No, Diatoms Have Not Been Found in a Meteorite
This is full of ad hominem, rough guesses, non scientific hyperbole, ones persons opinion (the authors, or a person contacted) and colloquialisms and weasel words. Please don't assume I believe in panspermia. But this article is likely to be just as rubbish as the original paper. The emotional language the author uses makes me think that this gripe is personal. As in biased. The opposite bias he accuses the original author of. And he keeps, well, saying, why, well...<p>Some examples of the hyperbole:<p>"It’s wrong. Really, really wrong. Way, way, way ridiculously oh-holy-wow-how-could-anyone-publish-this wrong."<p>"[deep breath]"<p>Cynically calling the journal "august"<p>"alarm bells exploded in my head"<p>"not without some merits." (not 'has some merits' but is just short of no merit at all. as in just 'some')<p>"fervent proponent"<p>"Like, really fervent" (did he actually, like, well, write 'like'?)<p>And so on it goes. And on, and on, and on. Like verbal diarrhoea. It really does come across like he has an axe to grind. This kind of writing really doesn't help his point. Do you think this article would pass peer review and be published in a journal?<p>I don't know why scientists just can't keep an open mind. Maybe life comes from outer space. Maybe it doesn't. Maybe diatoms are in meteorites. Maybe they aren't. No one really knows, do they?