do you know of any microbes
that have been generally accepted to have lived dormant for that long?
So it does open the potential for a Star Trek universe,
Not universe -- galaxy.
There are great odds against microbes evolving to our level
of intelligence.
Are you familiar with the theory in the following webpage?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis
As for "humanoids", their physical resemblance to us probably
won't even be as close to us as Bugs Bunny's.
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 6:47:03 PM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
Back in the 1950's, horror films were such a rage that a whole issue of a leading SF magazine
was devoted to stories focused on monsters. But Robert Silverberg took an unexpected tack in
his virtually forgotten contribution, "Foghorn Leghorn."
The best reference I could come up
with using either Yahoo or Google search engines was the following:
http://majipoor.com/works/display/mournful-monster-novelette
Not a film or movie. But Foghorn is my main man.
The picture of the magazine cover is lurid, but the webpage says nothing about the story itself.
Here is what I remember of it from having borrowed the magazine from a classmate
when it first came out.
Astronauts land on a cooler part of an uncomfortably hot planet. There they encounter
a 60-foot reptilian-looking creature, which eats one of the astronauts.
Towards the end of the story, when the others get together to turn their blasters on the monster,
it establishes telepathic contact with them, apologizing for what he had done, explaining
"I never thought such small creatures could be intelligent."
Then he telepathically tells his story: he was the last of his kind,
and with his death his race will die. He knows he is mortally wounded, and asks them
to finish him off. They are filled with compassion and resist the invitation, but seeing in
what agony he is in, they finally accede to his wish. He thanks them for "a good quick death."
I vaguely recall a 50s flick about a trip to Venus that sounds something like that. Something about past wars between aliens messing things up on Venus.
I have a large library of old scifi, some of it black and white. It no longer interests me, but at the time I began the collection, I was amused by bad scifi. The worse the better. How some of the actors kept straight faces was beyond my understanding.planet in spaceships, one of which was sent to seed Earth with DNA, intending to create life that could one day land on Mars and be recognized as descendants."
As well, I have this one:
Gary Sinise in Mission to Mars.
"A three-dimensional projection of the solar system depicts the planet Mars, covered with water, being struck by a large asteroid and rendered uninhabitable. A projection of a humanoid Martian lifeform reveals that the native Martians evacuated the
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_to_Mars
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 10:30:19 PM UTC-4, Glenn wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 6:47:03 PM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you do forgeries like this often, Glenn? I wrote "Mournful Monster" and you substitutedBack in the 1950's, horror films were such a rage that a whole issue of a leading SF magazine
was devoted to stories focused on monsters. But Robert Silverberg took an unexpected tack in
his virtually forgotten contribution, "Foghorn Leghorn."
"Foghorn Leghorn" for it without the usual brackets or a "Fixed it for you."
The best reference I could come up
with using either Yahoo or Google search engines was the following:
Readers, note the "mournful-monster" in the url.http://majipoor.com/works/display/mournful-monster-novelette
Not a film or movie. But Foghorn is my main man.Glenn, you'd better have a good explanation for this stunt,
beginning with an answer to the question I asked.
You can't expect people to keep reading and discover that
the description has nothing to do with Foghorn Leghorn:
The picture of the magazine cover is lurid, but the webpage says nothing about the story itself.
Here is what I remember of it from having borrowed the magazine from a classmate
when it first came out.
Astronauts land on a cooler part of an uncomfortably hot planet. There they encounter
a 60-foot reptilian-looking creature, which eats one of the astronauts.
There is a subtle dig on bigotry here, by the way.Towards the end of the story, when the others get together to turn their blasters on the monster,
it establishes telepathic contact with them, apologizing for what he had done, explaining
"I never thought such small creatures could be intelligent."
understanding.Then he telepathically tells his story: he was the last of his kind,
and with his death his race will die. He knows he is mortally wounded, and asks them
to finish him off. They are filled with compassion and resist the invitation, but seeing in
what agony he is in, they finally accede to his wish. He thanks them for "a good quick death."
I vaguely recall a 50s flick about a trip to Venus that sounds something like that. Something about past wars between aliens messing things up on Venus.It could be that it was based on "Mournful Monster." In fact, I'm not 100% sure that the setting for the story was *not* Venus.
I have a large library of old scifi, some of it black and white. It no longer interests me, but at the time I began the collection, I was amused by bad scifi. The worse the better. How some of the actors kept straight faces was beyond my
planet in spaceships, one of which was sent to seed Earth with DNA, intending to create life that could one day land on Mars and be recognized as descendants."As well, I have this one:
Gary Sinise in Mission to Mars.
"A three-dimensional projection of the solar system depicts the planet Mars, covered with water, being struck by a large asteroid and rendered uninhabitable. A projection of a humanoid Martian lifeform reveals that the native Martians evacuated the
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_to_MarsThanks for finally identifying the film I remembered. I do hope that Wikipedia was wrong
about "seed earth with DNA" as opposed to microbes, etc. Naked DNA cannot reproduce itself.
It needs enzymes to unwind it and then to duplicate it from nucleotides in the environment.
What's more, without a genetic code for matching triplets with amino acids, DNA
is pure gibberish. There is no way the life forms that could result would be recognized as descendants,
even assuming that there is a way for DNA to somehow evolve higher life forms.
On Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 8:49:51 PM UTC-4, Glenn wrote:had difficulty, I think with my mouse, in successfully copying and pasting, where the last last copy didn't stick, and retained the previous copy. How that and I happened to substitute Mournful Monster with Foghorn Leghorn without seeing the change, I
On Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 4:46:32 PM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 10:30:19 PM UTC-4, Glenn wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 6:47:03 PM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
Back in the 1950's, horror films were such a rage that a whole issue of a leading SF magazine
was devoted to stories focused on monsters. But Robert Silverberg took an unexpected tack in
his virtually forgotten contribution, "Foghorn Leghorn."
Do you do forgeries like this often, Glenn? I wrote "Mournful Monster" and you substituted
"Foghorn Leghorn" for it without the usual brackets or a "Fixed it for you."
Oh boy. I apologize. Now that you bring my attention to it, I recall highlighting "Mournful Monster" so that it could be pasted into Google to research. I had earlier considered using "Foghorn Leghorn" in a post to jillery, if memory serves. I have
Apology accepted. It looks like something that could have happened to me, so I believe thatorigin of Foghorn Leghorn, that it could have been pre-Disney cartoon character.
no malice was intended.
The best reference I could come up
with using either Yahoo or Google search engines was the following:
Well, yes, I'd feel the same way. But I think that sometime after attempting to copy Mournful Monster, I was a ways down in your post, and recalled "Foghorn Leghorn" (without being sensitive to the copy mistake I had myself made earlier", and madeReaders, note the "mournful-monster" in the url.http://majipoor.com/works/display/mournful-monster-novelette
Not a film or movie. But Foghorn is my main man.Glenn, you'd better have a good explanation for this stunt,
beginning with an answer to the question I asked.
a light hearted comment. I do recall at that time thinking that Foghorn Leghorn was an odd subject of science fiction for you to choose to share (again, not aware that I had changed it myself), and I do recall thinking that I might not know the
This definitely sounds like a senior moment and not too terribly different from other, less embarrassing senior moments of mine.that I won't lose something and have to spend time getting it back.
By the way, Foghorn Leghorn is a Warner Bros. character, like Bugs Bunny.
Bugs Bunny has an interesting history. He was first voiced and/or invented by Tex Avery,
who went on to do one cartoon after another whose main character was
an underspoken hound dog character named Droopy.
Droopy's style is diametrically opposite that of the manic Foghorn Leghorn, yet they are my two favorite cartoon characters.
Another contrast: Droopy always triumphs in the end,
and usually has lots of minor triumphs all the way through,
while Foghorn suffers one pratfall after another.
Maybe this was indeed a senior moment. Again, I apologize. Perhaps I'll experience another senior moment in the future by not replacing my mouse or keyboard. It has become irritating, and causes me to have to remember to double check what I paste, so
understanding.You can't expect people to keep reading and discover thatI agree. I apparently wasn't making the connection at that time.
the description has nothing to do with Foghorn Leghorn:
The picture of the magazine cover is lurid, but the webpage says nothing about the story itself.
Here is what I remember of it from having borrowed the magazine from a classmate
when it first came out.
Astronauts land on a cooler part of an uncomfortably hot planet. There they encounter
a 60-foot reptilian-looking creature, which eats one of the astronauts.
Hmm?There is a subtle dig on bigotry here, by the way.Towards the end of the story, when the others get together to turn their blasters on the monster,
it establishes telepathic contact with them, apologizing for what he had done, explaining
"I never thought such small creatures could be intelligent."
Then he telepathically tells his story: he was the last of his kind, and with his death his race will die. He knows he is mortally wounded, and asks them
to finish him off. They are filled with compassion and resist the invitation, but seeing in
what agony he is in, they finally accede to his wish. He thanks them for "a good quick death."
I vaguely recall a 50s flick about a trip to Venus that sounds something like that. Something about past wars between aliens messing things up on Venus.It could be that it was based on "Mournful Monster." In fact, I'm not 100% sure that the setting for the story was *not* Venus.
I have a large library of old scifi, some of it black and white. It no longer interests me, but at the time I began the collection, I was amused by bad scifi. The worse the better. How some of the actors kept straight faces was beyond my
the planet in spaceships, one of which was sent to seed Earth with DNA, intending to create life that could one day land on Mars and be recognized as descendants."As well, I have this one:
Gary Sinise in Mission to Mars.
"A three-dimensional projection of the solar system depicts the planet Mars, covered with water, being struck by a large asteroid and rendered uninhabitable. A projection of a humanoid Martian lifeform reveals that the native Martians evacuated
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_to_Mars
Thanks for finally identifying the film I remembered. I do hope that Wikipedia was wrong
about "seed earth with DNA" as opposed to microbes, etc. Naked DNA cannot reproduce itself.
It needs enzymes to unwind it and then to duplicate it from nucleotides in the environment.
What's more, without a genetic code for matching triplets with amino acids, DNA
is pure gibberish. There is no way the life forms that could result would be recognized as descendants,
even assuming that there is a way for DNA to somehow evolve higher life forms.
I don't recall how the movie showed the "seeding'. All I recall is pictures of life forms swimming, then crawling, then walking. But it may well be that the alien showed them how the Earth was seeded by showing DNA strands floating in water.You've made me want to see the film again, but not enough to shell out more than a few bucks for it.
Sorry to be a day late in responding to your apology and explanation.
As you know, I've been quite busy in talk.origins today. My last two posts to one thread seems to have stopped everyone dead in their tracks, but I still have
one medium length reply to make there.
Your apology shows that you are a far more responsible person than
all but a few in talk.origins. My regard for you has gone up a good bit as a result.
On Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 4:46:32 PM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:difficulty, I think with my mouse, in successfully copying and pasting, where the last last copy didn't stick, and retained the previous copy. How that and I happened to substitute Mournful Monster with Foghorn Leghorn without seeing the change, I don't
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 10:30:19 PM UTC-4, Glenn wrote:
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 6:47:03 PM UTC-7, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
Back in the 1950's, horror films were such a rage that a whole issue of a leading SF magazine
was devoted to stories focused on monsters. But Robert Silverberg took an unexpected tack in
his virtually forgotten contribution, "Foghorn Leghorn."
Do you do forgeries like this often, Glenn? I wrote "Mournful Monster" and you substituted
"Foghorn Leghorn" for it without the usual brackets or a "Fixed it for you."
Oh boy. I apologize. Now that you bring my attention to it, I recall highlighting "Mournful Monster" so that it could be pasted into Google to research. I had earlier considered using "Foghorn Leghorn" in a post to jillery, if memory serves. I have had
of Foghorn Leghorn, that it could have been pre-Disney cartoon character.The best reference I could come up
with using either Yahoo or Google search engines was the following:
Well, yes, I'd feel the same way. But I think that sometime after attempting to copy Mournful Monster, I was a ways down in your post, and recalled "Foghorn Leghorn" (without being sensitive to the copy mistake I had myself made earlier", and madeReaders, note the "mournful-monster" in the url.http://majipoor.com/works/display/mournful-monster-novelette
Not a film or movie. But Foghorn is my main man.Glenn, you'd better have a good explanation for this stunt,
beginning with an answer to the question I asked.
a light hearted comment. I do recall at that time thinking that Foghorn Leghorn was an odd subject of science fiction for you to choose to share (again, not aware that I had changed it myself), and I do recall thinking that I might not know the origin
Maybe this was indeed a senior moment. Again, I apologize. Perhaps I'll experience another senior moment in the future by not replacing my mouse or keyboard. It has become irritating, and causes me to have to remember to double check what I paste, sothat I won't lose something and have to spend time getting it back.
understanding.You can't expect people to keep reading and discover thatI agree. I apparently wasn't making the connection at that time.
the description has nothing to do with Foghorn Leghorn:
The picture of the magazine cover is lurid, but the webpage says nothing about the story itself.
Here is what I remember of it from having borrowed the magazine from a classmate
when it first came out.
Astronauts land on a cooler part of an uncomfortably hot planet. There they encounter
a 60-foot reptilian-looking creature, which eats one of the astronauts.
Hmm?There is a subtle dig on bigotry here, by the way.Towards the end of the story, when the others get together to turn their blasters on the monster,
it establishes telepathic contact with them, apologizing for what he had done, explaining
"I never thought such small creatures could be intelligent."
Then he telepathically tells his story: he was the last of his kind, and with his death his race will die. He knows he is mortally wounded, and asks them
to finish him off. They are filled with compassion and resist the invitation, but seeing in
what agony he is in, they finally accede to his wish. He thanks them for "a good quick death."
I vaguely recall a 50s flick about a trip to Venus that sounds something like that. Something about past wars between aliens messing things up on Venus.It could be that it was based on "Mournful Monster." In fact, I'm not 100% sure that the setting for the story was *not* Venus.
I have a large library of old scifi, some of it black and white. It no longer interests me, but at the time I began the collection, I was amused by bad scifi. The worse the better. How some of the actors kept straight faces was beyond my
planet in spaceships, one of which was sent to seed Earth with DNA, intending to create life that could one day land on Mars and be recognized as descendants."As well, I have this one:
Gary Sinise in Mission to Mars.
"A three-dimensional projection of the solar system depicts the planet Mars, covered with water, being struck by a large asteroid and rendered uninhabitable. A projection of a humanoid Martian lifeform reveals that the native Martians evacuated the
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_to_Mars
Thanks for finally identifying the film I remembered. I do hope that Wikipedia was wrong
about "seed earth with DNA" as opposed to microbes, etc. Naked DNA cannot reproduce itself.
It needs enzymes to unwind it and then to duplicate it from nucleotides in the environment.
What's more, without a genetic code for matching triplets with amino acids, DNA
is pure gibberish. There is no way the life forms that could result would be recognized as descendants,
even assuming that there is a way for DNA to somehow evolve higher life forms.
I don't recall how the movie showed the "seeding'. All I recall is pictures of life forms swimming, then crawling, then walking. But it may well be that the alien showed them how the Earth was seeded by showing DNA strands floating in water.
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
The nearest is the Alpha Centauri system, some 6 trillion miles away. Assuming travel towards that bullseye at the rate of 6 million miles a year,
it would take a million years to get there. Do you know of any microbes that have been generally accepted to have lived dormant for that long?
Google is absolutely plastered with stories of 100,000,000 year old
microbes from the sea. I'm actually shocked that you couldn't find them.
But that's not what I was looking for.
It took me one to two minutes to find something about the Nature piece from 2000, talking about quarter-of-a-billion year old bacteria:
https://www.oakton.edu/user/4/billtong/eas100/oldbacteria.htm
That's a link to an archived story about it, not the Nature article itself.
Here's another source:
https://www.oldest.org/nature/living-organisms/
Again, kind of shocking that you couldn't find them.
So it does open the potential for a Star Trek universe,
Not universe -- galaxy.No. Universe. Do the Google on the closest galaxies to us.
There are great odds against microbes evolving to our levelIt's not about odds. There isn't a percentage chance. It's really about environment.
of intelligence.
Are you familiar with the theory in the following webpage?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis
Not really relevant in a discussion on any version of Panspermia.
I mean, if Panspermia is correct, the earth isn't rare.
And as we are
speaking right now of Panspermia, Rare Earth is a contradiction.
"If life is spreading itself across the universe, it's very rare."
No. It's common. It's very common.
It's only if Panspermia is incorrect that we have the potential for
the Rare Earth scenario.
As for "humanoids", their physical resemblance to us probably
won't even be as close to us as Bugs Bunny's.
The context here is Panspermia, where inter and not just intra
galactic life shares the exact same origins. The potential for
similarities is far greater.
AND THEN there's other issues. Such
as convergent evolution. Our bodies aren't random, they are a
solution to a given set of problems, and those problems would
be fairly common.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/693836218621968384
Google is absolutely plastered with stories of 100,000,000 year old microbes from the sea. I'm actually shocked that you couldn't find them.
After seeing so many such stories during my 76 years being debunked
It took me one to two minutes to find something about the Nature piece from 2000, talking about quarter-of-a-billion year old bacteria:
https://www.oakton.edu/user/4/billtong/eas100/oldbacteria.htm
This 2000 paper is about bacteria of that age from salt mines.
I first read about them before 1970, and the last time I read about
them, well after 2000, I read that the stories had been debunked.
That's a link to an archived story about it, not the Nature article itself.
Here's another source:
https://www.oldest.org/nature/living-organisms/
No. Universe. Do the Google on the closest galaxies to us.
I didn't need Google. Apart from paleontology, my oldest passion is astronomy.
Are you familiar with the theory in the following webpage?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis
Not really relevant in a discussion on any version of Panspermia.
The panspermia of microbes and nothing more:
I mean, if Panspermia is correct, the earth isn't rare.
It is rare as an abode of intelligent creatures
who need billions of years to evolve
By the way, if you are a firm believer in Panspermia
speaking right now of Panspermia, Rare Earth is a contradiction.
No it isn't.
"If life is spreading itself across the universe, it's very rare."
I never said anything like that. Rare earth is about *intelligent* life being very rare.
It's only if Panspermia is incorrect that we have the potential for
the Rare Earth scenario.
The context here is Panspermia, where inter and not just intra
galactic life shares the exact same origins. The potential for
similarities is far greater.
But anything intelligent that resembles us more than Bugs Bunny does
will be so far away, we wouldn't know about it before the sun becomes
a white dwarf.
AND THEN there's other issues. Such
as convergent evolution. Our bodies aren't random, they are a
solution to a given set of problems, and those problems would
be fairly common.
One of an astronomically large set of possible solutions.
Directed panspermia brings in ID on the ground floor:
the seeders of earth 3500 mya doing genetic engineering on
their microbes to make them suitable for life.
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
Google is absolutely plastered with stories of 100,000,000 year old microbes from the sea. I'm actually shocked that you couldn't find them.
After seeing so many such stories during my 76 years being debunkedExamples?
I am well aware that what trickles down to the unwashed masses is
garbage, and that's without even considering that science runs on grants,
and if you want the grant money you follow the narrative but, I don't
recall this -- how long life can lie dormant -- being an issue.
Unlike I.D. (under Dubya Bush) or AGW now.
It took me one to two minutes to find something about the Nature piece from
2000, talking about quarter-of-a-billion year old bacteria:
https://www.oakton.edu/user/4/billtong/eas100/oldbacteria.htm
This 2000 paper is about bacteria of that age from salt mines.Well it's about how long bacteria can remain viable. An asteroid strike
can easily turn salt mines to space debris.
I first read about them before 1970, and the last time I read aboutCites?
them, well after 2000, I read that the stories had been debunked.
That's a link to an archived story about it, not the Nature article itself.
Here's another source:
https://www.oldest.org/nature/living-organisms/
Leaving it here. Just in case.
No. Universe. Do the Google on the closest galaxies to us.
I didn't need Google. Apart from paleontology, my oldest passion is astronomy.
So you know that, given the excessively long time claimed for
bacteria to remain viable, if even the wimpiest flavor of
Panspermia is correct -- where abiogenesis does occur on a
planet, and then life is ejected into space by asteroid impacts
and supervolcanic eruptions -- life could have easily reached
another galaxy by now, beginning on Earth or Mars.
Are you familiar with the theory in the following webpage?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis
Not really relevant in a discussion on any version of Panspermia.
The panspermia of microbes and nothing more:
Life. If you believe in this new fangled "Evolution" thing, that's all it takes.
I mean, if Panspermia is correct, the earth isn't rare.
It is rare as an abode of intelligent creatures
We don't know that. It's a hypothesis only. If we find life in Mars or Ganymede then it's excessively unlikely that the Earth is rare.
who need billions of years to evolve
Merely an assumption.
By the way, if you are a firm believer in Panspermia
you should start a thread on it in talk.origins, where it really is on-topic. >>I'll back you up as much as I can without going out on a limb.
I'm a believer in testing ideas. As an idea, it is testable.
There. That's it.
Unfortunately it is easier said than done, but so wasn't Einstein's
theory. It took a couple of years before he saw his first successful
test.
Find life on Mars or Ganymede would be consistent with
Pangenesis but hardly compelling evidence. We'd need living
organisms, for example, not fossil remains, and we'd to get a
look at its DNA. Assuming it has any. We'd want to establish
a genetic relationship between worlds and preferably in a context
that encompasses a time frame longer than humans have been
firing off probes in its direction...
speaking right now of Panspermia, Rare Earth is a contradiction.
No it isn't.Of course it is.
You've confused "Life" for "Spacefaring technological life."
Humans were just as intelligent, some argue even more so, many
thousands of years ago, even if they lacked knowledge.
Ditto."If life is spreading itself across the universe, it's very rare."
I never said anything like that. Rare earth is about *intelligent* life being very rare.
No. It's about technological civilizations either traveling through space
or deliberately sending readable signals.
Ditto.It's only if Panspermia is incorrect that we have the potential for
the Rare Earth scenario.
The context here is Panspermia, where inter and not just intra
galactic life shares the exact same origins. The potential for similarities is far greater.
But anything intelligent that resembles us more than Bugs Bunny does
will be so far away, we wouldn't know about it before the sun becomes
a white dwarf.
So it's not about any "Rarity," it's about distance.
AND THEN there's other issues. Such
as convergent evolution. Our bodies aren't random, they are a
solution to a given set of problems, and those problems would
be fairly common.
One of an astronomically large set of possible solutions.No, that's just an assumption. Which brings us full circle: We need
to find alien life to expose these assumptions mistaken for facts.
Somewhere in the mid-sixties, there was great excitement about
dead microorganisms being found in a carbonaceous chondrite,
unlike any that the microbiologists looking at it had ever encountered.
The main hypothesis was that the chondrite came from a big asteroid that
was destroyed in a collision, but not before an advanced stage
of abiogenesis had occurred.
This was debunked by a specialist in pollen who identified them as pollen grains that had been sucked into the meteorite during its fall to earth.
Grant money assumes a good chance of success on a real tough nut to crack.
So you know that, given the excessively long time claimed for
bacteria to remain viable, if even the wimpiest flavor of
Panspermia is correct -- where abiogenesis does occur on a
planet, and then life is ejected into space by asteroid impacts
and supervolcanic eruptions -- life could have easily reached
another galaxy by now, beginning on Earth or Mars.
"Another galaxy by now" is not good enough.
To fill the universe
with microbes from one source would require ejecta at the speed of light, given the age of the universe. Impossible.
Galaxy-hopping only slows things down.
So you have to assume at least a billion independent abiogenesis events scattered throughout the universe
You are referring to the old-fangled recklessly optimistic estimates
based on the Drake equation, like Sagan's.
It is rare as an abode of intelligent creatures
We don't know that. It's a hypothesis only. If we find life in Mars or Ganymede then it's excessively unlikely that the Earth is rare.
It seems you have great faith in Sagan's estimates.
Merely an assumption.
Let's see you argue against it. It took 3500 million years on earth,
and you are now entertaining the notion that earth is highly atypical.
You've confused "Life" for "Spacefaring technological life."
I haven't confused it, I was merely addressing your earlier
comments about humanoids being all over the universe.
Correct. I was just using technology as an easy way to detect
intelligent lifeforms in other planetary systems.
On Monday, 29 August 2022 at 20:56:08 UTC+3, peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, August 27, 2022 at 3:31:24 PM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
If we find microbes whose genetic code is substantially different from ours,
that would be a slam-dunk.
Absolutely.
Unfortunately, if we found microbes that pair well to known earth microbes
that opens a whole can of worms: "Did they evolve independently or did
a version of Panspermia occur where cross contamination brought life from one world in our solar system to others?"
However, if it is not too far from earth life, then the issue of them being descendedYes. "PanspermiaLite."
from earth life that was transported there by comets or other non-human means
becomes a serious one.
The potential there is for life to be abundant across the galaxy. After all, microbes
are known to have lied dormant for longer than it would take to travel to the
nearest solar systems.
The nearest is the Alpha Centauri system, some 6 trillion miles away.
About 25 trillion miles I've read.
Assuming travel towards that bullseye at the rate of 6 million miles a year,How so slowly?
Getting to orbit of Earth takes speed about 154 million miles a year as minimum.
To leave orbit of Earth takes speed about 220 million miles a year as minimum.
To leave orbit of Sun takes speed about 820 million miles a year as minimum.
it would take a million years to get there. Do you know of any microbes that have been generally accepted to have lived dormant for that long?
Nope, 30 000 years assuming we travel at minimum speed needed to leave
orbit of Sun. But it feels reasonable to expect that we can figure some trick to gain some extra speed.
I'm almost certain that no eukaryote, not even a tardigrade, can
live dormant that long.
Once established there, it need only travel to the solar
system nearest to THAT new world... and so on & so forth.
So it does open the potential for a Star Trek universe,Not universe -- galaxy. The Large Magellanic Cloud is already
about 40,000 times as distant as the Alpha Centauri system.
where all these Humanoids
are distantly related to each other.
There are great odds against microbes evolving to our level
of intelligence. Are you familiar with the theory in the following webpage?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis
As for "humanoids", their physical resemblance to us probably
won't even be as close to us as Bugs Bunny's.
In a later post, I told JTEM that unless ejection is close
to the speed of light, this cannot happen.
At one-tenth
the speed of light (still out of the question, except for DIRECTED panspermia)
one would have to have billions of separate abiogenesis events
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
In a later post, I told JTEM that unless ejection is close
to the speed of light, this cannot happen.
Which just plain isn't true.
At one-tenth
the speed of light (still out of the question, except for DIRECTED panspermia)
one would have to have billions of separate abiogenesis events
No. Again, given the lengths of time it is claimed that bacteria may remain viable though dormant, anything ejected from the earth would have sufficient time to reach the nearest GALAXY, never mind the nearest solar systems.
Once there, once established on a new world, all that is necessary is yet another super volcano or asteroid strike to seed the next solar system/galaxy.
ADDING ADDITIONAL "abiogenesis" events, if it ever happened in the first place, would multiply the speed of the process.
Bacteria is claimed to remain viable for tens of millions of years, even 100 million years and, yes, one cite claimed a quarter of a billion years. At no more than escape velocity, there's absolutely zero difficulty in reaching distant worlds. Once established, they are the launching pad for the next round of seeding...
On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 07:57:54 -0700 (PDT), Peter Nyikos
<peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 1:42:10 AM UTC-4, JTEM wrote:
*Hemidactylus* wrote:
Apparently a poster can be much worse than Glenn. My JTEM filter seems to
have gone on sabbatical.
For the sake of some future psychology thesis, you could always try to
explain what triggered you this time.
Don't expect self-reflection from Scott "Hemidactylus" Chase. His posting >record on sci.bio.paleontology this year is FAR worse than that of Glenn. >And much more emotional.
BUT your posts since the OP here are really off topic for s.b.p. so far. >What might help is if you could address the question of how alien life >could have evolved differently than earth life. Pick a starting point >between 3500 million years and 10 million years and hypothesize how
things might have turned out on another planet if conditions had been identical
up to that point.
Over in talk.origins, I've given powerful evidence for there being
a vast multiverse with "island universes" [1] virtually identical with ours, >so this is not a farfetched scenario. Whether it is still off topic for s.b.p.
is something I'm leaving for other readers to help me decide.
If you have, you haven't done so recently. Cite this "powerful
evidence" you gave.
"this" refers to the end result of volcanic explosions and asteroid strikes on a single planet being the spread of its progeny all through the universe.
I'll make a note that you disbelieve that our universe is expanding
Since you say "would" instead of facing my "have to have billions..." squarely
Bacteria is claimed to remain viable for tens of millions of years, even 100
million years and, yes, one cite claimed a quarter of a billion years. At no
more than escape velocity, there's absolutely zero difficulty in reaching distant worlds. Once established, they are the launching pad for the next round of seeding...
All fine and dandy, but all stars that are capable of sustaining life in their planets
will have burned out before life has had a chance to colonize more than the nearest 1% of the universe from a single source, even if the ejecta achieve 1%
of the speed of light.
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
Somewhere in the mid-sixties, there was great excitement about
dead microorganisms being found in a carbonaceous chondrite,
unlike any that the microbiologists looking at it had ever encountered.
The main hypothesis was that the chondrite came from a big asteroid that was destroyed in a collision, but not before an advanced stage
of abiogenesis had occurred.
This was debunked by a specialist in pollen who identified them as pollen grains that had been sucked into the meteorite during its fall to earth.
Well not really relevant as the specific issue here was how long life was able to remain viable.
So we deconstruct the problem thusly:
#1. How long can life remain dormant, viable, encased in material?
#2. Does any such life-bearing material ever get ejected into space?
#3. If so, how long might it take for this material to reach points
beyond our solar system (other solar systems or even galaxies)?
#4. Is there sufficient time? Would such a time require less time than microbes may remain viable?
So the answers to the above all allow for a version of Panspermia,
one where life arises on a world and then is transferred to other
worlds even beyond the galaxy much less solar system.
There's further questions...
#5. What kind of microbes might we be speaking of?
What would be most likely to be ejected into space by a supervolcanic, eruption or asteroid/comet impact?
#6. Does location matter? The specific material context of the
microbes? Might microbes from HERE survive while the same
species found THERE have virtually no chance?
#7. Could microbes survive the explosion/ejection and later impact
on another world?
Seems like we could easily replicate the forces of an ejection event,
test the survival of microbes thrown into space and even reentry
(impact). Right now we'd probably have to satisfy ourselves with
computer models as we can't shoot rocks at Mars, retrieve them &
test them for life. Not yet. But just the fact that it does exist within
the realm of possibilities, even it not doable now, does qualify it as
a genuine scientific hypothesis.
IF THIS IS ALL SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIED, if life can survive being
ejected into space, if it can lie dormant for tens if not hundreds of millions of years, if it can survive impact with another world then
some flavor of Panspermia is all but proven to be true, and "Rare
Earth" is nonsense.
And, again, all quite testable. Real science. No need for opinions.
No need for speculation. It can all be tested.
Grant money assumes a good chance of success on a real tough nut to crack.No. Watch: "A Flock of Dodos."
The process is exactly as political, exactly as polluted today. It's
just favoring a different agenda.
So you know that, given the excessively long time claimed for
bacteria to remain viable, if even the wimpiest flavor of
Panspermia is correct -- where abiogenesis does occur on a
planet, and then life is ejected into space by asteroid impacts
and supervolcanic eruptions -- life could have easily reached
another galaxy by now, beginning on Earth or Mars.
"Another galaxy by now" is not good enough.It exceeds the need.
To fill the universeNo. You've forgotten your place. Go back to the original post: The Fermi Paradox.
with microbes from one source would require ejecta at the speed of light, given the age of the universe. Impossible.
Doesn't matter if it's ships or rocks! If life can make the journey, there's been more than enough time.
Galaxy-hopping only slows things down.No. It would likely be far faster to reach our nearest galactic neighbor
than the further side of our own galaxy. Not just due to the distance
but because the trip within the galaxy is far more likely to require
stages where life falls to a world, establishes itself only to then be
kicked back into space by another asteroid or super volcano...
Simply put: The further a bullet has to travel within a forest, the more likely it'll hit a tree before reaching the other end.
So you have to assume at least a billion independent abiogenesis events scattered throughout the universeThat would speed things up considerably.
You are referring to the old-fangled recklessly optimistic estimatesNo. Not at all.
based on the Drake equation, like Sagan's.
It is rare as an abode of intelligent creatures
We don't know that. It's a hypothesis only. If we find life in Mars or Ganymede then it's excessively unlikely that the Earth is rare.
It seems you have great faith in Sagan's estimates.I don't know why you are citing opinions of authority figures instead
of facts. Sorry. I'm just not that religious.
Merely an assumption.
Let's see you argue against it. It took 3500 million years on earth,It's not about time. The more time the more likely, we can assume, but
and you are now entertaining the notion that earth is highly atypical.
it's not a case where less times excludes a possibility.
You've confused "Life" for "Spacefaring technological life."
I haven't confused it, I was merely addressing your earlierNo, you definitely confused "Life" for "Spacefaring technological life."
comments about humanoids being all over the universe.
Correct. I was just using technology as an easy way to detectWhich is different from INTELLIGENT life. For the vast majority of
intelligent lifeforms in other planetary systems.
human history we have been "Intelligent life" but not technological.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/694350266118635520
These are all very good questions and very much on topic for talk.origins. But they aren't about paleontology.
Seems like we could easily replicate the forces of an ejection event,
test the survival of microbes thrown into space and even reentry
(impact). Right now we'd probably have to satisfy ourselves with
computer models as we can't shoot rocks at Mars, retrieve them &
test them for life. Not yet. But just the fact that it does exist within the realm of possibilities, even it not doable now, does qualify it as
a genuine scientific hypothesis.
Absolutely. Over in talk.origins, there is a scientific nonentity who
is a "legal eagle," and to whom I am trying to explain that the scientific concept
of testability used by scientists is NOT the one used by legal scholars
or historians or literary researchers, but rather testability IN PRINCIPLE.
peter2...@gmail.com wrote:
These are all very good questions and very much on topic for talk.origins. But they aren't about paleontology.
No, you need reading retention. I explicitly stated the benefits.
Seems like we could easily replicate the forces of an ejection event, test the survival of microbes thrown into space and even reentry (impact). Right now we'd probably have to satisfy ourselves with
computer models as we can't shoot rocks at Mars, retrieve them &
test them for life. Not yet. But just the fact that it does exist within the realm of possibilities, even it not doable now, does qualify it as
a genuine scientific hypothesis.
Absolutely. Over in talk.origins, there is a scientific nonentity whoWithin the realm of possibilities; potentialities.
is a "legal eagle," and to whom I am trying to explain that the scientific concept
of testability used by scientists is NOT the one used by legal scholars
or historians or literary researchers, but rather testability IN PRINCIPLE.
I do not make idle threats.
On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 1:27:56 PM UTC-7, JTEM wrote:
https://uapro.tumblr.com/post/692166849732935680/the-fermi-paradox-bites-snails-from-a-spirited
It's a screenshot of an exchange, a snippet out of a thread,
from over in Talk.Origins dating to 2005...
I for one positively love, Love, LOVE the potential found in
alien life forms. And it doesn't have to be hyper advanced,
super intelligent, technological life either. No little green
men landing and asking that someone "Take me to your
leader."
No, microbes will do just fine. At least for a while. Generations,
maybe.
See, we only have one model for evolution, the earth, and
it's SEVERELY limited by the stupidity of human.
All humans. No exceptions.
Humans aren't an intelligent species, we are an emotional
species that also includes an element of intelligence. But,
to call humans "Intelligence" is just plain wrong.
THE OCEAN
Choose one characteristic by which to describe the ocean.
Just one.
It's going to be water. Unless you're an twit, it's water. Saying
that the ocean is "A large body of water" isn't entirely inaccurate
but if we were to choose one and only one characteristic then
water it is.
"The ocean is a large body of salt."
Nope. Grossly inaccurate.
So we call it "Water" even if it's also salt, and life and of course
other minerals but "Water" is close enough."
And calling humans "Emotional" is like calling the ocean "Water."
It's not entirely accurate, there's other components, certainly
very important components, but all are dwarfed in their
contribution by emotions... in humans... or water, in the ocean.
Humans are emotional twits.
Yes, even you. There are no exceptions.
Want proof?
Darwin didn't "Invent" or "Discover" evolution. His greatest
impact on science was to hold it back for several decades,
by becoming the face of naturalism and rejecting Mendel, and
it is DEFINITELY a case that if Darwin had hung himself before
writing his first book that Wallace & others would have
published just the same, with extremely little chance of making
the same errors that Darwin made.
You knew that?
Well, Darwin didn't even believe in evolution. Oh, sure, he used
the word by if you ever heard of this thing called usenet, and
played on it long enough, you're totally accustomed to people
using words wrong. You don't even need to be on usenet, it
happens often enough in real life, we frequently encounter
people using words wrong, saying things wrong...
misunderstanding words...
I mean, when Darwin said "Evolution" he wasn't thinking of
evolution. No, what he had in his head exactly matched what
those who REJECTED evolution thought of in it's place.
Stalin & Mao made Lysenkoism the official "Science" of the
communist world. People risked their life and certainly their
freedom for teaching (or even practicing) the Capitalist
VooDoo of evolution. They taught Lysenkoism in it's place,
and Lysenkoism was virtually identical to Darwin's one and
only theory -- Pangenesis -- both being little more than
plagiarized copies of Lamarckism...
So, there. Your EMOTIONAL rejection of reality supersedes
any intelligence you may have. Though you are intellectually
capable of dealing with the Darwin hoax, you could probably
even figure it all out on your own, no help from me, you are
EMOTIONALLY castrated. You can't do.
Must.. Defend... Darwin...
Darwin... god...
Science... Incarnate...
And that's the problem right there, lady.
So if we had alien life, any alien life, we could study it and in
so doing confirm or dispel a great many notions we now take
for granted.
It's not that we humans, all of us humans, impose our a-priori
assumptions on data & observations, it's that we often (usually,
always) don't know that we're doing it!
So from this perspective, it's actually quite possible that so
called "lower life forms" would be more valuable to us. After all,
the more highly advanced a species is, the more likely that they
have shaped the genetics of life on their planet, assuming that
our concept of "Genetics" even applies...
So life, even bacterial life from Mars or Ganymede, could harbor
the potential to completely rewire the human brain, as far as
leading with our assumptions goes. Or defending a favorite idea
instead of the soundest conclusion.
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/692867215050047488It's not clear what this has to do with paleontology, or aliens, for that matter. In any event
you'll have to wait until at least next Monday. Our resident alienist is a very busy man, and
he doesn't work weekends.
JTEM is
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 303 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 76:19:12 |
| Calls: | 6,805 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,327 |
| Messages: | 5,400,170 |