Staggering picture of extra-terrestrial organism is PROOF of alien life, scientists claim

originally posted by: Macenroe82
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance


Has there been a single post on ATS that you did not have an answer for? Or do you always assume you know everything?

He is absolutely right though.

a reply to: Frocharocha

Baby Aliens!

a reply to: JadeStar

Agree. For a scientist, he does not follow the scientific method.
He is tasked the wrong way around, as he believes the result is proof of extraterrestrial life, and tries to backpiece it to panspermia.

The way this should be done, is to pass the material captured through the gauntlet of all the things it might be, and see if it makes it to the other end.

The most recent idea is that life roams around the universe on comets and asteroids, and spreads from place to place that way. I think that makes a lot of sense and I tend to think that way because I believe it makes more sense for there to be plentiful life around the universe than to believe that we somehow are living in a place with "different rules" than the rest of the universe. We want to feel like we are special, and that blinds us to how much life is out there.

originally posted by: Macenroe82
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

I didnt mean to come across as a pompous a# to you. Sorry about that.
I did some follow up, because i never heard of these 2 before and see what you mean.

Enjoy the rest of your evening.

Hey, no worries. I wasn't trying to come off as an arrogant know-it-all (though I often do, apparently lol). These two guys (Wainwright and Wickramasinghe) have been making this sort of unsubstantiated claim (repeatedly) for many years, so I've learned that whenever their names are attached to something, it's almost certainly untrue.

Sometimes, though, I forget that not everyone has heard of them or put in the time and effort to recognize and to understand the myriad of problems with their 'research'. I apologize for that.

I think this is the first time I've ever seen these claims made solely under Wainwright's name. Usually Wickramasinghe is the primary one referred to, with Wainwright mentioned only in passing. That's good news, in my opinion, as it would seem to indicate that Wickramasinghe's name is becoming more widely recognized as being completely disreputable (and rightfully so).

Again, I apologize for any earlier perceived hostility.

Is this life? Maybe...I have always thought space itself is much akin to water...would explain so much about gravity and planets stasis.

Is this life? Maybe...I have always thought space itself is much akin to water...would explain so much about gravity and planets stasis.

Just one question… how can it be alien life if it resides in Earths biosphere?

Panspermia is a nice theory but doesn't account for anything. Not one microbe has been found to date in meteoritic material.

Besides always claiming that, I mean.

E.T microorganisms are nothing new :/ not that exciting to me. But it's good for people that had no idea about it. thanks for posting!

originally posted by: Eagleyedobserver
E.T microorganisms are nothing new

Uh-huh...Care to back up that statement with some evidence?

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance
Does he work with him or is wainwright just jumping on the bandwagon to validate his own ideas? Don't see in the article that they worked together at the university? I could be wrong.

Yes, they work together. Here's the two making the same claim in 2013. In 2003 the two claimed that SARS came from space. They have no credibility whatsoever.

Thanks for the heads up in this post and the few before...

Its one of those things you either want to be true or really don't want it to be true depending on your view point on alien species. Shame that there's charlatans still flogging lies.

I was on the side of wanting to finally see an 'alien' species (other than the belief that we all are actually theoretical aliens).

Maybe the reason they keep saying it, is because people keep shooting them down.

I look at things like this with an open mind, and a hopeful one as well.

Perhaps they're right.

Perhaps they're not.

I hope they are right.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: Eagleyedobserver
E.T microorganisms are nothing new

Uh-huh...Care to back up that statement with some evidence?

yep, even NASA made a announcement years ago about some E.T microorganism (or something like that) Can't find link to that specific announcement but it was some underwater form I believe.

www.disclose.tv...
+this one is interesting too.
www.telegraph.co.uk...

a reply to: Eagleyedobserver

Nowhere in either of the sources you linked does it mention anything about any extraterrestrial organisms ever having been discovered. Care to try again?

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: Eagleyedobserver

Nowhere in either of the sources you linked does it mention anything about any extraterrestrial organisms ever having been discovered. Care to try again?

thats why I wrote I can't find specific links Sorry. I'm pretty sure it was about some underwater form that is potential E.T.

Google it maybe you're lucky.

originally posted by: Eagleyedobserver

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: Eagleyedobserver

Nowhere in either of the sources you linked does it mention anything about any extraterrestrial organisms ever having been discovered. Care to try again?

thats why I wrote I can't find specific links

Sorry. I'm pretty sure it was about some underwater form that is potential E.T.

Google it maybe you're lucky.

It was not E.T. it was "Arsenic Based Life" and it was a fiasco

a reply to: JadeStar

Hey, what about the antarctic meteors they figured out were Martian and then one (or two) had "seeming" microorganisms in them? Back in '97 or so?

I know that after the news conference proclaiming 'alien life found' the arguments got heated and the conservatives won by default, but some of those micro fossils sure could be life... or, of course, odd geology... we just don't have proof.

Were those possible organisms completely debunked? Did I just miss it?

Some guys at the UofA are pretty convinced the old Viking test really showed significant signs of life, and the meteors clinched it for them... but this was just from an informal bull session... no citations or anything.. .but I'm curious what the consensus is on those Mars meteors these days in pro astronomy circles... as the guys I speak to are pretty ...er, OLD.

originally posted by: Baddogma
a reply to: JadeStar

Hey, what about the antarctic meteors they figured out were Martian and then one (or two) had "seeming" microorganisms in them? Back in '97 or so?

I know that after the news conference proclaiming 'alien life found' the arguments got heated and the conservatives won by default, but some of those micro fossils sure could be life... or, of course, odd geology... we just don't have proof.

Were those possible organisms completely debunked? Did I just miss it?

Yes. Morphology alone is not enough to prove alien life.

Here you can read about the Martian Meteorite announcement and the story after the big story (which you missed):

Allan Hills 84001

Some guys at the UofA are pretty convinced the old Viking test really showed significant signs of life, and the meteors clinched it for them... but this was just from an informal bull session... no citations or anything.. .but I'm curious what the consensus is on those Mars meteors these days in pro astronomy circles... as the guys I speak to are pretty ...er, OLD.

The Viking tests were flawed and inconclusive. We expect to have much better tests on the Mars 2020 rover which believe it or not is going to be the first Mars lander or rover to actually test for *present* life on Mars since the Viking missions.

The good news is that things like these announcements which were false alarms have made everyone in the field much more cautious when proclaiming they found ET life.

So when we actually DO find ET life the announcement of it will stand on much more solid ground.

It will still be up for debate (as it should be) but the debate is likely to be like the one in the 1990s about whether the first detections exoplanets were really planets:

Short.

And with coorborating evidence in the years after the initial discovery.

Historical reference: There were many exoplanet "false alarm" announcements back in the 1960s (you can see them on my time line in the link in my signature). So when the real announcements were made 20 years ago a lot of astronomers questioned whether it too was another false positive or false alarm.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
This is the guy that works with Wickramasinghe. It's not true. I guess Wickramasinghe's reputation has gotten so bad that they're using Wainwright's name now...

SPEAK ENGLISH GODDAMN IT!!!

originally posted by: HUMBLEONE

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
This is the guy that works with Wickramasinghe. It's not true. I guess Wickramasinghe's reputation has gotten so bad that they're using Wainwright's name now...

SPEAK ENGLISH GODDAMN IT!!!

stfu. your us of a is not whole world, k?