U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-07-2011, 04:14 PM
 
Location: Sinking in the Great Salt Lake
13,145 posts, read 20,579,391 times
Reputation: 14053

Advertisements

Alien Life in Meteorites: 'Remarkable Achievement' or 'Garbage'? - FoxNews.com

so whatdaya think?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-07-2011, 04:40 PM
 
4,172 posts, read 6,238,386 times
Reputation: 1209
From your article:

"While we value the free exchange of ideas, data, and information as part of scientific and technical inquiry, NASA cannot stand behind or support a scientific claim unless it has been peer-reviewed or thoroughly examined by other qualified experts," Mr Hertz said.

So, I stand by NASA - I have no faith.

But, given the vastness of the universe, I think it is very highly likely there is life elsewhere.

Last edited by calmdude; 03-07-2011 at 05:36 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-07-2011, 04:41 PM
 
4,514 posts, read 4,655,331 times
Reputation: 4057
That's what has been "probing" folks all this time? *sigh* so let down
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2011, 12:56 AM
 
5,465 posts, read 8,697,996 times
Reputation: 3543
Hmm. This subject was already posted on the Science & Technology forum. Regardless, some of the gushing reviews are perhaps not quite as optmistic as might be thought from a single article by Fox News. Fair and balanced? Space.com reports the following about NASA's glowing views of Richard Hoover's findings:
Quote:
"NASA cannot stand behind or support a scientific claim unless it has been peer-reviewed or thoroughly examined by other qualified experts," Paul Hertz, chief scientist of NASA’s Science Mission Directorate in Washington, D.C., said in a statement. "This paper was submitted in 2007 to the International Journal of Astrobiology. However, the peer review process was not completed for that submission."
Others have not be quite as polite, calling Hoover's findings as being "sloppy" and "garbage". The point is that Hoover's claims so far are only his own. NASA isn't supporting Hoover's claims, nor are a number of other noted scientists.

Here are a few links that discuss how Hoover's claims are being viewed by a number of noted experts.

Scientists Dubious Over Claim of Alien Life Evidence in Meteorite | Meteorite Cyanobacteria Extraterrestrial Life | Space.com

Alien Microbe Claim Starts Fight Over Meteorite | Wired Science | Wired.com

Cosmic Log - Meteorite mysteries go viral

It doesn't mean there is no other life forms elsewhere in the solar system or the universe. The odds continue to greatly increase in favor of the likelihood of life existing elsewhere, be it nanobacteria or complex and technological organisms. But the bottom line is that we have yet to see any hard evidence to prove it. Frankly, I suspect Hoover's claims might end up like the Allan Hills meteorite recovered from Antarctica - inconclusive.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2011, 06:22 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,051 posts, read 31,980,424 times
Reputation: 10554
Erich von Daniken lives!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2011, 09:55 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,618 posts, read 11,959,499 times
Reputation: 3749
Wink How to Resolve This?

The proper approach by the ethical scientific community will be to further test this hypothesis, very rigorously, though let's not forget that it's already been carefully tested by the researcher quoted. This is not an off-the-cuff wishful commentary by this noted cosmologist after all.

If the various alternative explanations (sample contamination being the most common alternate explanation, but even that may well be excluded depending on how the samples were collected and subsequently handled) are run to ground, or at least minimized, then we'll proceed to a much higher confidence level on the interim conclusion. (Soon enough of course we'll see what the Christian denialist websites concoct [AiG, The Creation Institute, etc.] Their complicated, erroneous and concocted rebuttals are quickly picked up and thoughtlessly parroted by the fundy posting crowd. Just watch!)

The Christian rebuke (as I'm sure will be their immediate position) will be to harp on the few alternate possibilities, but I'd ask them to also consider, as the evidence grows, that this may also represent an actual valid finding of extra-terrestrial life. And, if it's DNA-based and a bacterium, this may well prove that the genesis of original life here on earth, prior to it's obvious Evolutionary diversification, may well have been a few dozen meteorites dropping into our primordial oceans 13.6 B years ago!

Lint, as it were, from God's pockets perhaps?

And if meteoritic seedings were the case, then what does this mean to a devout fundamentalist Christian? Certainly it would show that the biblical account of the origins of life, of Genesis by nose-wriggling, so to speak, is, as predicted, just a fable invented by scientifically naive authors trying to figure the unfigurable out.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2011, 01:15 AM
 
5,465 posts, read 8,697,996 times
Reputation: 3543
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
The proper approach by the ethical scientific community will be to further test this hypothesis, very rigorously, though let's not forget that it's already been carefully tested by the researcher quoted. This is not an off-the-cuff wishful commentary by this noted cosmologist after all.

If the various alternative explanations (sample contamination being the most common alternate explanation, but even that may well be excluded depending on how the samples were collected and subsequently handled) are run to ground, or at least minimized, then we'll proceed to a much higher confidence level on the interim conclusion. (Soon enough of course we'll see what the Christian denialist websites concoct [AiG, The Creation Institute, etc.] Their complicated, erroneous and concocted rebuttals are quickly picked up and thoughtlessly parroted by the fundy posting crowd. Just watch!)

The Christian rebuke (as I'm sure will be their immediate position) will be to harp on the few alternate possibilities, but I'd ask them to also consider, as the evidence grows, that this may also represent an actual valid finding of extra-terrestrial life. And, if it's DNA-based and a bacterium, this may well prove that the genesis of original life here on earth, prior to it's obvious Evolutionary diversification, may well have been a few dozen meteorites dropping into our primordial oceans 13.6 B years ago!

Lint, as it were, from God's pockets perhaps?

And if meteoritic seedings were the case, then what does this mean to a devout fundamentalist Christian? Certainly it would show that the biblical account of the origins of life, of Genesis by nose-wriggling, so to speak, is, as predicted, just a fable invented by scientifically naive authors trying to figure the unfigurable out.
A couple of corrections. Dr. Richard B. Hoover is an astrobiologist. Cosmology deals with the structure and changes of the universe.
NASA - NASA Marshall Center Astrobiologist Richard Hoover Awarded 2009 SPIE Gold Medal
http://genesismission.jpl.nasa.gov/e...osCosmolTT.pdf

The other correction is regarding the primordial oceans (presumably meaning the Earth's oceans) 13.6 billion years ago. The universe is estimated to be about 13.7 billion years old. The Sun and Earth are thought to be around 4.54 billion years old.
How Old is the Universe
WMAP- Age of the Universe

While Dr. Hoover is no slouch, I'm not yet convinced that his claim of nanobacteria fossils in meteorites is necessarily the only possible explanation. His work needs to be peer reviewed and tested. NASA isn't supporting his claim for that very reason. That said, it's possible an indepth study could arrive at the same conclusion as Hoover.

If Hoover's implications are correct, then indeed it raises some significant questions about the possible origin of life on Earth. Even if life on Earth was not the result of panspermia, it would certainly be evidence that life has formed elsewhere. In the case of the meteorites, the objects in question appear to be nanobacteria which are long dead and fossilized. It would make me wonder where these things came from and how long they've been contained in the meteorites. It's probably fair to consider that the meteorites may have been hurled into space from somewhere, in a similar fashion that the martian meteorites were likely blasted off the surface of Mars from large impacts.

Although the specimans examined are long dead and fossilized, they had to be alive at some point in the past. If life on Earth began from such 'seeding' of bacteria from somewhere else in space, perhaps some other star system in the galaxy, that drifted into our solar system, then those primative bacterial life forms had to be alive when they arrived on the planet. If such bacteria can survive such a long and hazardous journey in the past, then there'd be no reason to think some meteorites entering the Earth today might be fossils, but some might still be alive.

We can't really be certain about what such primative life forms in the past were like, meaning they could've been what we would consider to be hazardous but changed as they evolved over time. This is sheer speculation on my part. Fossils are no problem, but what about any that may enter the Earth today and are still alive? Perhaps the atmospheric and environmental conditions have changed on Earth that such space bacteria would be unable to survive for long. Hard to imagine though if they managed to survive the rigors of space for perhaps millions or billions of years. We know there's a wide variety of bacteria here on Earth, but there could be many times more that we don't know about that have originated elsewhere in the universe. Some might be be pretty unremarkable, but some might be extremely hazardous to life on Earth. Could there be some meteorites on the planet that contain some living but dormant organisms waiting to be exposed and revived to begin multiplying? Maybe "The Blob" or John Carpenter's "The Thing" isn't so far-fetched to imagine. LOL!

I agree that if the objects in question are in fact nanobacteria, and not just some strangely shaped minerals, and that life is spread or seeded throughout the cosmos like that, it would put a serious damper on the claims of AiG and The Creation Institute. It would also be interesting if meteorites on the surface of the Moon or Mars could be recovered and shown to contain similar objects.

I see that AiG has posted a page about Hoover's claims, but fails to be specific, other than to say that they wouldn't be surprised if it's quietly swept aside, and that panspermia isn't what the Bible describes as to how life originated on Earth.
Alleged Alien Life in Meteorite - Answers in Genesis
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2011, 04:16 AM
 
Location: South Africa
5,563 posts, read 6,661,723 times
Reputation: 1788
I klikeddalinky to AiG and this part
Answers in Genesis has responded to similar reports in the past and we will be prepared to offer a statement in the future after the research has been examined by the scientific community. Until that point, there are some important points to remember as you think about this issue.
Peer review guuud
First, notice that the desire to prove an evolutionary origin of man is a driving force in the Journal of Cosmology (i.e., “the implications are that life is everywhere, and that life on Earth may have come from other planets”). This is flatly contradicted by the Bible’s historically accurate account which reveals that God directly created life on earth (Genesis 1–2; Colossians 1:15–18).
Oops peer review baaaad.

Like they say you can't make this .... up Oh wait you can, my bad.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2011, 06:07 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,618 posts, read 11,959,499 times
Reputation: 3749
I'd say that AiG et al, facing a possible clear-cut conclusion, will have to get it's story straight if this breaks as a possible source of the origins of life here on earth. Of course, this would also just move the goal-posts to...

"Oh. Well then, just where did original life begin? God must have a bio-research lab a few million life years out! Yeah! That's the ticket!"

And so on. Stay tuned.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:27 PM.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top