Scientists revive 100-million-year old microbes from deep underground

a reply to: 727Sky

Those aren't microbes... Those are the remains of humans.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: 727Sky

Here comes the greygoo or COVID 20.

Doomporn aside, this is actually rather interesting.

The coronavirus is probably something the Chinese revived from the Jurassic era... A prehistoric cold.

a reply to: chris_stibrany

I think they teleported the Nazi yeti from their Moonbase.

I take it you mean Operation Tabarin/Operation Highjump or the like?

Rear Admiral Richard Byrd talks about such in his diaries, but now we are bordering on the premise of some kind of Hollow Earth bulltard.

a reply to: andy06shake

arright mate?

a reply to: LSU2018

Or simply out of natures petri dish, with the spread of such enabled via its 14 day incubation period, combined with the mass transit hubs and infrastructure we now have in place across the globe.

My monies on nature I'm afraid.

a reply to: chris_stibrany

Aye, fair to middle today.

How about yourself?

a reply to: andy06shake
It's a joke. lol

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: 727Sky

Should be titled "Scientists revive microbes older we guess than 50,000 years from deep underground"

Lately I can't seem to get an straight answer how any can guess the age of things older than 50,000 years



www.abovetopsecret.com...


wiki radiocarbon dating

Carbon dating is unreliable for objects older than about 30,000 years, but uranium-thorium dating may be possible for objects up to half a million years old, Dr. Zindler said.

I don't know how they can date, semi-accurately, anything older than a few hundred years unless there's a date stamped on it.

It is astounding, and potentially a bit scary, in terms of unleashing something we have no defence against.

a reply to: MorpheusUSA

Sound but I'm not Australian.

Byrd's diary is actually good reading, all the outlandish stuff where Antarctica is concerned generally is.

Need to take it with a pinch of salt all the same.

a reply to: EverythingsWrong

Last time I did that, I saw a gazelle get ripped apart by a pack of lions because it entered the wrong territory. Don't rule out cannibalistic tribes that'll eat you if they catch you, too. We're a lot less hideous than civilized people. It just happens to be that some people among us aren't as civilized now.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: 727Sky

Should be titled "Scientists revive microbes older we guess than 50,000 years from deep underground"

Lately I can't seem to get an straight answer how any can guess the age of things older than 50,000 years



www.abovetopsecret.com...


wiki radiocarbon dating

Carbon dating is unreliable for objects older than about 30,000 years, but uranium-thorium dating may be possible for objects up to half a million years old, Dr. Zindler said.

I don't know how they can date, semi-accurately, anything older than a few hundred years unless there's a date stamped on it.

Radio carbon dating is fairly accurate, there are other methods for dating geology, they can't radio carbon date these microbes, they must be using geological methods/timeframe.

How is a good question on the microbes, but Radio Carbon is well established for shorter timeframes.

a reply to: andy06shake

We can beat it... We're earthlings.

But they do say the end of the world is near... Plagues, aliens, microbes from millions of years ago that could come back to life and possibly turn the weak immune systems into hellish beasts....

This is just the beginning.

originally posted by: vonclod

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: 727Sky

Should be titled "Scientists revive microbes older we guess than 50,000 years from deep underground"

Lately I can't seem to get an straight answer how any can guess the age of things older than 50,000 years



www.abovetopsecret.com...


wiki radiocarbon dating

Carbon dating is unreliable for objects older than about 30,000 years, but uranium-thorium dating may be possible for objects up to half a million years old, Dr. Zindler said.

I don't know how they can date, semi-accurately, anything older than a few hundred years unless there's a date stamped on it.

Radio carbon dating is fairly accurate, there are other methods for dating geology, they can't radio carbon date these microbes, they must be using geological methods/timeframe.

How is a good question on the microbes, but Radio Carbon is well established for shorter timeframes.

I'm not trying to argue about it. I just don't see how, without the use of a time machine for verification, a 1,000,000 year old rock can be dated accurately and known without the shadow of a doubt that the date is accurate. Who's there to say "Yep, the carbon date is correct and I know without a doubt that this rock right here is 1,003,466 years old."? Nobody, that's who. It's all just a guess.

a reply to: LSU2018

More like the end of the beginning.

The end of the world is always near.

And yet here we are plodding along regardless.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: vonclod

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: 727Sky

Should be titled "Scientists revive microbes older we guess than 50,000 years from deep underground"

Lately I can't seem to get an straight answer how any can guess the age of things older than 50,000 years



www.abovetopsecret.com...


wiki radiocarbon dating

Carbon dating is unreliable for objects older than about 30,000 years, but uranium-thorium dating may be possible for objects up to half a million years old, Dr. Zindler said.

I don't know how they can date, semi-accurately, anything older than a few hundred years unless there's a date stamped on it.

Radio carbon dating is fairly accurate, there are other methods for dating geology, they can't radio carbon date these microbes, they must be using geological methods/timeframe.

How is a good question on the microbes, but Radio Carbon is well established for shorter timeframes.

I'm not trying to argue about it. I just don't see how, without the use of a time machine for verification, a 1,000,000 year old rock can be dated accurately and known without the shadow of a doubt that the date is accurate. Who's there to say "Yep, the carbon date is correct and I know without a doubt that this rock right here is 1,003,466 years old."? Nobody, that's who. It's all just a guess.

Carbon dating is only good for 30-40,000 years back. They are doing something else for this..Phage!..calling Dr Phage!

www.nature.com...

originally posted by: EverythingsWrong
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

So tell me dear man what exactly is amazing and beautiful..........an act of kindness or love.........that is the point, shouldn’t that be the norm.

Take a trip into deep oceans, barrier reefs, deepest jungles, African wilderness or even sit atop the highest mountain and see nature at its best - equilibrium - now travel to the fringes of society - which would appear as paradise, nature at its best or what ‘man’ has created.

Intellect isn’t a beautiful amazing thing..........well maybe it is only we have used it incorrectly.

Now if every invention that we would have created would have been to enhance nature I wouldn’t need to comment but man is destructive, greedy and simply evil..........unfortunately it is what it is and we live with it but it could have been so much different.

It is sad that you willfully wallow in such darkness. There is endless beauty in the physical human as well as what is in their spirit. Nature can be destructive, selfish, ugly, and out of balance, all without the presence of human beings.

Society is no paradise, but neither is living an existence at the whims of nature and the elements.

What you fail to see is that we are natural, we do what is natural for our species, the good, the bad and the ugly. All our worst characteristics can be found in abundance in nature, as is all of nature's beauty within us.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Nature may very well be destructive, but she's also efficient.

As to nature being selfish or ugly, well those are very human constructs.

Nature entertains no such illusions.

Balance is the ticket indeed, nature can not function effectively when the balance is out of kilter.

As to all of nature's beauty within us???

We are simply one species, that have been around for what amounts to little more than a heartbeat in the grand scheme of our Earth's history.

a reply to: andy06shake

Same ol #e.
So . cant complain. alright so.

This is another example of why I think life will turn out to be common in the universe. Extremophile species have been found in a liquid asphalt lake and clustered around hydrothermal vents 8,000 feet underwater. I suspect we’ll discover many alien species in the solar system.