NASA scientists: colony of fossil bacteria in Martian meteorite in Britain

NASA scientists: colony of fossil bacteria in Martian meteorite in Britain

www.thesun.co. uk

NASA scientists believe these are the first pictures of a colony of Martians - in the UK.
The microscopic aliens are on a slice of a meteorite in London's Natural History Museum.

The scientists, who used a scanning electron microscope to take snaps, say the bumpy surface resembles a fossilised colony of microbacteria - a simple form of life.

The meteorite from Mars fell on Egypt in 1911.



Read more: www.thesun.co.uk...

(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Bacteria from Mars found inside ancient meteorite
Allen Hills 84001 proved to contain Martian fossils

[edit on 2-12-2009 by Imagir]

NASA scientists believe these are the first pictures of a colony of Martians - in the UK.

Read more: www.thesun.co.uk...


Last week ALH 84001, and today the Egiptian Meteorite of The London's Natural History Museum....?

Hmmm.... strange coincidence!

Nasa has decided that wants finally say to us something about… Mars?

www.thesun.co. uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 12/2/2009 by Phage]

Two clues do not make a proof, but this coincidence regarding news about the “Life on Mars” is indeed anomalous in a so short time.

I wonder: There will be a third and a definitive admission?

reply to post by Imagir

I suggest waiting for more information. The Sun is not really a good source.
www.thesun.co.uk...

Originally posted by Phage
I suggest waiting for more information. The Sun is not really a good source.

Yes. Just because something looks like it could be fossilized bacteria doesn't mean that's what it is. I'm sure there are any number of non-living processes that could produce something similar. But that's what peer review is for, eh?

reply to post by 2000 Yards

Actually, I meant that the article in the Sun provides absolutely no information other than, "NASA scientists:".

You know how Sorcha Faal begins almost all of his articles? "Russian scientists have said...".

I like to have a tiny bit more information about things.


Another article from the Sun:
www.thesun.co.uk...

[edit on 12/2/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage


Phage... Phage... You are a Bad boy...

Telegraph is a good source?
www.telegraph.co.uk...
Or this one?
www.qarannews.com...
Or this one?
www.newkerala.com...

reply to post by Imagir

Thanks, I couldn't find any other articles. But there really isn't any more information in those. It's more information I want, not more of the same.

But

Nasa scientists, who used a scanning electron microscope to take snaps, say the bumpy surface resembles a fossilised colony of microbacteria

is a different statement from:

NASA scientists believe these are the first pictures of a colony of Martians

I'll bet some NASA scientists do not believe those are the first pictures of a colony of Martians.

[edit on 12/2/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage


"Our sofa is haunted!" And then a picture of a sofa.

Sorry man, that was just too funny!

Yeah, The Sun is indeed a tabloid. Not as bad as The Weekly World News (sometimes I wonder, however), but still not too credible.

Haunted Sofa. Ahah. I love it.

The strange thing is that the egiptian meteorite was already known... under the section: "Possible evidence of life has been hypothesized in three meteorites". wikipedia!

en.wikipedia.org...
"A 1.3 billion-year-old meteorite from near El-Nakhla, Egypt. Small structures that look vaguely like Earth bacteria. More like bacteria than those in the better-known Allan Hills meteorite."

[edit on 2-12-2009 by Imagir]

reply to post by Imagir

It's been of interest for quite a while.
www.execulink.com...

THE TELEGRAPH.
www.telegraph.co.uk...

The news is in the SCIENCE NEWS!!

"Samples of a colony of Martians have been put on display in the Natural History Museum, in London."

reply to post by Imagir


Headlines are often different from what the article actually says.
The article says scientists think it resembles colonies of bacteria, not that it is.

resemble:
appear like; be similar or bear a likeness to; "She resembles her mother very much"; "This paper resembles my own work"

wordnetweb.princeton.edu...

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Imagir

 

It's been of interest for quite a while.
www.execulink.com...

What do you would mean? No more interest, Now?

reply to post by Imagir

I mean it has been studied before.
With the new data about AHL84001, EETA79001 may be examined more closely. Perhaps more new evidence will be found there as well.

reply to post by Phage


Well said. This News is a "News"!
What I want to emphasize is that also on this meteorite is begun to inquire and there are high probability that finds Martian bacteria in it.

Scientists were able to use high resolution electron microscopes that were not available 13 years ago.

And it is really strange that in the same week, after ALH84001, now the News about fossilized bacteria in the Egyptian meteorite.

However, dear Phage, I do not know if already you are put to acquaintance from your colleagues in office, but the politics of NASA slowly begin to change…

reply to post by Imagir

Your little "jokes" about my occupation are becoming both tiresome and offensive. They are also a violation of the T&C's of ATS.
Knock it off.

Odd that nobody cared enough to go to the source?

Nasa on this and links to PDF's of the published articles.

Using more advanced analytical instruments now available, a Johnson Space Center research team has reexamined the 1996 finding that a meteorite contains strong evidence that life may have existed on ancient Mars.

The new research focused on investigating alternate proposals for the creation of materials thought to be signs of ancient life found in the meteorite. The new study argues that ancient life remains the most plausible explanation for the materials and structures found in the meteorite.

In 1996, a group of scientists led by David McKay, Everett Gibson and Kathie Thomas-Keprta of NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston published an article in Science announcing the discovery of biogenic evidence in the ALH84001 meteorite. A newly published paper revisits that original hypothesis with new analyses. The paper, “Origin of Magnetite Nanocrystals in Martian Meteorite ALH84001,” by Thomas-Keprta and coauthors Simon Clemett, McKay, Gibson and Susan Wentworth, all scientists in the Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science Directorate at JSC, is in the Nov. 1 issue of the journal Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta of The Geochemical Society and The Meteoritical Society.

Lots of pictures and links to articles if you go to the linked site.

“The evidence supporting the possibility of past life on Mars has been slowly building up during the past decade,” said McKay, NASA chief scientist for exploration and astrobiology, JSC. “This evidence includes signs of past surface water including remains of rivers, lakes and possibly oceans, signs of current water near or at the surface, water-derived deposits of clay minerals and carbonates in old terrain, and the recent release of methane into the Martian atmosphere, a finding that may have several explanations, including the presence of microbial life, the main source of methane on Earth."

Kathie Thomas-Keprta appears to be a member of a team that is working on this and the media hound they chose to do interviews.

Why is it when something real comes along to add to the debate, there is such little interest? Makes one wonder about the motives? If NASA proves life on Mars will the debate change and everyone switch sides just because the proof came from NASA, the most likely to make such a find?