Tell me more ×
Skeptics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for scientific skepticism. It's 100% free, no registration required.

As I understand it, there is little belief that life could have originated on Earth until the end of the Late Heavy Bombardment (4.1-3.8B years ago) but DNA-based life was certainly established by ~3.4B years ago. I was taught that DNA-based life was certainly preceded by "RNA-world" and that was most likely preceded by some kind of protein-based system. So you've got ~500-700M years to bootstrap all the way to DNA.

But now it appears that "slow meteorites" might transfer from solar system to solar system, opening up several billion years of additional chemistry experiments. But on the other hand requiring chemicals coming from compatible planets and surviving several million years of hard vacuum and surviving falling to Earth and somehow taking hold...

Is it reasonable to be skeptical that ~500-700M years is enough time for abiogenesis? Is that timeframe considered a "problem" by scientists?

share|improve this question
1  
The time frame isn't. Life doesn't operate by years, but by generations. Some bacteria can reproduce daily - so while that's a few hundred million years (which is still a heckuva lot on an evolutionary scale), that could be up to thousands of millions of generations. – MCM Oct 16 '12 at 1:59
2  
Not really sure what you would expect as an answer here: surely what happened, happened and panspermia has nothing to do with abiogenesis (actually, it still depends on it). As it stands this question is a biology question and not a question suitable for here. You are not skeptical of any particular claim, but rather invite discussion about a topic. – Sklivvz Oct 16 '12 at 7:08
Panspermia offers an order of magnitude of additional time, and vastly expanded environments and chemistry to the question of abiogenesis. But it clearly has its difficulties. Short of becoming an expert, I don't know which, if any, aspects are considered crucial either by proponents or opponents. I don't even know if panspermia is considered phlogiston by real experts. So restructuring my fundamental "Life (or pre-life) started on Earth?" skepticism by grabbing some obvious aspect ("can molecules survive interstellar travel?") strikes me as a mistake. – Larry OBrien Oct 16 '12 at 17:43
@LarryOBrien - You are still not skeptical of any claim. You are asking for an opinion of a theory. That is not what Skeptics SE is for. Even if it was on topic... it would not be constructive since you are basically seeking a discussion. – Chad Oct 16 '12 at 19:36

closed as off topic by Sklivvz Oct 16 '12 at 7:08

Questions on Skeptics Stack Exchange are expected to relate to scientific skepticism within the scope defined in the FAQ. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about closed questions here.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.