beecee

Wow! What an incredible experience!

Well Ashe Barty has another grand slam title, after a great effort by the American Danielle Collins, which sees her in the top 10 ranking for the first time in her life. And best of all, in the long drawn out official speeches and acceptance speeches, not one bloody mention of the Djokovic! Nadal and the Rusky tonight will see the conclusion of two weeks of incredible tennis and sportsmanship from the players, both winners and losers!!!

Even though we have the most deadly species in the world, it is unlikely that you will be harmed by them, especially as they only bite humans in self-defence. I remember many years ago bushwalking and we came across a red bellied black snake curled up on the trail. We just all quietly walked around it, and while it was certainly observing us, it never made a move. The biggest danger is the stone fish and/or box jelly fish found up near the Great Barrier Reef, certainly no where near Sydney's many surfing beaches, where the occasional shark sighting, and even less occasional attack. Considering the numbers of people that go to our beaches on a typical weekend, and with now, drones in the sky, attacks are rare also.

Look us up, will but you a VB, take you to the greatest game of all, and throw a shrimp on the barbie for you.

. Perhaps if you actually address the points made in my many links, and avoid your less then complimentary remarks against myself and the scientists, that see this as science, you may not make such silly blanket statements as "science fiction parading as science"and "wasted intelligence" and other remarks. I remember past debates with you, and your always less then mainstream position or strong inferences that you seem to take.eg: we probably are the only life off the Earth, intelligent life is rare and we are probably it, boots on Mars is a wasted dream etc etc etc. I can't help but wonder if that ties in with abiogenesis or not. No I am unable to pull these past interactions up, but if I am judging you wrong, please indicate and I'll withdraw what I believe as your stance. Anyway, here are some of the links, papers, and references I have given that do see it as science and in fact as our right also. https://phys.org/news/2019-01-seeding-milky-life-genesis-missions.html https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.02286.pdf https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ast.2019.2197 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222394696_Glaciopanspermia_Seeding_the_Terrestrial_Planets_with_Life http://www.astroethics.com/ https://phys.org/news/2010-02-professor-moral-obligation-seed-universe.html "Michael Mautner, Research Professor of Chemistry at Virginia Commonwealth University, seeding the universe with life is not just an option, it’s our moral obligation." Again what people seem to be missing is the probability over possibility scenario.

Your reasoanble attitude is apppreciated. Seeding probable sterile worlds certainly is science, despite your misgivings. A shame you refelct so much arrogance in your comments agaisnt known professionals. Professor Gros is a reputable scientist and It's more then just Professor Gros. I suggest you read some of the links. Agreed.

While Australia does have at least two or possibly three of the most venomous snakes in the world, their numbers are grossly over-estimated. In my time I have only ever seen three in the bush...same with spiders...we really aint over run with them.

No racoons here! 😉 I have two dogs now, among the most intelligent of breeds, Mini Dachsunds, and while being a fearless breed, to the point of foolhardy, are not overly concerned when we meet up with other dogs, large or small, unlike some of the terrier breeds, which in many cases, are automatically aggressive to larger breeds. My parents bred mini Dachy's.

No problem with that, but the Mrs has grown an attachement to this little dove sitting all day on its egg....so far, so good. We are also keeping a good distance and observing it with some binos.

"Generally" being the operative word. When my old Rotty mate was alive, I was taking him for a walk one morning, when this little Shitzu terrier, came runnning out at him, madly barking and running in and out between my Rottweilers legs. My Rotty just stood there with this inquisitive look on his face, until the woman that owned the shitzu hearing the commotion, rushed out and grabbed her dog. I explained there was nothing much too worry about as my Rotty had already had breakfast. 😊 We presently have a dove that we (the Mrs and I) have been watching building a nest in one of our trees. It now has a little egg in it... My concern is the number of crows around our area.

Oh yeah!!! Aint that true!! And has been shown in recent Sydney/Melbourne protest marches. Well said!!

Obviously you don't. Or at least are being mighty weird and/or coy about it. Let me explain, a citation is simply explaining that certain reasons/methodologies etc, have come from another source. Does that help? Yes, opinions worth thinking about, rather then some philosophical driven claptrap from a nobody. 🥱 And I concur with those opinions, and of course facts. And as such, I'm all for it! But you in reality you are questioning nothing, simply stubbornly maintaining your naysay philosophical position. Your baggage again, is your philosophy, that I have shown to be unworkable in other threads. 🤭 I think we have some very good explanations and scientific opinions at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.02286.pdf not the least being ....... "For terrestrial life it is custom to attribute value nearly exclusively to complex life, viz to animals and plants. Killing a few billion bacteria while brushing teeth does not cause, to give an example, moral headaches. The situation changes however when it comes to extrasolar life, for which we may attribute value also to future evolutionary pathways. This is a delicate situation. Is it admissible to bring eukaryotes to a planet in a prokaryotic state, superseding such indigenous life with lifeforms having the potential to develop into complex ecologies? Our prevalence to attribute value predominately to complex lifeforms would suggest that this would be ethically correct [58, 59], in particular if we could expect our galaxy to harbor large numbers of planets in prokaryotic states. Endowing a selected number of exoplanets with the possibility to evolve higher life forms would in this case not interfere with the evolution of yet simple life forms on potentially billions of other planets. Genesis missions would comply with the common-sense norm to attribute value to complex lifeforms, the very rational to undertake them in first place, and abort whenever the target planet harbors life that can be detected from orbit." ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Taking that scientific reasoning along with the "probability v's the possibility" argument, and the "use by date" of Earth, 3 billion years or so hence, and the possibility of exteding our own species on another planet. Are we not obliged to extend our species lifetime? I certainly believe we are, even at the possible risk ( as opposed to probable) of killing some microscopic underground bacterial like entities, or even changing or enhancing there's and ours evolutionary pathways.

An extract from a previous link at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.02286.pdf "Taking the evolution of terrestrial biota as a reference [30, 35], we may classify nonsolar ecosystems into four categories: primitive-prokaryotic, prokaryotic, unicellular eukaryotic and multi-cellular eukaryotic, viz complex life. For terrestrial life it is custom to attribute value nearly exclusively to complex life, viz to animals and plants. Killing a few billion bacteria while brushing teeth does not cause, to give an example, moral headaches. The situation changes however when it comes to extrasolar life, for which we may attribute value also to future evolutionary pathways. This is a delicate situation. Is it admissible to bring eukaryotes to a planet in a prokaryotic state, superseding such indigenous life with lifeforms having the potential to develop into complex ecologies? Our prevalence to attribute value predominately to complex lifeforms would suggest that this would be ethically correct [58, 59], in particular if we could expect our galaxy to harbor large numbers of planets in prokaryotic states. Endowing a selected number of exoplanets with the possibility to evolve higher life forms would in this case not interfere with the evolution of yet simple life forms on potentially billions of other planets. Genesis missions would comply with the common-sense norm to attribute value to complex lifeforms, the very rational to undertake them in first place, and abort whenever the target planet harbors life that can be detected from orbit. Considering the case of Mars, it is however clear that it will be hard to rule out unambiguously the existence of ecospheres of exceedingly low bioproductivity. Protocols regulating the necessary level of confidence are hence needed. It would be meaningful to embargo the entire extrasolar system in case that complex life would be detected by flyby probes on one of its planets" and with relation to the Genesis project itself, "Biosphere compatibility considerations suggest in this case that we should not consider in-situ investigations of exoplanets teeming with life [35], with the reason being that such an endeavor could be catastrophic for the indigenous biosphere." end extracts: As one would generally expect from agenda free, caring, thinking, considerate scientists, practising what they do best...science. And as such, I'm all for it!

Ooops, sorry!! Been wrapped up in the Tennis! Still you have Mario and the Greek Angel as extras.😉 in english and Italian...... Anna Netrebko ~ O Mio Babbino Caro ~ Giacomo Puccini

https://phys.org/news/2022-01-lunar-jupiter-moon-powerful-rocket.html Space travel is all about momentum. Rockets turn their fuel into momentum that carries people, satellites and science itself forward into space. 2021 was a year full of records for space programs around the world, and that momentum is carrying forward into 2022. Last year, the commercial space race truly took off. Richard Branson and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos both rode on suborbital launches—and brought friends, including actor William Shatner. SpaceX sent eight astronauts and 1 ton of supplies to the International Space Station for NASA. The six tourist spaceflights in 2021 were a record. There were also a record 19 people weightless in space for a short time in December, eight of them private citizens. Finally, Mars was also busier than ever thanks to missions from the U.S., China and United Arab Emirates sending rovers, probes or orbiters to the red planet. In total, in 2021 there were 134 launches that put humans or satellites into orbit—the highest number in the entire history of spaceflight. Nearly 200 orbital launches are scheduled for 2022. If things go well, this will smash last year's record. I'm an astronomer who studies supermassive black holes and distant galaxies. I have also written a book about humanity's future in space. There's a lot to look forward to in 2022. The moon will get more attention than it has had in decades, as will Jupiter. The largest rocket ever built will make its first flight. And of course, the James Webb Space Telescope will start sending back its first images. more at link....................... Nasa's Artemis program to return to the Moon in 2024 should get underway in 2022.

https://phys.org/news/2022-01-extreme-exoplanet-complex-exotic-atmosphere.html An international team including researchers from the University of Bern and the University of Geneva as well as the National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) PlanetS analyzed the atmosphere of one of the most extreme known planets in great detail. The results from this hot, Jupiter-like planet that was first characterized with the help of the CHEOPS space telescope, may help astronomers understand the complexities of many other exoplanets—including Earth-like planets. The atmosphere of Earth is not a uniform envelope but consists of distinct layers that each have characteristic properties. The lowest layer that spans from sea level beyond the highest mountain peaks, for example—the troposphere—contains most of the water vapor and is thus the layer in which most weather phenomena occur. The layer above it—the stratosphere—is the one that contains the famous ozone layer that shields us from the Sun's harmful ultraviolet radiation. In a new study published in Nature Astronomy, an international team of researchers led by the University of Lund show for the first time that the atmosphere of one of the most extreme known planets may have similarly distinct layers as well—albeit with very different characteristics. more at link................. the paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-021-01581-z Titanium oxide and chemical inhomogeneity in the atmosphere of the exoplanet WASP-189 b Abstract: The temperature of an atmosphere decreases with increasing altitude, unless a shortwave absorber that causes a temperature inversion exists1. Ozone plays this role in the Earth’s atmosphere. In the atmospheres of highly irradiated exoplanets, the shortwave absorbers are predicted to be titanium oxide (TiO) and vanadium oxide (VO)2. Detections of TiO and VO have been claimed using both low-3,4,5,6 and high-7 spectral-resolution observations, but subsequent observations have failed to confirm these claims8,9,10 or overturned them11,12,13. Here we report the unambiguous detection of TiO in the ultra-hot Jupiter WASP-189 b14 using high-resolution transmission spectroscopy. This detection is based on applying the cross-correlation technique15 to many spectral lines of TiO from 460 to 690 nm. Moreover, we report detections of metals, including neutral and singly ionized iron and titanium, as well as chromium, magnesium, vanadium and manganese (Fe, Fe+, Ti, Ti+, Cr, Mg, V, Mn). The line positions of the detected species differ, which we interpret as a consequence of spatial gradients in their chemical abundances, such that they exist in different regions or dynamical regimes. This is direct observational evidence for the three-dimensional thermochemical stratification of an exoplanet atmosphere derived from high-resolution ground-based spectroscopy.

I had this young punk a year or so ago call me a old bastard. My reply was, "Hey matey, I'm there, you have yet to get there!"😉 Italian songs?

Of course he lied and then tried to wiggle his way out of it! And in the meant time, the Australian Open proceeds as it should, with the women's final tonight between Australian Ashleigh Barty, world number 1 and American Danielle Collins. The men's final is on Sunday night between Rafael Nadal and fiery Russian Danil Medvedev. So far been great tennis.

Other then your penache for comedy fairy tales when cornered. I suggest you try it...the honest unbiased inquiry that is, without your life philosophy baggage. As an example from a previous link...."if you had good conditions, simple life can develop very fast, but complex life will have a hard time. At least on Earth, it took a very long time for complex life to arrive. The Cambrian Explosion only happened about 500 million years ago, roughly 4 billion years after Earth was formed. If we give planets the opportunity to fast forward evolution, we can give them the chance to have their own Cambrian Explosions". I see such an effort and process as extremly scientifically gratifying and forward thinking. Thanks but I must correct you on "my method"...As per my many reputable links, that honour actually goes to a Dr. Claudius Gros, a theoretical physicist from the Institute for Theoretical Physics at Goethe University Frankfurt. Perhaps if you weren't saddled with such philosophical baggage, you would have seen that in some of the articles...if of course you did read any of them. You have forgotten your probability over possibility logic. The rest of the life out there???😊Are we talking about our stellar system, that within a few light years, the whole galaxy or are you going for the universe?😅 I prefer the science, and the possible scientific experiment "Project Geneis". It proceeds on our scientific knowledge and capabilities and on known sterile worlds. We can and will I'm certain, be able to at least extend our "use by date" with such an experiment, as we obtain further advancement with new acquired techological expertise. To use an old phrase of mine again...as an advanced species, we were not born to stagnate on this fart arse little blue orb. That of course does not mean that through science and scientific endeavour, we should not have as our current number one priority, the repair and protection of this fart arse little blue orb.

You interprete it the way you like. Your "OK then", says plenty about your intent. ☺️

I'll stick to process thank you, in the manner I was using to describe it. But your silly pedant noted. No. I've given ample scientific opinion and views on such an intended process. You, as usual are applying your world ideological/philosophical view, which is also obvious in the vast majority of your posts. Nup, wrong again. It is a reason to propagate life whenever and whereever we can, due to the scientific facts that everything does have a use by date. In summing again, It's certainly not me pushing some idealistic philosophical ideology, theist, or ID nonsense. I'm simply agreeing with an aspect of science, as science, and with regards to the probability of such. You disagree, that's your opinion and we all understand opinions. Yes, I also understand that some of the points are still speculative...all the more reason why continued experiments and observations should continue. This obviously has now developed into a science v's philosophy argument. No wonder notable physicists such as Lawrence Krauss and others have chose to criticise some philosophical aspects and that which some philosophers deem as exempt from criticism. "Science is simply common sense at its best that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic". Thomas Henry Huxley (1825-95) English biologist. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: "Philosophy consists very largely of one philosopher arguing that all others are jackasses. He usually proves it, and I should add that he also usually proves that he is one himself". Henry Louis Mencken. (1880-1956). Minority Report, H. L. Mencken's Notebooks. Knopf, 1956. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: From a previous link, two sensible statements.... "Our purpose is best achieved in space, where life has an immense future. We can start now to secure this future, by seeding with life new solar systems. New species can develop there into intelligent beings who will expand life futher. Filling the universe with life will give our human existence a cosmic purpose". "Human survival, and expanding life in space, are cosmic human endeavors. They will require human cooperation on cosmic scales of space and time, based on compassion, truth, justice, peace, and a firm respect for life. They can be secured by these priciples: "Love Life; Respect Reality; and Honor Human Dignity".

Yes, certainly one of the more intriguing UFO/UAP sightings/reportings. Plenty unexplained there.

When I was helping to crew a three masted barquentine across the Pacific called the Eolus, I was at the helm one night on the midnight to 0400 hrs watch, around 0130hrs just after crossing the equator...pretty damn hot and some guest crew were sleeping on deck. While I was masterly steering our way across the great blue Pacific, I was singing an old song called "South of the Border' this one....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRo-XczWkPY perhaps not as sweetly, but I wasn't half bad, at least that's what I thought. Soon an old school teacher who was sleeping on deck, came up, blanket around her shoulders, and kindly told me my voice was fucking terrible and she couldn't sleep! Anyway she threw her hands up in the air and decided to go to the furthest part of the ship away from me at the helm, up to the focsle forward of the mainmast. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRo-XczWkPY

Another Physorg article on the subject........................ https://phys.org/news/2010-02-professor-moral-obligation-seed-universe.html Professor: We have a 'moral obligation' to seed universe with life: (PhysOrg.com) -- Eventually, the day will come when life on Earth ends. Whether that’s tomorrow or five billion years from now, whether by nuclear war, climate change, or the Sun burning up its fuel, the last living cell on Earth will one day wither and die. But that doesn’t mean that all is lost. What if we had the chance to sow the seeds of terrestrial life throughout the universe, to settle young planets within developing solar systems many light-years away, and thus give our long evolutionary line the chance to continue indefinitely? According to Michael Mautner, Research Professor of Chemistry at Virginia Commonwealth University, seeding the universe with life is not just an option, it’s our moral obligation. As members of this planet’s menagerie, and a consequence of nearly 4 billion years of evolution, humans have a purpose to propagate life. After all, whatever else life is, it necessarily possesses an incessant drive for self-perpetuation. And the idea isn’t just fantasy: Mautner says that “directed panspermia” missions can be accomplished with present technology. “We have a moral obligation to plan for the propagation of life, and even the transfer of human life to other solar systems which can be transformed via microbial activity, thereby preparing these worlds to develop and sustain complex life,” Mautner explained to PhysOrg.com. “Securing that future for life can give our human existence a cosmic purpose.” more at link........................ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: http://www.astroethics.com/ Principles of Life-Centered Astroethics: Why Life? Principles of Life-Centered (Biotic) Ethics Life is unique in Nature, and for us, it is precious. Life is unique in its complex patterns, and in its purposeful self-continuation. We belong to life and share its drive for self-propagation. Belonging to life then implies a human purpose to secure, expand and propagate our family of gene/protein life. Advancing Life in Space: Panbiotic Ethics Our purpose is best achieved in space, where life has an immense future. We can start now to secure this future, by seeding with life new solar systems. New species can develop there into intelligent beings who will expand life futher. Filling the universe with life will give our human existence a cosmic purpose. Life-Centered Panbiotic Ethics: Principles and Implications Human survival, and expanding life in space, are cosmic human endeavors. They will require human cooperation on cosmic scales of space and time, based on compassion, truth, justice, peace, and a firm respect for life. They can be secured by these priciples: "Love Life; Respect Reality; and Honor Human Dignity". Life-centered biotic ethics define the human purpose: to forever safeguard and propagate life, and to elevate life into a major force in Nature. Can we in fact implement these principles? How can we assure that our family of gene/protein life survives and expands in the galaxy? What are the prospects for life in the Solar System and far beyond? What cosmological future will this new panbiotic astro-ethics secure? These questions are addressed below, and further in the e-book "Seeding the Universe with Life: Securing Our Cosmological Future" (free download) The basic principles are summarized also in Bioethics 2009, 23, 433-440: "Life Centered Ethics and the Human Future in Space" (free download). more at link................ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: These two remarkable quotes deserve a reply...🤭 Unlike the comedy one. It's certainly not me pushing some idealistic philosophical ideology, theist, or ID nonsense. I'm simply agreeing with an aspect of science, as science, and with regards to the probability of such. You disagree, that's your opinion and we all understand opinions. I've given numerous articles and scientific opinions on the genesis process, perhaps you need to invalidate those points made, with more then just rhetoric. yes, I also understand that some of the points are still speculative...all the more reason why continued experiments and observations should continue.

https://phys.org/news/2019-01-seeding-milky-life-genesis-missions.html "Invariably, the issues of extra-terrestrial life and planetary exploration is a controversial one, and one that we are not likely to resolve anytime soon. One thing is for sure though: as our efforts to explore the solar system and galaxy continue, it is an issue that we cannot avoid". https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.02286.pdf Why planetary and exoplanetary protection differ: The case of long duration Genesis missions to habitable but sterile M-dwarf oxygen planets: Abstract: Time is arguably the key limiting factor for interstellar exploration. At high speeds, flyby missions to nearby stars by laser propelled wafersats taking 50-100 years would be feasible. Directed energy launch systems could accelerate on the other side also crafts weighing several tons to cruising speeds of the order of 1000 km/s (c/300). At these speeds, superconducting magnetic sails would be able to decelerate the craft by transferring kinetic energy to the protons of the interstellar medium. A tantalizing perspective, which would allow interstellar probes to stop whenever time is not a limiting factor. Prime candidates are in this respect Genesis probes, that is missions aiming to offer terrestrial life new evolutionary pathways on potentially habitable but hitherto barren exoplanets. Genesis missions raise important ethical issues, in particular with regard to planetary protection. Here we argue that exoplanetary and planetary protection differ qualitatively as a result of the vastly different cruising times for payload delivering probes, which are of the order of millennia for interstellar probes, but only of years for solar system bodies. Furthermore we point out that our galaxy may harbor a large number of habitable exoplanets, M-dwarf planets, which could be sterile due to the presence of massive primordial oxygen atmospheres. We believe that the prospect terrestrial life has in our galaxy would shift on a fundamental level in case that the existence of this type of habitable but sterile oxygen planets will be corroborated by future research. It may also explain why our sun is not a M dwarf, the most common star type, but a medium-sized G-class star. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ast.2019.2197 Seeding Biochemistry on Other Worlds: Enceladus as a Case Study: Abstract: The Solar System is becoming increasingly accessible to exploration by robotic missions to search for life. However, astrobiologists currently lack well-defined frameworks to quantitatively assess the chemical space accessible to life in these alien environments. Such frameworks will be critical for developing concrete predictions needed for future mission planning, both to determine the potential viability of life on other worlds and to anticipate the molecular biosignatures that life could produce. Here, we describe how uniting existing methods provides a framework to study the accessibility of biochemical space across diverse planetary environments. Our approach combines observational data from planetary missions with genomic data catalogued from across Earth and analyzed using computational methods from network theory. To demonstrate this, we use 307 biochemical networks generated from genomic data collected across Earth and “seed” these networks with molecules confirmed to be present on Saturn's moon Enceladus. By expanding through known biochemical reaction space starting from these seed compounds, we are able to determine which products of Earth's biochemistry are, in principle, reachable from compounds available in the environment on Enceladus, and how this varies across different examples of life from Earth (organisms, ecosystems, planetary-scale biochemistry). While we find that none of the 307 prokaryotes analyzed meet the threshold for viability, the reaction space covered by this process can provide a map of possible targets for detection of Earth-like life on Enceladus, as well as targets for synthetic biology approaches to seed life on Enceladus. In cases where biochemistry is not viable because key compounds are missing, we identify the environmental precursors required to make it viable, thus providing a set of compounds to prioritize for detection in future planetary exploration missions aimed at assessing the ability of Enceladus to sustain Earth-like life or directed panspermia. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/08/150827111652.htm Interstellar seeds could create oases of life: Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Summary: Astrophysicists now show that if life can travel between the stars (a process called panspermia), it would spread in a characteristic pattern that we could potentially identify. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222394696_Glaciopanspermia_Seeding_the_Terrestrial_Planets_with_Life Glaciopanspermia: Seeding the Terrestrial Planets with Life? Abstract: The question whether life originated on Earth or elsewhere in the solar system has no obvious answer, since Earth was sterilized by the Moon-forming impact and possibly also during the LHB, about 700 Ma after the formation of the solar system. Seeding by lithopanspermia has to be considered. Possible sources of life include Earth itself, Mars, Venus (if it had a more benign climate than today) and icy bodies of the solar system. The first step of lithopanspermia is the ejection of fragments of the surface into space, which requires achieving at least escape velocity. As the velocity distribution of impact ejecta falls off steeply, attention is drawn to bodies with lower escape velocities. Ceres has had, or still has, an ocean more than 100 km deep, with hydrothermal activity at its rocky core. The possible presence of life, its relative closeness to the terrestrial planets and Ceres' low escape velocity of 510 m/s suggest that Ceres could well be a parent body for life in the solar system.Icy impact ejecta – hence glaciopanspermia – from Ceres will be subject to evaporation of volatiles. Spores may be loosened by evaporation and enter the atmospheres of the terrestrial planets as micrometeorites.The seeding of the terrestrial planets from Ceres would result in (1) detection of life in the crustal layers of Ceres; (2) a commonality of Cerean life with Terran and possible Martian and Venusian life and (3) biomarkers of Cerean life, which might be found in the ice at the Moon's poles and on the surface of other main belt asteroids. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Yes, I ignored the comedy routine in a previous post....