1. It is anti-theory,originals don’t cross so explicitly.
2. Why we see effects of evolution on simple thing as mosquitoes, they become more & more resistable to vaccines.
3. How does ‘smart DNA’ know it is the right time to show up?
4. I agree that there are only 4 base constituents of DNA (CTAG) and arranging them differently gives different species but this doesn’t mean that some species you never saw exists. It is like some dish my girlfriend can cook because things which she will cook from exist but it doesn’t exist yet.
5. These DNAs are made of nitrogenous base, sugar, phosphates and if these elements already exists in universe why not some new kind of Alien_DNA can exist which contains some other elements & then the genetic library will be completely different.
I will say this doc shown us some strong scientific facts but it is not something I will buy so easily.
**Fun Fact: I do not hate religious people :) , I will say religion helped us built this society but too much of it is harmful.

mars might have been habitable earlier than earth

this would provide a larger window for abiogenesis to have occured because it happened so quickly on earth (between ~4.2 => 3.8 bya)

however, there is also the notion that even with a total melt off of the oceans (resulting from large asteroid collisions), regions far enough below the surface could have shielded life even under such catastrophic extremes (the interior goldilocks zone, within the crust at depths of up to )

some also speculate that comets – having clay, water, radioactive materials, the requisite elements, and a huge mass considered in aggregate – are a far likelier source for the origin of life than EITHER earth or mars.

there is a lot of tumult & speculation in this field (origins of life, study of archaic life) – which is part of its attraction.

Yeah, but another way of stating that is to say that devout believers who are affiliated with a church tend to discount all other theories of genesis because they have rationalized and assimilated their religious dogma. For instance, creationists tend to be of the Abrahamic religions, because their creation narrative conforms to their interpretation of the Bible. To say that spiritual, but not religiously affiliated people are more likely to accept the possibility of ufos is easy to explain, when you add that spiritual people who are not religiously affiliated are also more likely to accept evolution than their religiously affiliated counterparts.

so we have a number of hypothesis for panspermia, and abiogenesis yet no complete theories.

i personally think the Miller-Urey experiment is the best we have so far.

good question though, and you are VERY right that it is merely pushing the ball down the road but actually backwards. it explains how life got here, but not how it formed. which is the real question.

Huxley said, “…perhaps this planet is HELL for some other world…” Yeah, I can see that, certainly.

Dio wrote, “Tell a little truth with many lies, it’s the only way I’ve found…”

This guy seems to have captured that here.

To me anyway…

all this guy did was move the goal post to another planet.live had to start from chemicals and natural processes somewhere. we know for a fact that all the chemicals and amino acids are pleantyful on earth. and are finding ,the same things on other planets and extraterestrial bodies as well. abiogenisis explains how live most likely started..natural selection and the processes of evolution takes over from there.

get a real education based on evidence.not speculation and lack of evidence like this guy has done. the scientific method works…making stuff up to fill in gaps,,is religion