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.

 

Scientists have proved for the first time that nucleobases found in meteorite are extraterrestrial

page: 1
27
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+7 more 
posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Scientists have proved for the first time that nucleobases found in meteorite are extraterrestrial


news.yahoo.com

PARIS (AFP) - Genetic material from outer space found in a meteorite in Australia may well have played a key role in the origin of life on Earth, according to a study to be published Sunday.

European and US scientists have proved for the first time that two bits of genetic coding, called nucleobases, contained in the meteor fragment, are truly extraterrestrial.

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 13-6-2008 by Parabol]




posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Here's a bit more...



A team of European and US scientists showed that the two types of molecules in the Australian meteorite contained a heavy form of carbon -- carbon 13 -- which could only have been formed in space.

"We believe early life may have adopted nucleobases from meteoric fragments for use in genetic coding, enabling them to pass on their successful features to subsequent generations," Martins said.

If so, this would have been the start of an evolutionary process leading over billions of years to all the flora and fauna -- including human beings -- in existence today.


Creationist reaction in.... 3.... 2....

Ok, really though this sounds awesome. It's a plausible theory that's obviously been covered and here's a bit of evidence to help it, what do you think?

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 06:26 PM
link   
wow ... great find ... the scientis finally proved their theory ... as i remember this theory excist for many years but it's the first time they proved it. Such discoverys are rare, about once every few years and it's always nice to see them. Great find. This could rise chances for extraterrestrial life on other planets by multiple times i think.



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 06:41 PM
link   
this is simply amazing.

i think its kind of arrogant for anyone to think that if these "building blocks" are present in the galaxy/universe on a widespread scale that earth is the only planet life COULD have evolved on.

fantastic find



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I'm not on either side of the creationist/evolution debate. However, I do get annoyed at examples of junk science and people jumping on a "scientific" discovery because it supports their side.

That said, look at this statement from the article:


A team of European and US scientists showed that the two types of molecules in the Australian meteorite contained a heavy form of carbon -- carbon 13 -- which could only have been formed in space.


Does anybody here honestly understand the basis for the claim that carbon 13 could only be formed in space? Or even more to the point, does anybody here understand at all the procedures these scientists used to arrive at their conclusions?

So then why all the celebration at this "find"? Isn't it just a case of being happy that there's a story that supports your position, so you really don't care about the validity of the conclusion?

It seems to be contrary to the "Deny Ignorance" spirit of this site.



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 07:07 PM
link   
i would point out a certain statement in the report:

We believe early life may have adopted nucleobases from meteoric fragments for use in genetic coding, enabling them to pass on their successful features to subsequent generations. Martins said.



the key idea here is that indigent, Earth life was already here and flourishing... it's just now thought possible that the Earth based life
allowed these nucleotides from meteorites into that primitive lifes DNA or pre-DNA structure.
I thought that the "primordial soup" theory already took this into account...

oh well



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 07:32 PM
link   
So basically meteorites are a kind of intergalactic pollen that are scattered across the universe pollenating planets?



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Creationist here!


This is my favorite part



Competing theories suggest that nucleobases were synthesised closer to home, but Martins counters that the atmospheric conditions of early Earth would have rendered that process difficult or impossible.


It speaks to me. In more ways than one!
First it says -- ooo, so if he's right about it being difficult or impossible, that's score 1 for intelligent design.
Second it says -- woot, had to come from somewhere else meaning dna based life on other planets, perhaps!



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 01:08 PM
link   
I'm a young earth creationist, I believe there could be life on other planets, but not evolved life. Maybe plant life, even animals, but not people, however I do believe that there are beings that some may consider aliens that live on other planets, but they did not evolve there, science has yet to prove that man evolved from an ape/chimp/monkey. There is no missing link, I've watched documentary after documentary or people find monkey skeletons and calling them the missing link when it is clearly the skeleton of a chip, they even do a side by side comparison, and there is no difference, they either find that or a skeleton of a hunched back person. A hunch back is not evolution, being in between upright and all fours is not benificiary to the animal/primate that is hunched over all the time it's harmful to there back and usually means they have bad back problems, I know I do.

So if they find a meteor with bacteria on it, who's to say it didn't come from earth? who's to say it isn't contaminated or the fact that there test could be a fluke or a mistake was made. I believe there could be life on Mars even, but I don't believe it evolved there.
Macro evolution, it still has not been proven, notice I say MACRO, MICRO elvolution (deceptive name btw) is simply an organism making normal changes adapting to there enviroment, not dinosaurs sproating a complex structure like feathers all of the sudden, seriously, that's just simple stupid.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Parabol
 


how?

if its here on earth and in the metorite doesn't that only prove they are in both? sorry im thicker than a redtree toothpick



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 



Please post information backing up your claims as well. You can't just drop into a thread and debunk without proof.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


There's more to it than the Yahoo article suggests, but there is a general consensus that heavy carbon molecules occur more frequently in Space than on Earth where the percentages are quite low for Carbon-13 Typically you find about 1% of Earth carbon is that isotope.

It is quite odd to find nucleotide bases in a meteor and I'd suspect that it was contamination, but they claim to have ruled out that possibility.

So it's no proven by any means, but it is a strong suggestion that their premise has some merit. In the past it was too difficult and expensive to analyze.

Here's a PubMed link for you. Link



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Hold on, I am not a creationist but if they are positive that life started this way then can't they just do an experiment? Try to create bacteria using caron13 and the that would give more evidence for evolutionists.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 


Well, first of all scientists have not been able to create 'life' without some seeding, but they can build nucleotides in a test tube and have it incorporate carbon isomers.

The point is not if they can create it, it's that the odds favor a non-terrestrial origin of these organic compounds if they were indeed present in the meteorite and not contamination.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   
If DNA structures can be reproduced or altered by some type of energy or radio wave, then these signals could take hold anywhere these building blocks are possible. Since we supposedly have much of this DNA in common, then these could have been sent from another solar system or galaxy etc. Probes could be sent out with these signals also. So, any meteor might also be capable of starting this process if it's hit by this energy beam. Haven't scientists supposedly altered a frog DNA in this way with some type of laser?

A planet that blew up, might then also pass some of it's DNA to another solar system by light or sound waves also. Similar to Star Trek fiction? What about DNA signals being frozen in a crystaline form also? I had heard somewhere that our DNA can be applied in a note or sound form. So, is this some type of resonance frequency?



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Truly Extraterrestrial. That's a key phrase that grabs my interest. I don't mean aliens of course...



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Wow fantastic news i must say, i do begin to see patterns of information being released, so somehow in near future we may be facing some new big event.

Just my 2 cent

Best regards

Loke.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyjackblack
I'm a young earth creationist,


Only gonna make a quick comment because this subject really is for another thread and has been covered numerous times on this forum, but the young earth has been debunked over and over. There is far more to the subject than just a documentary or two.

Now as for the original topic; Should the nucleobases really have been brought by the meteor, then it merely proves that the smaller particles are not exclusive to earth. It would also prove that some material can reach one planetary body while traversing the harsh enviorments of space and planetary entry. But it's no smoking gun imo. I'm curious of the methods of determining the origin of the nucleobases though. I'll see if i can find the actual publishing on the research later.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   
My opinion - I think it's very likely that the material found in the meteorite is contamination. I give it at least a 50-50 chance of being that.

Just because of the preponderance of C-13, it's jumping the gun to immediately presume that it -had- to be produced in space or elsewhere than on Earth.

I also think it's a big jump to conclude that the presence of these nucleotides is evidence that life on Earth started due to this seeding.

So the announcement is at least premature, and at most a misleading interpretation of the evidence acquired thus far. There's too much emphasis on the fantastic these days, maybe as a ploy to capture the public's imagination and promote funding.


[edit on 14-6-2008 by Badge01]



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Could it not also simply be that material was knocked into space by one of the many asteroids which have impacted earth over the ages?

-ChriS



new topics

top topics



 
27
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join