Reply to commentary by R Duggleby (2019)

Steele, E.J., Al-Mufti, S., Augustyn, K.A., Chandrajith, R., Coghlan, J.P., Coulson, S.G., Ghosh, S., Gillman, M., Gorczynski, R.M., Klyce, B., Louis, G., Mahanama, K., Oliver, K.R., Padron, J., Qu, J., Schuster, J.A., Smith, W.E., Snyder, D.P., Steele, J.A., Stewart, B.J., Temple, R., Tokoro, G., Tout, C.A., Unzicker, A., Wainwright, M., Wallis, J., Wallis, D.H., Wallis, M.K., Wetherall, J., Wickramasinghe, D.T., Wickramasinghe, J.T., Wickramasinghe, N.C. and Liu, Y. (2019) Reply to commentary by R Duggleby (2019). Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology, 141 . pp. 74-78.

Abstract

Duggleby (2018) has made a numerical analysis of some aspects of the wide range of phenomena we reviewed in Steele et al. (2018) and asserted " .that panspermia as proposed by Steele et al. (2018) is extremely implausible.” It seems to us that Duggleby has based his viewpoint on a quite narrow and specific model of Panspermia which he supposes to be active in the cosmos. Here we address both his conclusions and his numerical analysis. Our response therefore will be at two levels, his specific analysis and his general conclusions. In the specific section below we show that while Duggleby's numerical analysis appears in part correct it is, in the final analysis, quite irrelevant to Cosmic Panspermia. In the general response which follows we address his unsupported conclusion throughout his critique, namely that … " none of the examples mentioned by Steele et al. (2018) is decisive enough to allow no other explanation."

Item Type:	Journal Article
Murdoch Affiliation(s):	School of Veterinary and Life Sciences
Publisher:	Elsevier
Copyright:	© 2018 The Authors
URI:	http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/45243

Item Control Page

Downloads