It has been
proven
that microbes exist high in Earth's atmosphere, well above 40 km, they've been
detected
even at 400 km height. And this is a global phenomenon. As everything, gravity is pulling them
down and since they are more dense than the surrounding air, they are, just like rain, falling
down. Sure, there is some lateral motion (which may be correlated with lateral momenta of meteors) but
the radial component must be significant. On Venus, they could be
kept
afloat for significant amounts of time due to extreme super-rotation of the atmosphere, induced
gravity waves and photophoresis, but on Earth, not as much. And if they're not falling for
millions of years, with their populations constantly replenished, they are
de facto coming
from space - with meteors (possibly more in comets than asteroids). Possibly even in the smallest cosmic
dust particles, albeit, they're probably arriving already dead in such cases.
If they would remain in atmosphere much longer, their presence perhaps could be explained by ejection
from Earth in large asteroid impacts and maybe even extreme volcanic eruptions, but such events
are too rare to be viable solution candidates.
Microbes have been detected in meteorites on Earth (possibly as fossils as well), but they are, by
the effective policy, considered as contamination, even though the
dominant
species in these are often extremophiles resistant to high radiation (eg. Rubrobacter radiotolerans) - which
is not the case for the surrounding soil.
If the microbes are constantly
raining down on Earth, they must be
de facto everywhere
and they are also constantly raining on other celestial bodies (on Venus, even more than on Earth).
So why is this fact not yet established as such among the population?
Is this really a fact? In other words, is this fact true?
Nothing can be proven absolutely so no fact is an absolute fact. After all, many scientific facts have
turned out to be lies. The average mainstream scientist effectively behaves like "extraordinary life" is
a fact, or absolute truth. "Microbes in meteorites are contamination" - another such fact. There
are many such facts in modern science, making it very religious. My extensive research, using
a holistic approach (which, on average, is very lacking in mainstream), over the years has led me to
believe, with great confidence, that life is everywhere. To me, thus, at least occasional if not
constant, ingress of microbes from space to Earth - is a fact. Contrary to average mainstream, I require
evidence to show without ambiguity that this is not true, rather than the other way around.
I am aware that microbes are constantly lifted up from Earth and can reach great heights, but all
attempts to explain microbes at 400 km height with Earth origin are speculative. Some speculate
they ride
on the flow of ions (electric currents), some speculate they ride
on extreme vertical winds. But these have problems and can hardly explain heavier particles (larger
than nanometer order) beyond 120 km height. Even if that's true, the microbial population at great
heights is probably dominated by those coming from space, the opposite being true near
surface. Viable (living) microbes falling to Earth have been detected beyond 40 km height. This is
harder to explain with microbes lifted up from Earth's surface because these microbes have to pass
through the deadly ozone layer. Unlike microbes falling in meteors, they wouldn't be protected by
the rock and their exposure to ozone would last much longer due to significantly lower radial
velocity. Research shows that exposure
of microbes to ozone concentration at about 2.3 ppm results in 80% reduction in viability for most
microbes after 15 minutes. How much of them would survive the trip through the 30 km
thick layer of atmosphere where ozone concentration is larger than 2.5 ppm on average and
reaches 15 ppm at 32 km height?
Microbes riding in meteors then have a greater chance of surviving the trip through the
atmosphere, which in this case (upward trip on asteroids excluded) makes survival on entry more
likely than survival on exit.
The reason, I believe, lies in the biased hallucination guiding the behavior and development of the polarized human
population. Hallucinations exist everywhere in space, wherever any organization of individuals as a whole
acts as a distinct organ(ism). These individuals don't have to be physically connected (information exchange
between them can be
wireless). This has been proven by studies showing that
splitting of
brains in two halves does not, as initially believed (and required by conventional theories on emergent
consciousness), result in splitting of consciousness.
Hallucinations may even exist independently of consciousness, even though they are generally
correlated with consciousness. Due to relativity in causality, as postulated in CR, hallucinations
exist independently from the organization correlated with it (just like dark matter can exist
independently of coupled real mass). In other words, hallucination can affect individuals (eg. guiding
them into the organization) just as individuals can affect the hallucination. This entanglement
can be weak (eg. in a temporary formed flock of birds) or strong.
Individuals of human species are highly organized and often act as a constitutional
quantum of
some organization. Hallucinations on Earth are thus everywhere and a superposition of all human
organizations exists as a larger hallucination. It is dominated by polarized organizations and, based
on collective behavior of humans, this is nothing less than a hallucination of a
devil - a disease
acting against the well-being of the planet and any long-term well-being of its own embodiment.
Conspiracies are thus real, it's just hard to put the hallucination (or the correlated
collective) in jail and why would the devil ruling the world want to put its self in jail? The jail
itself is the invention of the devil and it exists for those who oppose it, in one way or
another.
The devil and its demonic components prioritize financial gain, jobs bringing money to
organizations, and other short-term benefits resulting from overexploitation. This then explains
the anthropocentric behavior of the collective, and why it always takes so long to accept new
paradigms (which degrade the status of
homo sapiens as a special and sacred figure, whether locally
or in the whole observable universe) even though the evidence is obvious from non-biased
perspectives. It is simply not in the [short-term] interest of organizations like NASA to
find life, as much as it is in their interest to [prolong the]
search for life.
This is why all rovers on Mars are not equipped to detect life, they're equipped to drill, blast
and irradiate rocks with high energy - and in that process
destroy
any life that may exist. This is probably not [much] the result of conscious action of individual
scientists working on these rovers and their missions, it is a subconscious guidance of the collective
hallucination. However, conscious action may not be negligible in those at higher positions in the
hierarchy of such organizations - as they are more concerned with funds, jobs and public
support. Eg. would the public overwhelmingly support the search for life on Mars if it has been
already proven (without going to Mars) that life exists there?
The constant exchange of microbes between the celestial bodies is actually convenient for the
devil when it comes to denial of ubiquitous life. Because there's no much difference between microbes
on Earth and other bodies, it can always
explain it by contamination (when it should be
interpreted as evidence for continuous presence and exchange of life on inter-planetary scales).
Eventually, the devil will
find life, but not before the opportunities for profit on its
denial have been exhausted.
Until then it will probably continue to abuse the Occam's razor - claiming that the simplest
explanation for an isolated problem is the most likely explanation, even though there are no
isolated problems in nature and the most likely solution is not the simplest one rather the one that
solves many problems at once. And it will continue to make ordinary claims extraordinary - so they
require extraordinary evidence.
The god you claim as your property does not use razors and life is not extraordinary. Your denial of
life ain't something extraordinary either. Deal with it, devil, or be gone.