From: Briang1@blueyonder.co.uk   
      
   A very basic answer from another non scientist.   
      
   Firstly, I'm not sure you are right that people are using humans as the   
   criteria for whether life can exist.   
      
   At the moment the jury is still out  on how life started in the first place.   
   Was there a head start by means of organic molecules from space? Was it   
   seeded from somewhere else or was there indeed divine intervention!   
      
   I think from what I've read, the genetic records suggest that some life   
   survived the cataclysms of Asteroid or comet impacts to some extent, and   
   there is no' second start', although,as you say, you would need to  excavate   
   a lot of rock to be sure.   
      
   I think the hypothesis is that conditions were right enough to start with,   
   for long enough to get evolution going well enough for some to survive. The   
   problem with the places we are seeing out there in space is that we do not   
   fully understand their histories. In most cases we have never been there and   
   no samples in pristine condition exist here. Mars meteorites are of course   
   debris from impacts and may well have been molten when ejected.   
      
   This is what makes Genesis and Stardust so important, as these are   
   interstellar and old material, as it would have been in the very beginning.   
      
   I mean, Europa has been in deep freeze for what appears to be a very long   
   time, and goodness only knows about Titan.   
      
   If anything exists in such stringent radiation and temperature conditions   
   that lives, would we in fact recognise it as life? Only monitoring the   
   conditions and trying to understand the natural processes will give any   
   hint, I imagine.   
      
   As for planets orbiting other stars, I think, and this is a personal view,   
   that in many cases the lives of the stars is too short or variable to allow   
   what WE know as life, to get going.   
      
   Incidentally, some would say that the reason life here on Earth has to have   
   sex and replicate that way in the main, is purely the need to both develop   
   to a changing environment, and damage by oxidants and radiation over the   
   lifespan.  Surely the parts of our dna which attempt to repair it are there   
   for good reasons.   
      
   In some benign, unchanging environment, there would not be need for change,   
   so we might find long lived but poorly developed life elsewhere.   
      
   Just some thoughts.   
      
   Brian   
      
   --   
   Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.   
    graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them   
   Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk   
   ________________________________________________________________   
   _____________________________________________   
      
      
   "Marcel Kuijper"  wrote in message   
   news:r5j3v20jes37.12obrpi55w842$.dlg@40tude.net...   
   >   
   > Hello,   
   >   
   > This is my first post here, so forgive me if these questions have been   
   > asked before. (and I'm not a scientist)   
   >   
   > Left and right we can read how lots of people speculate that a certain   
   > planet or moon can not have any lifeforms on them because of extreme cold,   
   > heat, or drought.   
   > These assumptions are mostly based on speculations that intelligent   
   > lifeforms or humanoids could not survive such harsh enviroments.   
   >   
   > This puzzles me....haven't humans learned to adapt themselves to their   
   > surroundings? Haven't we evolved in such a way that we can deal with the   
   > elements? Haven't other lifeforms on this planet evolved in the same way?   
   >   
   > If it were just ordinary humans making these claims I wouldn't think   
   > anything of it, but when scientists start saying stuff like that I feel   
   > anger swell up inside me. Lots of different scientists from lots of   
   > different countries stand behind the same claim.   
   >   
   > So what are they basing their claims on?   
   > Why is it they throw humans into the equation whenever a new planet is   
   > discovered?   
   >   
   > Even a microscopic, single-celled organism is a lifeform and that is   
   > basically where it all starts. Look at us! We're far from perfect, but   
   > we've come a long way over the years.   
   >   
   > Do I believe in life elsewhere? You betcha!   
   > Where do you think we came from?   
   >   
   > Life started over after the dinosaurs and we are that life.   
   > It might even be possible that the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs was   
   > carrying a microscopic, single-celled organism deep inside it and when the   
   > dust settled, life began once again.   
   > Maybe it was the asteroid after that, or maybe even the one after that.   
   > If so, that microscopic, single-celled organism had to have come from   
   > somewhere inside the universe. Maybe it even came from a universe outside   
   > our own. Who knows for sure?   
   >   
   > But until we get actual proof of that, it's my belief that scientists   
   > around the globe should stop saying that life outside planet Earth is not   
   > possible due to factors that we humble humans could not possibly endure.   
   >   
   >   
   > Regards,   
   > Marcel   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)