It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Capsule Brings First Comet Dust to Earth

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 07:00 AM
link   

-->
"DUGWAY PROVING GROUND, Utah (AP) - After a seven-year journey, a NASA space capsule returned safely to Earth on Sunday with the first dust ever fetched from a comet, a cosmic bounty that scientists hope will yield clues to how the solar system formed.

The capsule's blazing plunge through the atmosphere lit up parts of the western sky as it capped a mission in which the Stardust spacecraft swooped past a comet known as Wild 2.

"This is not the finish line. This is just the intermediate pit stop," said project manager Tom Duxbury of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., which managed the $212 million mission.

About a million comet and interstellar dust particles - most smaller than the width of a human hair - are believed to be inside a sealed canister."
-->


apnews.myway.com...

This is being posted in "medical" because of the following.

In my opinion the planet will soo be engulfed in a world wide plague of "unknow" origin.




[edit on 16-1-2006 by thermopolis]

[edit on 16-1-2006 by thermopolis]

[edit on 16-1-2006 by thermopolis]

[edit on 16-1-2006 by thermopolis]




posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Sounds like someone has read "The Andromeda Strain" one too many times...



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 06:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Sounds like someone has read "The Andromeda Strain" one too many times...


As someone who pretends to be associated with BSL4's, you should understand the concept of "containment" and unknown virus. Currently CDC protocol requires biowaste to be treated to 275 deg F for 3 hours before it just dumps it into the sewer systems. A virus that is hardened during a few years in space would pass right through the "cookers" and have a whole new place to "play".

When NASA quarantined the "moon boys" in the 70's in Houston, it was a joke, because one of them notice a nice stream of "ants" on the floor of the "containment" area.

The Mars-Rock facility in Los Alamos is unfinished. What IF a dormant super-bug is in the comet "dust"?



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 08:13 AM
link   
Shortley before the great "black plague" that wiped out 33-50% of Europe there were accounts of seeing 2-7 comets in the sky. Just thought I would add my own paranoid dillusional totaly nonfact based comment on the subject



It is not that far of a stretch to suggest comet debri will yield killer bacteria!



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by linuxfueled
Shortley before the great "black plague" that wiped out 33-50% of Europe there were accounts of seeing 2-7 comets in the sky. Just thought I would add my own paranoid dillusional totaly nonfact based comment on the subject



It is not that far of a stretch to suggest comet debri will yield killer bacteria!


Actually I have studied this issue, the data is not just coincidental. There is much science behind it.



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 11:58 AM
link   
However, there is evidence that bacteria has come from space, and that comets DO carry microorganisms.

Evidenced from this experiment:

www.scienceagogo.com...

Much much more information here on bacteria surviving in space:

www7.nationalacademies.org...

www.panspermia.org...

www.cf.ac.uk...

www.ebicom.com...

And as an aside, there's some evidence to suggest a relationship between sunspots and influenza epidemics.

aira.astro.ro...

www.spacedaily.com...



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 05:05 PM
link   
I'm not disagreeing with the idea of some sort of bacterium being found on meteors or comets, we find fossils of them all the time. However, what I AM arguing is their ability to cause disease. Do you have any idea how many space bodies land on earth's surface annually? Why haven't we seen some sort of disease since then? All the bacteria we've found in our trophosphere have not been capable of causing disease to the best of my knowledge...

Ciao,
~MFP



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc
I'm not disagreeing with the idea of some sort of bacterium being found on meteors or comets, we find fossils of them all the time. However, what I AM arguing is their ability to cause disease. Do you have any idea how many space bodies land on earth's surface annually? Why haven't we seen some sort of disease since then? All the bacteria we've found in our trophosphere have not been capable of causing disease to the best of my knowledge...

Ciao,
~MFP


Well where to begin there "Doc". Bacteria are far more "fragile" than protien encased virus that can be dormant for many years. Bacteria have cell walls that can be "cooked" upon entry into the atmosphere.

In this case it is far more likley that virus can lay dormant in the "particles" of a comet then find a new "host" on earth that has no immunity.

As indicated in the links above there is much evidence to link new unknown disease with comets and meteors, etc.



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Bacteria are far more "fragile" than protien encased virus that can be dormant for many years. Bacteria have cell walls that can be "cooked" upon entry into the atmosphere.

In this case it is far more likley that virus can lay dormant in the "particles" of a comet then find a new "host" on earth that has no immunity.

As indicated in the links above there is much evidence to link new unknown disease with comets and meteors, etc.


More fragile? You DO know that there are bacteria on earth called hyperthermophiles which live on sea vents at over 75C, halophiles that live in immense salt concentrations, psychrophiles that live at -10C, an anoxic bacteria that live in the absence of oxygen? Explain to me how bacteria are, as a general rule, "fragile"? Also, there was no conclusive evidence in ANY of those sources that pointed towards studies linking certain diseases to any bacteria of extraterrestrial origin.

Ciao,
~MFP



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Don't forget the bacteria that lives in methane ice
(unless you already mentioned it under a different name the nvrmnd)



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 01:11 AM
link   
The thought has ran through my head as well. As long as they keep it contained we should be alright. Its the moron who wants to bring home piece of the comet to show his kids that puts us at risk.



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 05:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc

Bacteria are far more "fragile" than protien encased virus that can be dormant for many years. Bacteria have cell walls that can be "cooked" upon entry into the atmosphere.

In this case it is far more likley that virus can lay dormant in the "particles" of a comet then find a new "host" on earth that has no immunity.

As indicated in the links above there is much evidence to link new unknown disease with comets and meteors, etc.




More fragile? You DO know that there are bacteria on earth called hyperthermophiles which live on sea vents at over 75C, halophiles that live in immense salt concentrations, psychrophiles that live at -10C, an anoxic bacteria that live in the absence of oxygen? Explain to me how bacteria are, as a general rule, "fragile"? Also, there was no conclusive evidence in ANY of those sources that pointed towards studies linking certain diseases to any bacteria of extraterrestrial origin.

Ciao,
~MFP


The bacteria you name have "adapted" to the condition indicated, remove them from those very specific conditions and they DIE. Again extraterrestrial disease would more likely be Viral.



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 01:21 PM
link   

The bacteria you name have "adapted" to the condition indicated, remove them from those very specific conditions and they DIE. Again extraterrestrial disease would more likely be Viral.


So...what evidence do you have that would suggest a disease that doesn't technically exist would most likely be viral? Viruses evolve in the presence of a host vector. Why would something evolve on a comet with no probably host vector? It seems much more likely that single celled organisms would evolve in an environment rich in metals and ice. Also, viruses are very easily destroyed, so explain how they could sustain constant collision with debris in space and the harsh entry into Earth's atmosphere?

Ciao,
~MFP



posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Also, viruses are very easily destroyed, so explain how they could sustain constant collision with debris in space and the harsh entry into Earth's atmosphere?

Ciao,
~MFP


Sorry there bsl4guy, Virus with their "hard" protien shell can lay dormant for many, many, years. Frozen in a comet in the frigid reaches of space could have a strain that earth has no defense whatsoever.

Perhaps the phrase "ebola on steroids"........an airborn mild version of ebola that kills more slowly.

Most (99.999%) of bacteria can be killed with a sime chlorine solution.

Virus can not.............



posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Sorry there bsl4guy, Virus with their "hard" protien shell can lay dormant for many, many, years. Frozen in a comet in the frigid reaches of space could have a strain that earth has no defense whatsoever.

Perhaps the phrase "ebola on steroids"........an airborn mild version of ebola that kills more slowly.

Most (99.999%) of bacteria can be killed with a sime chlorine solution.

Virus can not.............


Actually, Thermopolis, you couldn't be more wrong. Many bacteria are not, in fact, easily killed with a simple chlorine solution. I'd like to see your documentation on that. If you speaking of something like HCl, aka hydrochloric acid, than sure, I'd buy that. But by the same token, so can viruses.

Now, here's where you're theory has a flaw. Most scientists today don't classify viruses as "living", just as prions aren't "living". Any evolutionary changes in viruses are only tentatively called evolutions because there is a genotypic and phenotypic change. However, this is always due to a flaw in the DNA polymerase action that occurs when a phage's DNA is clipped out of the bacterium or cellular DNA. Now, these changes can only occur in the presence of a DNA based host that has cellular surface proteins that will interact correctly with the association of proteins on the viral capsid. See, the capsid is a very small layer of protein, whereas a bacteria contains many layers of glycoproteins and lipids, some mroe than others depending on if it is Gram + or Gram -. So, explain to me how a virus, which resides on a comet where no known host has been seen to exist in conjunction with these imaginary viruses you're speaking of, could possibly replicate itself, evolve to adapt to new hosts (i.e. humans), etc. ? Viruses actually have a very short life span outside of hosts. There are a few exceptions that I can't think of off the top of my head, but they do not infect humans to the best of my knowledge. There are, however, literally dozens of spore forming and extremophile bacteria that can in fact survive outside their extreme conditions.

So, in short, I fail to see any scientific reason to believe a virus has somehow been replicating on a comet with no apparent host and how a thin layer of proteins with so sporous covering could survive entry into Earth's atmosphere. Prove me wrong.

Ciao,
~MFP



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 06:37 AM
link   
It is sad that you don't even understand the significance of a BSL4 lab. The vast majority of level 4 lab containment protocol is anti-viral in nature. Good old "listerine" is the best anti-bactrial agent on the market and in fact is most likely a major ingredient in the chemical shower at the air-lock of all BLS-4's.

Based on the type and density of the virus protien shell a specific virus can lay "dormant" for a very long time, especially "frozen" in the outer reaches of space. You should be aware that the exact time of dormancy was 'clasified" on 2002 in the US.

Such freezing destroys barteria. However, it is true that "super strains" of bacteria are rising due to the over use of anti-mirobial solutions.

If you look in a list of the most lethal disease to "man" the list is overwhelmingly "viral" and not bacterial.

As for killing bacteria with chlorine, you must also be aware that chlorine destroys the cell wall of the bacteria.



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 09:20 AM
link   

It is sad that you don't even understand the significance of a BSL4 lab. The vast majority of level 4 lab containment protocol is anti-viral in nature. Good old "listerine" is the best anti-bactrial agent on the market and in fact is most likely a major ingredient in the chemical shower at the air-lock of all BLS-4's.

Based on the type and density of the virus protien shell a specific virus can lay "dormant" for a very long time, especially "frozen" in the outer reaches of space. You should be aware that the exact time of dormancy was 'clasified" on 2002 in the US.

Such freezing destroys barteria. However, it is true that "super strains" of bacteria are rising due to the over use of anti-mirobial solutions.

If you look in a list of the most lethal disease to "man" the list is overwhelmingly "viral" and not bacterial.

As for killing bacteria with chlorine, you must also be aware that chlorine destroys the cell wall of the bacteria.


Another swing and miss, thermopolis. You point out that most biosafety level 4 studies are on viruses, and this is correct. My main point of contention with you is that these viruses developed in areas inhabited by humans. They evolved and adapted in human environments so that they can infect human vectors. Their environments are NOT comets. Viruses have never been shown to be able to infect a host that it has never been in contact with before. That would be like your small intestine being able to evolve to digest a new type of sugar compound on a planet we have not discovered yet, not possible.

Also, as far as your dormant viruses, I think you need to reread your sources. The only dormancy viruses exhibit is in host cells, not in some frozen state. We can freeze them in tissue samples, typically, but I have never heard of a virus having a "virus protien shell", you're suggesting that the virus produces this outside the host cell or something? This is impossible, as viruses exhibit zero metabolism. No energy intake, no waste output, no transcription or translation of genetic code other than the original assembly. You seem to think viruses are these living, breathing things when in fact modern science and modern medicine classifies them as clusters of proteins arranged in specific ways.

Also, your magic chlorine atoms do not disrupt bacterial cell walls. If you're talking about a chlorine based SOLUTION, I could probably buy that, but it's not the chlorine doing it by itself. Chlorine is small enough to enter the bacterial cell by diffusion and isn't reactive enough with nonpolar molecules to do any harm to the cell.

Ciao,
~MFP



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc
My main point of contention with you is that these viruses developed in areas inhabited by humans. They evolved and adapted in human environments so that they can infect human vectors. Their environments are NOT comets. Ciao,
~MFP


www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Actually there DOC if you check this database you will find that a vast majority of "virus" are in the plant kingdom. To replicate yes a virus needs a host, however, there are many ways for a virus to survive in space debris that surrounds comets, including being deposited from impacts with other planets or asteroids from the debris of exploded planets.

The mechanisim you describe for chlorine penetrations of the cell wall is as I understand it.

Ciao...........bsl4doctor dude...........

What is the meaning of "bubbletight"

[edit on 23-1-2006 by thermopolis]



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 03:28 PM
link   


Actually there DOC if you check this database you will find that a vast majority of "virus" are in the plant kingdom. To replicate yes a virus needs a host, however, there are many ways for a virus to survive in space debris that surrounds comets, including being deposited from impacts with other planets or asteroids from the debris of exploded planets.

The mechanisim you describe for chlorine penetrations of the cell wall is as I understand it.

Ciao...........bsl4doctor dude...........

What is the meaning of "bubbletight"


Wow, ok. So first off, the link you gave in your post is nothing more tha na taxonomic virology site, proves nothing. Secondly, you think most viruses belong to the Plant kingdom? Are you insane? Do viruses produce starches? Can they undergo photosynthesis? Do they contain chlorophyll, have a metabolism, need nutrients to survive, release molecular oxygen, take in carbon dioxide? No, they don't. There are a vast number of viruses (now it's bugging me, the proper term is virii), that INFECT plants, hence tobacco mosaic virus being the first discovered virus, however, virii have NEVER EVER EVER EVER been considered part of the plant kingdom. That is just plain and simple bad science and blantantly false. Also, as far as virii being deposited from impact with other planets or asteroids from planets that have exploded...do you have any idea the amount of heat produced by both of these events? Far more than it takes to denature protein, which composes most of a virus structure. Explain that for me, please.

You might find this site interesintg: www.lenntech.com... . Turns out I was right. Chlorine, in the form of HCl NOT Cl (as this technically does nto exist in nature, it is instead Cl2) diffuses into the cell and does it's damage there, not by disturbing the cell wall. It disrupts ATP synthesis and thus kills the bacteria via lack of respiration. Need I say more? Or is this site not good enough for you since it disagrees with your "opinion".

Oh, and I don't understand you "bubbletight" comment, what does that mean? And I'm not a "dude".

Ciao,
~MFP

[edit on 1/23/2006 by bsl4doc]



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Secondly, you think most viruses belong to the Plant kingdom? Are you insane? Do viruses produce starches?
Oh, and I don't understand you "bubbletight" comment, what does that mean? And I'm not a "dude".

Ciao,
~MFP

[edit on 1/23/2006 by bsl4doc]


Ahhh No, I was pointing out that many "virus" exist outside "humans". That they can exist outside anything with "blood".

Virus can lay dormant from other worlds that have exploded or been impacted by passing asteroids, etc. Virus from outside earth is the issue. Do you think that virus only exist on earth? That is a bit narrow..........

I would think bacteria and virus are "universal". Those from outside earth might be rather nasty once they get here.

As far as how chlorine destroys bacterim, we are saying the same thing. Chlorine "solution" infers HCL. Check you chem shower at the airlock of your lab, the "soluition" it uses will most likely contain "listerine" base and chlorine..........

The term "bubbletight" refers to the specification for the bio-seal that protects the public from the interior of a BSL4 lab.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join