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.

 

NASA's Press Conference December 2 To Reveal "Astrobiology" Finding!!

page: 9
51
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
I had some strange ponderings.I read that possibly life originally was like this. The new arsenic (#33 by the way) using bacteria (found in lake MONO) uses arsenic instead of phosphorus for metabolism. Phosphorus is the backbone of the DNA double helix. And helps to make ATP which is the "universal energy currency" (ATP= Adenosine TriPhosphate). Arsenic literally means " strong man" (maybe before the FALL). Phosphorus literally means "MORNING STAR " (life forms after the fall?). Now check out the alchemical symbols for them:

Phosphorus:



watch.pair.com..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>


or:

0.tqn.com..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

Arsenic:


www.csa.com...


Make of it what you will. But I think something is strange here.




posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   
After hearing from one of the scientists at the NASA panel yesterday, about how fragile the chemical links made up of arsenic instead of phosphorus are supposed to be (too fragile for a living thing to use), I begin to suspect that a good deal of biology will eventually have to be rewritten, besides the bare facts that phosphorus isn't necessary to life, and arsenic isn't excluded. Could this bacteria using arsenic live elsewhere? It seems so, as it can use either phosphorus or arsenic, whichever is available. It apparently would like a saline environment. Mono Lake is very salty, having no natural outlet. Ross



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
This is certainly an important discovery.

True but I don't understand the hype from NASA
This was posted February 22nd, 2009

Searching for Life on Earth
bytesizebio.net...



Zorgon --

Read the article you posted more closely.

Here's an excerpt:

Since 1994 it has been known that As(III) is used by some bacteria as an electron acceptor in respiration of some bacteria. Recently, bacteria inhabiting the alkaline shores of Mono Lake, California were found to be using Arsenic(III) as an electron donor in photosynthesis. It is not inconceivable that Arsenic, in some form, may be have been used as a Phosphorous replacement, although the latter, much more fundamental biochemical change, has not been found yet; not even in the Mono Lake bacteria.

[emphasis mine]

It seems from that excerpt from the article you posted, at the time the article was published (February 2009), they had NOT yet proved that arsenic was being used in place of phosphorus in the DNA processes as mentioned in the NASA press conference. It seems they were looking for this arsenic-replacement in the Mono lake bacteria, but they had not found it -- until recently.

The article says that it was only known that arsenic is used by some bacteria as an electron acceptor in respiration used as an electron donor in photosynthesis. However, the NASA announcemnt was about a discovery of arsenic replacing phosphorus that was alluded to in the article -- which they call a "fundamental biochemical change" (I suppose bacteria respiration and photosynthesis using arsenic is NOT that fundamentally different than "normal").

BOTH the discovery of the arsenic in photosynthesis/respiration mentioned in your article AND the arsenic replacing phosphorus as the backbone of DNA processes announced by NASA were by the same group of researchers from the U.S. Geological Survey -- namely Felisa Wolfe-Simon, who is a NASA astrobiologist and a Fellow at the Geological Survey. She was involved in the discoveries mentioned in your article AND this latest announcement by NASA.

So the discovery NASA announced the other day WAS IN FACT a relatively new discovery -- even though they had suspicions about it for a while.


edit on 12/3/2010 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Here is the video of the press conference.




posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   
Life is here with man.
Man needed the microbes to exist.
So these lower forms of life came along for the ride.
UV and Tesla particles make more changes than a normal
bacteria getting stuck at mono lake and ingesting a common mineral at a particular location.
In the report I heard only the presence of arsenic was found and no verification
of DNA use by electron microscope.

Lets be through here, a bug lived in a polluted area.
Check out other bugs and see where minerals go.
Yeah it happens all over Earth due to man to begin with.
A large quantity of a normal bugs were deposited
and began living at mono lake.
No way they spring up on the lake.
They should soon die off.

Unless Man is in space you will not find any life.
A fact NASA should admit along with its Tesla ship envy.
ED: Being a multicelled organism one can't say where
the arsenic is in an unknown process. Can't say
substitution yet even though they admit a normal organism
came upon an arsenic environment.
ED+: There is still a normal percent see at 45:17 and
sounds like dead organisms in the mud soon.
ED++: Don't think there is replacement.
All the bacteria is not DNA.

edit on 12/4/2010 by TeslaandLyne because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
In the report I heard only the presence of arsenic was found and no verification
of DNA use by electron microscope.


Electron microscope? What the hell are you on about? Why would you even try to use an electron microscope to find out what the DNA is composed of?
And the whole point of the study was that arsenic was used in the makeup of the bacteria's DNA.


Our data show evidence for arsenate in macromolecules that normally contain phosphate, most notably nucleic acids and proteins.

A Bacterium That Can Grow by Using Arsenic Instead of Phosphorus

That's the actual paper the reports are based on for anyone that's interested in reading it.



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
So the discovery NASA announced the other day WAS IN FACT a relatively new discovery -- even though they had suspicions about it for a while.


Technically you are correct... but NASA hype is still overboard
Remember the flop with the 'water on mars' form the picture and the flopped "bomb the moon' mission? These guys need new press agents



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by AgentSmith
 


Wow full explanation alert.
Sorry about that
DNA used by life support, yes but other organs seemingly had arsenic placement.
However not everything is the life spring which still has the original Phosphorus.
The original Phosphorus still in the microbe and adding any use of the arsenic and
not the life mechanism for sure or an electron microscope would show the difference
and not go by a quantitative measurement.
The Illuminati are very careful at fooling people.
Normal bacterial was placed in mono lake mud and nurtured with the best care.
Something that would not happen at mono lake.
We are up against the most cunning of initiatives of payola in support of life forms
here and in the past and from other dimensions to explain away the UFO from ET
of the bible or other dimensions and what not because they can't even use the
electron microscope that Tesla invented besides his ship now called UFOs which
started the whole alien explanations.



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
So the discovery NASA announced the other day WAS IN FACT a relatively new discovery -- even though they had suspicions about it for a while.


Technically you are correct... but NASA hype is still overboard
Remember the flop with the 'water on mars' form the picture and the flopped "bomb the moon' mission? These guys need new press agents


1. NASA did not hype this news conference. All they did was call it and schedule it, like they noramally do with these scentific-findings press conferences, which they hav often (and they didn't hype the "exceptional object in our cosmic neighborhood" they has last month either -- that was ATS members who hyped that.

Having said that, NASA rightfully could have hyped this particular press conference on the arsenic batcteria. True, arsenic has been shown to be used by bacteria in some life processes before. HOWEVER, the manner in which these creatures use arsenic in place of phosphorous is a totally different thing. This is a fundamentally different kind of organism that MAY show that life on Earth had two separate and independent geneses.

2. I'm not sure which "water on Mars" you are talking about, but perhaps you mean the picture that showed possible marks left by water flowing down the walls of a crater. The jury is still out on the possibility that those flows could have been water and/or watery mud -- or perhaps something else. There are some scientists who have show it could have been very fine sand that flows like a fluid. I think the ongoing potential that it was water is worth a bit of hype.

...but again, NASA was very reserved in their announcement, even saying at the time of the announcement that this only "suggests" the possibility of water flowing on Mars. They weren't sure if it was water or fine silt. I remember people on ATS criticizing NASA for even bringing up the possibility that it was not water (i.e., some ATSers wanted MORE hype from NASA).

There is still ongoing research being done by NASA and others looking for (and finding) signs of water or water ice on Mars:
www.nasa.gov...
blogs.discovermagazine.com...

3. "Bombing the Moon": One more time, NASA didn't create the hype -- the hype was caused by the internet. NASA did say that the dust kicked up by the centaur rocket crashing into the Moon may be visible from powerful Earth-based telescopes (they were wrong), but they never hyped the event.

And, by the way, even though the common public thought the experiment was a "dud" (because they didn't "see" a big dust cloud), astro-geologists know that the experiment actually was successful. The 20-meter wide crater and tenuous dust plume were enough for spectrometers to be able to detect signatures of water in that crater:
LCROSS Moon Crash Discovers Water
edit on 12/4/2010 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   
The Moon bombing has old connotations as a certain force beam
was proposed as to have enough effect on landing at the Moon, or
any planet of choice, as to make its presence known to observers.

Yeah, that got nowhere.

I do wonder if such the force beam does exist and tptb are holding back
on NASA and letting them fail to complete.
ED: The force beam followed the missile and completed the job.
Thats a good one. I'd even let HAARP do it, even though I call it
wimpy, if the set up was done right.


edit on 12/4/2010 by TeslaandLyne because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is PeopleThis is a fundamentally different kind of organism that MAY show that life on Earth had two separate and independent geneses.


Which means life as we know it and as we don't know it is probably scattered all over the solar system... So Lets get that robo submarine up to Europe ASAP and see what's swimming around up there


...but again, NASA was very reserved in their announcement, even saying at the time of the announcement that this only "suggests" the possibility of water flowing on Mars. They weren't sure if it was water or fine silt.


No they said it was water... until people on the internet told them the photo was on a hill




There is still ongoing research being done by NASA and others looking for (and finding) signs of water or water ice on Mars:


Well NASA should get together with ESA seems THEY can find water ice no problem





"Bombing the Moon": One more time, NASA didn't create the hype -- the hype was caused by the internet. NASA did say that the dust kicked up by the centaur rocket crashing into the Moon may be visible from powerful Earth-based telescopes (they were wrong), but they never hyped the event.


"BOMBING THE MOON" isn't hype?




The 20-meter wide crater and tenuous dust plume were enough for spectrometers to be able to detect signatures of water in that crater:


Well that is what they say, sure but heck the Pentagon already told us there was water up there in 1996 100 sq kilometers 50 feet deep of dirty water ice... All NASA did was pollute that water by smashing rocket debris all over it. Dang cosmic litterbugs if you ask me. And all that water they claim they spewed into the atmosphere... POOF sublimated and gone now...

And what about all those MUTATED bacteria they are leaving all over the place? Man that locker room on ISS is NASTY



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 05:19 PM
link   


And what about all those MUTATED bacteria they are leaving all over the place? Man that locker room on ISS is NASTY
reply to post by zorgon
 


Well, the way I see it...you haven't arrived until you've developed the ability to seed outer space with human waste.



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
The Moon bombing has old connotations as a certain force beam
was proposed as to have enough effect on landing at the Moon, or
any planet of choice, as to make its presence known to observers.

Yeah, that got nowhere.

I do wonder if such the force beam does exist and tptb are holding back
on NASA and letting them fail to complete.
ED: The force beam followed the missile and completed the job.
Thats a good one. I'd even let HAARP do it, even though I call it
wimpy, if the set up was done right.


edit on 12/4/2010 by TeslaandLyne because: (no reason given)



After every sentence I read of yours, I just think "...what?!"
Your writing style is very confusing, you don't have to hit enter after every so many characters typed, and what you say is random and doesn't make sense.



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by elocin
 


In an effort to be kind I'm thinking Telsla's first language is not English. If that, however, is not the case then....shame, shame on the public school system.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is PeopleThis is a fundamentally different kind of organism that MAY show that life on Earth had two separate and independent geneses.


Which means life as we know it and as we don't know it is probably scattered all over the solar system... So Lets get that robo submarine up to Europe ASAP and see what's swimming around up there

I agree in principle that life in the galaxy may be ubiquitous, but I'm not ready to say it's "scatted all over the solar system"

Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised if life totally independent of earth life would one day be found on Titan, Enceladus, Europa, Ganymede, or even in the clouds of Venus.

I read a NASA paper once in which the NASA astrobiologists made a pretty good case for the potential for microbial life existing in the atmosphere of Venus (which, as they said, would explain chemical imbalances that are currently not easily explained without the presence of life there).

Heck -- with this announcement of life using arsenic in metabolic processes, perhaps one day we will find life on geologically-active Io -- life that uses sulfur and sulfur dioxide for metabolic processes.



Originally posted by zorgon
No they said it was water... until people on the internet told them the photo was on a hill

NASA was careful to only say that it "suggests" water is flowing down that hill. And it could still be water. It hasn't been definitively proven to have been fine silt or liquid water yet. It could have been a slurry of silt and liquid water -- i.e., perhaps the fine silt allows the water to survive the low pressures for longer than usual without quickly turning to vapor.

NASA knows for a fact there is water-ice under the surface (see my next response below), so perhaps at certain depths, the ground heats the ice to the melting point, allowing for groundwater to flow. That relativity deep ground water (mixed with the silt) may find its way to the surface via these crater walls.



Originally posted by zorgon
...Well NASA should get together with ESA seems THEY can find water ice no problem...

NASA did find water ice in craters. That was one of the links I provided.



"BOMBING THE MOON" isn't hype?

I may be wrong, but I don't think NASA ever used the word "bombing" -- that was the press who used that word. In NASA releases, I think it was always explained as "crashing a Centaur rocket into the Moon" -- which is exactly what they did.



... the Pentagon already told us there was water up there in 1996 100 sq kilometers 50 feet deep of dirty water ice...

That's right. The Navy's "Clementine" probe first found signs of water in 1994. NASA's Lunar prospector also found signs of water in 1998 (and even crashed into the Moon, in a mission similar to LCROSS), but the findings from both Clementine and Lunar Prospector could not be confirmed. That's why NASA did the LCROSS mission. LCROSS again found what was probably water, but it could not be confirmed at the time.

In another mission, NASA supplied an instrument that finally confirmed water. That NASA instrument that first confirmed the presence of water was called the Moon Mineralogy Mapper, and it flew aboard India's "Chandrayaan-1" spacecraft.

edit on 12/5/2010 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
NASA was careful to only say that it "suggests" water is flowing down that hill.


Not THAT water flow... THIS one

Mars rover finds puddles on Mars?



"Puddles" on Mars?
A computer algorithm applied to stereo Pancam images of an area of Burns Cliff, within Endurance Crater, identified some very smooth areas (blue). Credit: NASA / JPL / Cornell / Ron Levin

www.planetary.org...

It's kinda like the hype announcement "100% chance of life on Gliese 581G" But I suppose some people don't have long term memories regardig all the NASA hype announcements only to be squashed later. Remember the announcement that you could grow asparagus in the Martian soil? (why asparagus
) then later they said "oops... we gotz perclorates.. that be bad for asparagus afterall" (paraphrased0



I may be wrong, but I don't think NASA ever used the word "bombing" -- that was the press who used that word. In NASA releases, I think it was always explained as "crashing a Centaur rocket into the Moon" -- which is exactly what they did.

Scientific American used "Bombing" and if I drop a Centaur rocket onto your house, you gonna nit pic on the 'bomb'? Like I said Cosmic Litterbugs... seems there way of 'science' is smashing into things to see what will happen... remember Temple 1?


(and even crashed into the Moon, in a mission similar to LCROSS),


Case in point LITTERBUGS... I bet they are smashing them all over the Moon so we can't spot ancient anomalies anymore



Moon Mineralogy Mapper, and it flew aboard India's "Chandrayaan-1" spacecraft.


Yeah that one was cool
Getting closer to John Lear's version...


"Data from Chandrayaan-1 also suggests that water is still being formed on the Moon"

www.timesonline.co.uk...

Maybe it's raining a little when those raging electrostatic dust storms sweep the surface.


But we were talking about NASA HYPE... I call this HYPE...



June 5, 2007: Picture this: A spaceship swoops in from the void, plunging toward a cloudy planet about the size of Earth. A laser beam lances out from the ship; it probes the planet's clouds, striving to reach the hidden surface below. Meanwhile, back on the craft's home world, scientists perch on the edge of their seats waiting to see what happens. Sounds like science fiction? This is real, and it's happening today.

science.nasa.gov...



Moon Fountains When astronauts return to the Moon in the years ahead, they might encounter electrified fountains and other strange things.

Back in 1956, two years before NASA was even created, Hal Clement wrote a short story called "Dust Rag" published in Astounding Science Fiction, about two astronauts descending into a crater on the Moon to investigate a mysterious haze dimming stars near the lunar horizon. After discarding a wild guess that they were seeing traces of a lunar atmosphere--"gases don't behave that way"--they figured it had to be dust somehow suspended above the ground. In a conversation remarkable for its scientific prescience, one of the astronauts explains:
science.nasa.gov...


Moon Fountains



Funny how all these decades people have been called crazy for seeing dust clouds on the moon and sunset/sunrise rays created by dust (yeah from Earth) and now NASA says "Yuppers, dere be dust storms strong enough to tear the flesh off a Martian Targ and sunset rays up there!"


December 7, 2005: Every lunar morning, when the sun first peeks over the dusty soil of the moon after two weeks of frigid lunar night, a strange storm stirs the surface. The next time you see the moon, trace your finger along the terminator, the dividing line between lunar night and day. That's where the storm is. It's a long and skinny dust storm, stretching all the way from the north pole to the south pole, swirling across the surface, following the terminator as sunrise ceaselessly sweeps around the moon. see captionNever heard of it? Few have. But scientists are increasingly confident that the storm is real.

science.nasa.gov...



I bet even the Tabloids couldn't make up better HYPE

Good ole NASA... GREAT entertainers



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 03:51 PM
link   


Good ole NASA... GREAT entertainers
reply to post by zorgon
 


Unfortunately, they're entertaning to a small percentage of the population....like we here at ATS. Most people are only vaguely aware that NASA and their counterparts in other countries even exist.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 

Oh, c'mon Zorgon...

I know that you know that I know that you know [whew!] that is simply a false color image, as the article that you posted speculates:

The blue color is, of course, false color and probably arose from the color table that Levin and Lyddy used to encode the results of their image analysis algorithm -- it's not the blue color that argues for water, it's the smoothness and the way that the smooth areas fill topographic lows. At least I'm pretty sure that's what they're claiming; unfortunately, I couldn't find a copy of the conference abstract online. I found a list of the papers here, but that's it; apparently the conference proceedings have not yet been published. So all I have to go on to investigate this extraordinary claim -- that Opportunity saw puddles of water on the Martian surface -- is what was written in the New Scientist article. That, and the images from the rover, which are out there for everyone to investigate.


The smoothness may be explained by fine wind-blown sand filling the ruts. Or perhaps it really is muddy water -- who knows? This certainly wasn't hyped, and it being water IS certainly a possibility.

Nice try, though


...oh -- and the "100% chance of life on Gliese 581G" announcement was NOT made by NASA and was NOT based on any particular scientific proof. That was simply the personal opinion of one of the researchers. There was no direct evidence of life -- just some evidence that Gliese 581g potentially lies in the "goldilocks zone" and nothing else.


edit on 12/5/2010 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 03:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Oh, c'mon Zorgon...
I know that you know that I know that you know [whew!] that is simply a false color image, as the article that you posted speculates:


Yeah I know they are just blueberries but when that 'water' was first announced it was all hype... They had to retract it. The article I linked was the aftermath


As to Arsenic Life Hype...



But it doesn't matter anyway. Obama told NASA they can't go back to the moon, and no Mars trip for 25 years, but they get to play on Asteroids... he will allow funding for that

edit on 6-12-2010 by zorgon because: Classified



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 03:32 AM
link   
EEWWWW Just found out about another lifeform. Bet this one would thrive on IO

SNOTTITE yeah that's right after 'snot' You wouldn't want this stuff dripping on you in a cave... they 'eat' sulphur and waste is sulfuric acid... yikes




Snottites are colonies of single-celled extremophilic bacteria. They hang from the walls and ceilings of caves and are similar to small stalactites, but have the consistency of "snot", a slang word for mucus. The bacteria derive their energy from chemosynthesis of volcanic sulfur compounds including H2S and warm-water solution dripping down from above, producing sulfuric acid. Because of this, their waste products are highly acidic (approaching pH=0), with similar properties to battery acid.[1]


en.wikipedia.org...

Wonder which planet these little boogers dropped in from?



new topics

top topics



 
51
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join