Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Extraterrestrial (microbial) life found in meteorite

page: 6
35
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 05:51 AM
link   
Ill be impressed when they finally admit that we have had contact with other life forms




posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy

reply to post by micpsi
 


And the meteorite finally made its way back, conveniently leaving the rest of the debris in orbit. I doubt it


The debris would have started falling immediately after the asteroid strike and probably would continue for many many years after the present. Some debris would have not achieved orbital velocity, that would have been the first to fall. Other pieces would be in orbit until acted upon by other forces.... such as collisions with other debris.


Your scenario is too elaborate and contrived. Ever heard of "Occam's Razor"? I was not disputing the principle. Clearly, the possibility cannot be ruled out a priori. But, when we are faced with two or more possible explanations equally supported by data, the simplest one is the best. That the meteorite came from outer space is less convoluted an explanation than that some asteroid in the past impacted the Earth and sent debris containing fossil diatoms back into space, some of which has recently fallen down just in Sri Lanka. It's an ad hoc way of evading evidence for panspermia because there is no independent evidence to support this alternative scenario.
edit on 15-1-2013 by micpsi because: Typo corrected



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 07:05 AM
link   
reply to post by micpsi
 

Contrived?
Even without the presence of fossils factored in, the Earth-derived origin hypothesis is just as likely an 'outer space' origin.

The meteorite should be examined by qualified scientists(that have no agenda) to determine where it came from.
edit on 15-1-2013 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I'm very interested in this UK meteorite as my first UFO 'spot' was a fireball over Worcester UK (about 10:00 pm) a little BEFORE Christmas (25/10/2012)... It was a bright, orange, flaming, slow-moving (or more likely very high up) object with a steady, arcing trajectory with no discernible wind influence - it looked nothing like a Chinese Lantern or shooting star (of which I've seen many)... I managed to capture about 10s before my crappy battery ran out but it took about a minute to disappear over a slightly hilly horizon...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The ATS forum (thread893629/pg1) + other sites' sightings posts confirms that it was a LARGE meteorite to me... and there seem to have been many last year. Now I don't want to panic but....!



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


We know life is here, we have no idea how it started.

Thats like saying you don't know where that tree came from. I'll tell you...
a seed from another tree. Now follow that back as far as you can tolerate until your mind goes blank.

If you want to start a garden anywhere you are going to need seeds. If you want to raise chickens you are going to need eggs.

If you want a baby you need a womb. If you are going to deny that is the beginning of the next generation from the last generation, then you are going to need a mind.

Oh.... never mind.


What you are saying is a circular argument that doesn't really make sense. You are saying life couldn't have originated here, it must have originated somewhere else. Please follow your logic all the way through and what you are saying is that life couldn't have started anywhere ever as at some point there will be no 'somewhere else' that is originated and spread from.

I don't want to offend but hopefully you see what I mean.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Damn you Phage! I want to believe!
But you make it so darn hard lol.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:51 PM
link   
I heard of the red rain in India some years ago. If this is true, then all of that rain was filled with microbial life. Not of this Earth. Panspermia was laughed off at first. Now it seems to explain how life can arrive at distance places. I have a theory that mushrooms could be the oldest organisms in existence. They don't need light, can survive on decaying materials, and there spores can survive interstellar travel.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
So is the fabric of society going to crumble? will we have riots in the streets? Is the world going to grind to a halt like so many people have been claiming will be the case if we ever discover life anywhere else other than the earth?



A pandemic of awakening ex-creationalists will occur. TPTB won't be up for losing a large chunk of their most obedient sheeple, allowing the non-'nut job' free thinkers and non conspiracy theorists to become a minority, their ideas becoming close minded and non-realistic to the general populace. This will not do, at all costs!



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by something wicked
 


You are saying life couldn't have originated here, it must have originated somewhere else.

Don't twist it too much.
What I hold is:

We've never been off this star system. We cannot conclude that there is no life there or that it is not from there (or elsewhere).

And the hard evidence for life originating here has "gaps" so we cannot conclude that life originated here.

It is more complex than that, but between the two, I choose off world. It has more "credibility" to my mind. And that is just my opinion. Fair enough?



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 



And the hard evidence for life originating here has "gaps" so we cannot conclude that life originated here.


There might be gaps in the fossil record but DNA shows we did evolve from small mammals on this planet.

edit on 15-1-2013 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
reply to post by intrptr
 



And the hard evidence for life originating here has "gaps" so we cannot conclude that life originated here.


There miht be gaps in the fossil record but DNA shows we did evolve from small mammals on this planet.

I prefer the word "adapt". That may be true... that we are from lower animals. It supports the overall "theory". I thought all "backboned" animals are within a few percent (DNA wise) of each other? I could be mistaken.

Doesn't address "Origins".

Oh uh, use "quote" inside brackets when you quote onsite content and "ex" for external content.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by AlanWatts1111
Ill be impressed when they finally admit that we have had contact with other life forms

Sure, because "they" are so good at keeping secrets that would instantly make anyone historically famous forever. And nobody wants that!



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
reply to post by intrptr
 


And the hard evidence for life originating here has "gaps" so we cannot conclude that life originated here.

There miht be gaps in the fossil record but DNA shows we did evolve from small mammals on this planet.

But it still doesn't prove that it started on Earth. The biggest gap is still the one that goes from chemicals to living things. Dirty water that forms itself (or is formed via some outside force) into a functioning organism. Nobody knows how or where that happened. And don't count out when. I've always thought that there could be a chance that a small but durable living thing like a bacteria could find itself blasted through a tiny wormhole to any place and time in the universe, and bootstrap the universe into existence in the process. Hard to prove, though.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blue Shift

Originally posted by AlanWatts1111
Ill be impressed when they finally admit that we have had contact with other life forms

Sure, because "they" are so good at keeping secrets that would instantly make anyone historically famous forever. And nobody wants that!


Especially the Aliens. That would be like us telling Mickey D's cows what they are in for.
They might stampede.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by something wicked
 


You are saying life couldn't have originated here, it must have originated somewhere else.

Don't twist it too much.
What I hold is:

We've never been off this star system. We cannot conclude that there is no life there or that it is not from there (or elsewhere).

And the hard evidence for life originating here has "gaps" so we cannot conclude that life originated here.

It is more complex than that, but between the two, I choose off world. It has more "credibility" to my mind. And that is just my opinion. Fair enough?


I'm not twisting anything, you made the comment, I responded to it. We all have the right to an opinion, it's when you purport it to be a fact that you should expect people to question it.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   
So, if the panspermia theory is true, and life "arrives on planets" from outer space, where are the organisms coming from? From some interstellar clouds? Time for some googling i guess...



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


So what do you mean by gaps? or do you just mean we dont know where life started?

edit on 15-1-2013 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Haha! As it turns out this thing isn't even a meteorite. Apologies to anyone I questioned over this "find." The diatoms found in that rock are from identifiable freshwater species here on Earth. And without having sent this rock to be verified, it seems this was just a stone someone found in a riverbed or something.

Also, having looked a little more closely at this journal and the man presenting this "evidence", I too question his character.

mobile.slate.com...

There's a pretty good rebuttal of this find.
edit on 15-1-2013 by JayinAR because: add link



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Phil Plait from Bad Astronomy explains why the news is false: www.slate.com...

I wonder how many more such rubbish claims will we get in the future.



posted on Jan, 15 2013 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by something wicked
 


it's when you purport it to be a fact that you should expect people to question it.

I didn't claim any "facts" except that tees come from seeds and seeds come from trees. That is a fact by the way. If you mean by "it' that I am saying I know where life comes from, that would be a lie. I know I didn't say that. I surmise, I choose, I hold, that life is from elsewhere. Thats just my opinion...





new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join