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.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Advertisements
Of course we don't know yet what started life on earth, but the hints keep growing. There may in fact have been multiple life forms that started, and perhaps millions of years apart. Some may have started with ingredients right here on earth, and some coming via comets or meteors.
Here is an interesting study that looks at the comet theory:
Now we already knew that scientists have been able to make RNA in the laboratory (Life’s First Spark Re-Created in the Laboratory | WIRED) so the next step is to find what started that on earth. This new study may have the answer. From the abstract:
Ribose and related sugars from ultraviolet irradiation of interstellar ice analogs
Ribose is the central molecular subunit in RNA, but the prebiotic origin of ribose remains unknown. We observed the formation of substantial quantities of ribose and a diversity of structurally related sugar molecules such as arabinose, xylose, and lyxose in the room-temperature organic residues of photo-processed interstellar ice analogs initially composed of H2O, CH3OH, and NH3. Our results suggest that the generation of numerous sugar molecules, including the aldopentose ribose, may be possible from photochemical and thermal treatment of cosmic ices in the late stages of the solar nebula. Our detection of ribose provides plausible insights into the chemical processes that could lead to formation of biologically relevant molecules in suitable planetary environments.
One more step. Every time scientists explore abiogenesis, the new studies indicate it is more rather than less likely to have occurred. I wonder what the Ken Ham's of the world will say when actual life is created in the lab?
I have faith that God made Satan put those bones there in order to test if we would believe what we ultimately don't want to anyway... so I can now ignore and feel acomplished about it.
But in all seriousness, this is an amazing find. I was really doubting the "bio-molecules from outer-space-to-Earth impacts" hypothesis before this study came along and showed the possibility to be more concrete.
Hopefully these scientists aren't just saying this stuff for the tax-free personal spokesperson livelihood and lavish mansions and private airplanes they get... oh wait, that's only megachurchists and televangelists; last I heard, anyway.
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 04-11-2016 at 12:59 AM..
But in all seriousness, this is an amazing find. I was really doubting the "bio-molecules from outer-space-to-Earth impacts" hypothesis before this study came along and showed the possibility to be more concrete.
Odd you had doubts about "bio-molecules from outer-space-to-Earth impacts". Every element on this planet came from space...many came from specific stars that make elements in their core when they go Supernova.
People I encourage you to study how the Earth was formed. Outer Space was here before Earth was formed. Earth was formed from the stuff that was in Outer Space
Keep in mind the difference between DNA and RNA with respect to their base pairing.
DNA consists of these base pairings: A-T; C-G Adenine links to thymine (A-T) and cytosine links to guanine (C-G).
RNA consists of these base pairings: A-U; C-G Adenine links to uracil (A-U) and cytosine links to guanine (C-G).
And in 1969, a meteorite fragment, known today as the Murchison meteorite, crashed in the Australian outback. A thorough analysis, following its discovery, showed that it contained uracil and xanthine molecules (nucleobases), which are building blocks for genetic materials made up of a heavy carbon isotope.
Odd you had doubts about "bio-molecules from outer-space-to-Earth impacts". Every element on this planet came from space...many came from specific stars that make elements in their core when they go Supernova.
People I encourage you to study how the Earth was formed. Outer Space was here before Earth was formed. Earth was formed from the stuff that was in Outer Space
Interesting but why should we assume the earth and Thea would have had different compositions when they formed from the same nebula? And they impacted so there would been substantial mixing.
Quote:
One of the challenges to the longstanding theory of the collision, is that a Mars-sized impacting body, whose composition likely would have differed substantially from that of Earth, likely would have left Earth and the moon with different chemical compositions, which they are not.
Interesting but why should we assume the earth and Thea would have had different compositions when they formed from the same nebula? And they impacted so there would been substantial mixing.
Not sure my friend...I also thought that did not make sense.
However
Quote:
This new hypothesis about how Earth’s moon formed is challenging the commonly believed “giant impact hypothesis,” which suggests that Earth's moon formed from a colossal impact of a hypothetical planetary embryo, named Theia, with Earth, early in our Solar System's history.
Odd you had doubts about "bio-molecules from outer-space-to-Earth impacts". Every element on this planet came from space...many came from specific stars that make elements in their core when they go Supernova.
People I encourage you to study how the Earth was formed. Outer Space was here before Earth was formed. Earth was formed from the stuff that was in Outer Space
enphasis on element. biomolecules are more complex arrangements of such and I would think they would need more time and conditions to develop than a few weeks(?) of Sun exposure in an environment of gravity and atmosphere.
Last I heard, most of the the evidence pointed to the Moon forming from an impact from a Mars sized planet on an Pre-Earth which then broke up into Earth and Moon. Oh it seems the new evidence points to a 5xMars sized planet (Theia(?)) and the Pre-Earth being 5xMars sized too. Cool.
Do all rockey planets have the same composition? Perhaps by a matter of physics some elements would settle in different areas around our solar system, thus forming rocky planets with different compositions based on how far away from the Sun they formed.
Last I heard, most of the the evidence pointed to the Moon forming from an impact from a Mars sized planet on an Pre-Earth which then broke up into Earth and Moon. Oh it seems the new evidence points to a 5xMars sized planet (Theia(?)) and the Pre-Earth being 5xMars sized too. Cool.
Yeah. Kinda like the same, only different. But then, they must surely be looking at the available evidence and seeking to further refine the theory.
emphasis on element. biomolecules are more complex arrangements of such and I would think they would need more time and conditions to develop than a few weeks(?) of Sun exposure in an environment of gravity and atmosphere.
Molecules are formed from atoms which are the basic unit of a chemical element.
Element - a basic substance that can't be simplified (hydrogen, oxygen, gold, etc...)
Atom - the smallest amount of an element
Molecule - two or more atoms that are chemically joined together (H2, O2, H2O, etc...)
Compound - a molecule that contains more than one element (H2O, C6H12O6, etc...)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth
Last I heard, most of the the evidence pointed to the Moon forming from an impact from a Mars sized planet on an Pre-Earth which then broke up into Earth and Moon. Oh it seems the new evidence points to a 5xMars sized planet (Theia(?)) and the Pre-Earth being 5xMars sized too. Cool.
Isn't it great how science is open to new discoveries and explanations to expound upon their Theories?
Do all rockey planets have the same composition? Perhaps by a matter of physics some elements would settle in different areas around our solar system, thus forming rocky planets with different compositions based on how far away from the Sun they formed.
Agreed. The thing is though, these two 5xMars planets formed then collided between Venus (Earth sized) and Mars (Thea sized). Where would they have formed and why would there be two of them? Where would Thea have formed anyway?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora
Isn't it great how science is open to new discoveries and explanations to expound upon their Theories?
Yes it is.
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.
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.
