This guy has some interesting information:
http://m.gawker.com//5777460/fox-news-publishes-fake-exclusi.... Something seems odd here - the guy has made this same announcement in the past.
---------------Some additional research from myself:
The link says that this is not the first time that Hoover made an announcement like this. So I tried to find some of them and got these:
1997: http://www.panspermia.org/hoover.htm
2004: http://www.panspermia.org/hoover2.htm
and: http://www.panspermia.org/hoover3.htm
2010: http://www.panspermia.org/hoover4.htm
(And just to be sure, the older of the articles is in Internet at least from 1998: http://web.archive.org/web/19981202091131/http://www.pansper... )
Michael Behe did good work as a microbiologist and publishes in the Journal of Creation. I'm sure this guy really believes it.
We'll see!
There's got to be some truth in it.
Instead of thinking that there's got to be some truth to it, think that when there's a whiff of BS and it looks like the work of a bunch of delusional cranks publishing in their own vanity journal, it's nonsense and should be ignored.
People say things for all kinds of weird reasons, which may range from pet theories to hawking books and getting speaking gigs.
> On the other hand, there's quite a long tradition of
> eminent, tenured, (and often aging) scientists going a
> little bit off the deep end, especially in areas outside
> of their actual expertise.
Look no further than Watson and Crick.To be fair, any other academic institution would have given him tenure. The point of tenure in those systems is precisely so that faculty can say batshit insane ideas with the hope that the odd lunatic will be right, or at least invite discussion.
Why would he risk his career and put his reputation at stake?