Life’s ingredients may have ‘sprinkled’ on Earth
Fascinating! Thanks for the link! 
Oh, great. So now we’ve gone from being star dust to being space tinkle. 
We are space tinkle.
We are golden.
And we’ve got to get ourselves
Back to the garden.
It just doesn’t work for me, I’m afraid.
djm
It seems unlikely to me that a molecule that complex could assemble in dense clouds, let alone survive entering an atmosphere.
But what the heck. Who knows. Pass the salt and pepper. 
I’m thinkin’ Cosmic Parmesan…
Hi
So, you mean we evolved from cheese rather than monkeys? I’m not sure whether I feel that’s better or worse. 
Well, looking at the White House and a few other similar establishments around the world it would seem like there must have been a monkey involved somewhere… 
Regards,
Owen Morgan
Yacht Magic
Anchored in the lagoon, St Maarten
My new blog.
Click here for my latest reported position. (Use the satellite view.)
Ok…I just assumed that you were talking about Life cereal, and this had something to do with a space picture. Maybe a giant cluster of stars that look like a box of Life or something.
I really think that I need to get to take two aspirin and go to bed 
The theory has been
around for a decade or two. The idea is
that the Earth was seeded for life in some way,
the constituents arriving on meteors.
Maybe this is something new in its favor.
Underlying is this difficulty:
accounts of life arising on earth without
any ‘outside’ influence appear to involve
stupendously low probabilities. Otherwise
we wouldn’t be trying to find explanations in what’s
going on in outer space.
Intelligent Design is responding to the same problem.
In the absence of a plausible mechanistic
explanation for life’s origination here,
it becomes more thinkable that
something teleological was involved.
How can you suggest such a thing with an argument as profound as the flying spaghetti monster around? I mean, intelligent design? To even mention it will turn our whole enlightened age into a bunch of noodle heads! Religion masquerading as science. I won’t have it. I won’t! I won’t! I won’t!
Here’s how it happened.
I’ve always found it mildly amusing (but sort of sad) that in many circles of the science community it’s considered “scientific” to invoke the possibility of aliens having a part in our existence, but inherently “unscientific” to invoke the possibility of God.
Tom
but Tom!
If God ain’t from here, s/he/whatever is an alien!!
Hi
These days Jesus would never get through immigration… Who did you say your father is? What’s his nationality? Where’s your luggage?
Regards,
Owen Morgan
Yacht Magic
Anchored in the lagoon, St Maarten
My new blog.
Click here for my latest reported position. (Use the satellite view.)
There’s something funny going on.
It’s sort of a dual level phenomenon.
At the bottom level, there are anti-evolution creationists
who want to use ID as a way of inserting religious
teaching into school curricula.
A lot of the horror is a response to them, and it’s
understandable, IMO. There’s a covert agenda.
But the ID theoreticians themselves do NOT want ID
taught in the schools. I’ve been corresponding with
some of them. They say there’s no curriculum for it,
teachers don’t know enough about it, and it only
leads to lawsuits that are bad for everybody.
What they want is more evolution taught in the
schools, so that students understand it to the
point where they can grasp difficulties for the
theory. Every theory has some difficulties,
including modern evolutionary theory, e.g.
there are real puzzles about how ‘altruistic’
behaviour could have evolved.
I respect these guys, they’re publishing in
prestigious peer reviewed journals, and I
think the end result will be to strengthen the
theory of evolution by forcing biologists who
believe it to address problems.
There is nothing to fear in mathematically sophisticated
attacks on evolutionary theory. Some of the arguments
are interesting. And a lot of this stuff is about the
arising of life BEFORE it could evolve, and the probabilities
of that. Why not? Press away!
But the issue has got caught up in the culture war,
and the ‘teaching evolution in the schools’ debate.
Which means they get dismissed as bible thumping
morons with a covert agenda.
Well said, Jim. As a creationist with a fairly scientific bent myself (and a wife who is a biology teacher), I don’t want anyone’s religion pressed in the schools. That isn’t what public schools are for. I certainly wouldn’t want my kids forced to pray to Vishnu; why would I want Hindu kids forced to pray to Yahweh?
What I DO want is for the problems and contradictions in evolutionary theory to be brought up and openly discussed. In other words, I (and most other creationists, ID scientists, etc.) would like to see it taught as a theory, rather than as a dogma. As you said, there’s a lot of dishonesty and fear on both sides of the issue. The implications are so huge that it’s hard to discuss it objectively.
So true. Though he didn’t exactly have an easy time of it in his day, either…
Tom
I’d like to see all of the sciences taught as a theory, rather than as a dogma.
I’ve long ago lost count of the things that were outdated when they were taught to me as fact, let alone the ones that fell later.
Just as music is taught!
maybe a little better 
Yeah, you remember, don’t you, when the boffins told us it was a fact that the liver had five lobes, that vision was the result of rays from the eyes, and that mice spontaneously generated if you tossed a bunch of clothes in the corner and waited, right? Those were the days.