Jump to content

Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites:


Recommended Posts

Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites:

 

Dr. Hoover has discovered evidence of microfossils similar to Cyanobacteria, in freshly fractured slices of the interior surfaces of the Alais, Ivuna, and Orgueil CI1 carbonaceous meteorites. Based on Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM) and other measures, Dr. Hoover has concluded they are indigenous to these meteors and are similar to trichomic cyanobacteria and other trichomic prokaryotes such as filamentous sulfur bacteria. He concludes these fossilized bacteria are not Earthly contaminants but are the fossilized remains of living organisms which lived in the parent bodies of these meteors, e.g. comets, moons, and other astral bodies. The implications are that life is everywhere, and that life on Earth may have come from other planets.

 

 

 

http://journalofcosmology.com/Life100.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

This journal does not appear to be peer-reviewed and half of the paper does not support its main points. To call the presented evidence weak would be flattering.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Given the controversial nature of his discovery, we have invited 100 experts and have issued a general invitation to over 5000 scientists from the scientific community to review the paper and to offer their critical analysis. Our intention is to publish the commentaries, both pro and con, alongside Dr. Hoover's paper. In this way, the paper will have received a thorough vetting, and all points of view can be presented. No other paper in the history of science has undergone such a thorough analysis, and no other scientific journal in the history of science has made such a profoundly important paper available to the scientific community, for comment, before it is published. We believe the best way to advance science, is to promote debate and discussion.

 

To be honest, I wouldn't have accepted a single paper in a peer reviewed journal as sufficient evidence for the claim anyhow. Let's wait and see what these scientists conclude, or if this just fades into nothingness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have long favoured pan spermia as an explanation of the appearance of life on Earth. The research is interesting, but something this important requires some very critical analysis and certainly comparable evidence and conclusions from other, wholly independent studies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My problem with this has to do with the chirality of the molecules, if they are 50/50 between left and right then it would appear that no life forms were involved, the fossil pics are somewhat less than overwhelmingly convincing either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me this paper questioning if life on earth evolved from bacteria, needs to be considered, along with the consideration of if meteorites transport life around the universe. How would a bacteria that uses sulfur as life energy, evolve into organisms that use the sun's light or protein for energy?

 

http://www.actionbioscience.org/newfrontiers/jeffares_poole.html

 

This explanation of the flexibility of RNA and a RNA world seems to explain why life began with so much variety and is reduced to so little variety.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me this paper questioning if life on earth evolved from bacteria, needs to be considered, along with the consideration of if meteorites transport life around the universe. How would a bacteria that uses sulfur as life energy, evolve into organisms that use the sun's light or protein for energy?

 

Very easily, chemo-synthesis is related to photosynthesis and the two probably evolved together..

 

This explanation of the flexibility of RNA and a RNA world seems to explain why life began with so much variety and is reduced to so little variety.

 

I'm not sure if this is relevant but life on earth is extremely flexible, bacteria and Archaea, use everything from hydrogen to uranium for chemical energy, the idea of "so little variety" is puzzling. Life on earth is extremely variable and sulfur utilizing bacteria are very common, purple sulfur bacteria are a good example. some bacteria life off nothing but hydrogen and carbon releasing methane as a waste gas, other bacteria use the methane to produce energy. Life on earth has so much variety I can't see how this guy can say that it has little variety.

 

As much as I would love to see this be confirmed i have some real problems with the pics, they look like crystals, vaguely organic crystals but not life. i have often wondered if crystals and life were related in some way. The cores of comets and small ice moons might be life factories after all but these pics look more like crystals than life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No this paper wasn't legit at all. Did you happen to notice that most of the images used are from various species of micro-organisms right here on Earth?

 

Why hasn't 'Science' or 'Nature' came out with anything? Are they out of the loop?

 

Yea right. Don't feed me bologna and call it filet Mignon.

 

Cheers,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.