It seems logical, but I’m pretty sure you can find planets with rivers and no life. We just don’t have the data to support the theory.
Very true but I would say a better question would be “Is there a plant with no rivers and life”.
From my understanding water and rivers were a huge part of how life became on Earth. I don’t know if I would go as far as saying it is required but I would say the odds of life is much higher with rivers then without rivers. At least from the data we have to go on.
In our solar system the earth is perfectly placed for life.
The assumption that rivers are a key ingredient for life is speculative and correlation-driven.
It seems logical, but I’m pretty sure you can find planets with rivers and no life. We just don’t have the data to support the theory.
Very true but I would say a better question would be “Is there a plant with no rivers and life”. From my understanding water and rivers were a huge part of how life became on Earth. I don’t know if I would go as far as saying it is required but I would say the odds of life is much higher with rivers then without rivers. At least from the data we have to go on.
At least with the data we have to go indeed.
As I said, it seems logical. But black swans and stuff, right?