Showing papers by "Max K. Wallis published in 2019"
University of Ruhuna1, University of Buckingham2, Michigan Technological University3, University of Peradeniya4, University of Melbourne5, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur6, University of Toronto7, Cochin University of Science and Technology8, Murdoch University9, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention10, University of Sydney11, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven12, Curtin University13, Australian National University14, University of Alberta15
TL;DR: In the specific section below it is shown that while Duggleby's numerical analysis appears in part correct it is, in the final analysis, quite irrelevant to Cosmic Panspermia.
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."
4 citations