the nanoparticles found in ALH are simply to small. length: 380nm
wide range about 20nm.(Scientific american) ( 20-100 nanometres in diameter, wiki)
the diameter of a ribosome is about 20-25nm. in an E.Coli you can find about 20 000 ribosomes.
the smallest living beeing (Mycoplasma) has a diamter about 200nm.
Staphylococcous aureus: 600nm....
the ALH84001 particles are to small to produce Proteins, no space for a metabolism etc.
The famous nanobacteria (for example Nanobacterium sanguineum)seems to be only anamorphic hydroxylapatite crystals (Ca2+ + PO42-) with proteins, lipids, DNA, RNA.. (sientific american)

you may like: http://journalofcosmology.com/Panspermia1.html

In the article linked, below, we read that Dr. Wickramasinghe intended to fly to Sri Lanka to gather further information about the Polannaruwa meteorite, over the weekend of Jan. 19-20. He explains a bit about why he believes the object is a meteorite, albeit an unusual one, and where he believes it may have originated. Included in the article is an interesting quote from Sir Arthur C. Clarke. He seems to have seriously entertained the possibility that Hoyle and Wickramasinghe's panspermia hypothesis is correct. I recall another of Sir Arthur's famous quotes, to the effect that-- when an elderly scientists says something is impossible, he is usually wrong, and when he says some is or could be so, he is probably right. Ironically, this could now apply to Clarke himself, and to Wickramasinghe. http://www.lankaweb.com/news/items/2013/01/17/chandra-wickramasinghe-coming-to-sri-lankato-gather-further-information/

The article linked below contains some interesting new details about the Polannaruwa meteorite. It was reported to still be smoking when found, and to be hot enough to burn the hands of those who tried to collect the fragments of it. Dr. Wickramasinghe explains that the object was determined to contain the correct proportion of carbon to identify it as a carbonaceous chondrite meteorite. He intends to make further tests on the specimen he has, and submit his results to a recognized, peer-reviewed journal, in the near future. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2266435/Does-rock-prove-life-outer-space-Controversial-scientist-claims-fossils-meteor-fragment.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Some writers and publications have taken to charging, or repeating the charge that Dr. Wickramasinghe is a 'fringe scientist'. The context of these remarks make it clear that the intent is critical and dismissive. They are not describing or commending his work on the edge of what is known; seeking to expand scientific knowledge. I thought it would be interesting to look up the doctor's curriculum vitae, resume, honors, publications, and accomplishments. Below is a link to a summary of this impressive lifetime of scientific endeavor: http://www.buckingham.ac.uk/directory/professor-chandra-wickramasinghe/

If verified this should add weight to the panspermia theory. But if life didn't originate here on earth where did it come from?

I believe life has originated all over the Universe, we just don't know about it...

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

Theoretically Panspermia is the right track.

Time is good for the development of life it gives us billions of years for RNA and DNA to form.

Multiple solar systems, suns, elements, and god knows what else to mix and mutate the soup to where DNA is today.

Lets not be naive, the story of science is one of surprise, just imagine looking into a microscope the first time.

However as Richard Dawkins correctly asserts, until we know and can prove that life did not form on earth it is just conjecture. It may well be that life formed here... we don't know yet.

If we do find life to have formed somewhere else, then it will become like a detective story tracing the clues to new systems (if we ever get that far)

What about chemical differentiation of planets?

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures