Strangely, it's not just him, though I agree it doesn't seem particularly likely to be true. The journal's editorial board seems to have people who do reasonably respectable work when it comes to their work that doesn't involve panspermia. The journal's editor-in-chief, for example, is a well-respected director at Harvard's observatory, and his "normal" papers (reporting on finds via the telescope) get published in normal journals.
It is pretty strange that there are so many big names playing along. 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.
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.
