Exclusive: NASA Scientist Claims Evidence of Alien Life on Meteorite

It is a meterorite.

It came through the atmosphere.

It contains evidience of biological samples.

All good.

Could this sample actually be from Earth? Could one of the strikes - such as the one that created the Moon - have not coalesced into our lunar companion, and instead been knocked into a different orbit? Where eventually, it rained back down on Earth again?

Then the sample would still be a meterorite. It would still have biological samples in it.

Where it is from - that's a very interesting question. Ruling out Earth would be good.

reply to post by wingsfan


Great find proves there are things living out there... In my fourth contact voice-ITS NOT AN OWL I MEEN WORM! Now what if possible would it look like evolved?

Originally posted by Leto
since 1961 have something to get excited about (Claus & Nagy, 1961).

And this is why we will never have disclosure Since 1961 and we still can't decide if it is or isn't a bug fossil... since 1947 we still don't know if Roswell was an alien or a balloon...

40 plus years to decide if this is a fossil? Humanity is doomed And when they finally do decide, people will say "meh what's all the fuss about? we knew this 50 years ago "

Originally posted by Aeons
Could this sample actually be from Earth?

Sure could have... what goes up does come down... maybe the Dino killer or the Sudbury asteroid tossed this stuff up, just like it did those miraculous Martian meteorites So maybe some of our rocks landed on Mars and are just lying around on the surface waiting to be picked up...




Maybe that is why NASA rovers found a trilobite on Mars




Trust NASA I always say... for a great laugh

Originally posted by Aeons
It is a meterorite.

It came through the atmosphere.

It contains evidience of biological samples.

All good.

Could this sample actually be from Earth? Could one of the strikes - such as the one that created the Moon - have not coalesced into our lunar companion, and instead been knocked into a different orbit? Where eventually, it rained back down on Earth again?

Then the sample would still be a meterorite. It would still have biological samples in it.

Where it is from - that's a very interesting question. Ruling out Earth would be good.

Well the Orguei meteor is older than Earth, so the fossils it includes must have been of pre-earth organisms, and thus of alien origin.

Originally posted by Leto
Well the Orguei meteor is older than Earth, so the fossils it includes must have been of pre-earth organisms, and thus of alien origin.

Presolar grains are isotopically-distinct clusters of material found in the fine-grained matrix of primitive meteorites, such as chondrites, whose differences from the surrounding meteorite suggest that they are older than the solar system

en.wikipedia.org...

No proof of age

They must have consideration in age, if they are in part thought to be a process formed from supernovae. Then there must be accretion mixing with other material both cosmic and solar, and god knows what else. As far as microbes or whatever they are, actually surviving a burnup into the atmosphere, Aberdeen university have done experiments with that, and found it more than a possibilty according to what kind of meteorite and water content, ablation, and starting cold temperature. I think perhaps the Russians did something similar using rock samples in a reentry. That was very interesting for scientists,

www.universetoday.com...

some details of the Aberdeen experiment is included in the above as well.

I just happened across this earlier:

NASA Refutes Alien Discovery Claim

"NASA is a scientific and technical agency committed to a culture of openness with the media and public. While we value the free exchange of ideas, data, and information as part of scientific and technical inquiry, NASA cannot stand behind or support a scientific claim unless it has been peer-reviewed or thoroughly examined by other qualified experts. This paper was submitted in 2007 to the International Journal of Astrobiology. However, the peer review process was not completed for that submission. NASA also was unaware of the recent submission of the paper to the Journal of Cosmology or of the paper's subsequent publication. Additional questions should be directed to the author of the paper." - Dr. Paul Hertz, chief scientist of NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington

So what can we learn from this statement? Well, it looks as if Hoover's paper didn't make it through the peer-review process when it was first submitted to a reputable science journal in 2007.

The Journal of Cosmology is known to have less than stringent submission guidelines (even though the website claims that articles are peer reviewed by "at least two recognized experts").

I don't think this falsifies the original study; however, it does cast a shadow of doubt on the paper's conclusions, as it has not been properly peer-reviewed. OR, is this NASA disinformation?

Originally posted by Leto

Originally posted by Aeons
It is a meterorite.

It came through the atmosphere.

It contains evidience of biological samples.

All good.

Could this sample actually be from Earth? Could one of the strikes - such as the one that created the Moon - have not coalesced into our lunar companion, and instead been knocked into a different orbit? Where eventually, it rained back down on Earth again?

Then the sample would still be a meterorite. It would still have biological samples in it.

Where it is from - that's a very interesting question. Ruling out Earth would be good.

Well the Orguei meteor is older than Earth, so the fossils it includes must have been of pre-earth organisms, and thus of alien origin.

Unless Earth isn't the first time this pile of rock has aggregated into a planet. I'm being the Devil's Advocate here.

reply to post by Aggie Man

Yes, I see that it just says that the peer process was not completed, and that is said without qualification. Why are they so jumpy? yet they will happily talk about the more exotic things like time travel and worm holes, just because they can exist in theory. Makes you wonder who is doing the real science, instead of putting noses in the air.

Originally posted by Aggie Man
I just happened across this earlier:

NASA Refutes Alien Discovery Claim

"NASA is a scientific and technical agency committed to a culture of openness with the media and public. While we value the free exchange of ideas, data, and information as part of scientific and technical inquiry, NASA cannot stand behind or support a scientific claim unless it has been peer-reviewed or thoroughly examined by other qualified experts. This paper was submitted in 2007 to the International Journal of Astrobiology. However, the peer review process was not completed for that submission. NASA also was unaware of the recent submission of the paper to the Journal of Cosmology or of the paper's subsequent publication. Additional questions should be directed to the author of the paper." - Dr. Paul Hertz, chief scientist of NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington

So what can we learn from this statement? Well, it looks as if Hoover's paper didn't make it through the peer-review process when it was first submitted to a reputable science journal in 2007.

The Journal of Cosmology is known to have less than stringent submission guidelines (even though the website claims that articles are peer reviewed by "at least two recognized experts").

I don't think this falsifies the original study; however, it does cast a shadow of doubt on the paper's conclusions, as it has not been properly peer-reviewed. OR, is this NASA disinformation?

That's just NASA trying to direct all questions to Hoover rather than them. The title "NASA refutes alien discovery claim" is funny seeing as how their statement does nothing to refute the 2007 paper nor the 2011 one, but you can't fault someone for trying to make a catchy title.

the defintion of "refuting" to nasa means spend years talking out your ass, passing the buck, and needlessly airbrushing anything and everything. maybe were better off cutting the billions in funding to them.

It seems that the articles posted as comments on the paper are not really confirming or denying the claims he is making. If in fact he is seeing fossils of bacteria, over 8 billion years old, they could not be from earth.

Originally posted by habfan1968
It seems that the articles posted as comments on the paper are not really confirming or denying the claims he is making. If in fact he is seeing fossils of bacteria, over 8 billion years old, they could not be from earth.

Indeed, that's the key, the Orguei meteor is older than Earth, the fossil is therefore not from Earth and thus it is alien. The implications are so shocking to many that the natural initial response is denial. Not many credentialed people would be willing to go on a limb and say yes it's true it's alien, or no it's false it's not alien because very few of them want to look like fools.

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Leto
Well the Orguei meteor is older than Earth, so the fossils it includes must have been of pre-earth organisms, and thus of alien origin.

Presolar grains are isotopically-distinct clusters of material found in the fine-grained matrix of primitive meteorites, such as chondrites, whose differences from the surrounding meteorite suggest that they are older than the solar system

en.wikipedia.org...

No proof of age

But they don't suggest something like that out of the blue. There was very intelligent and vigorous research and reasoning behind such a large suggestion as this. It is very... extremely likely... they are.

Good Ole NASA Never A Straight Answer... we Need Another Space Agency

Nasa Says "No Support" for Claim Of Alien Microbes
www.abovetopsecret.com...

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Top NASA scientists said Monday there was no scientific evidence to support a colleague's claim that fossils of alien microbes born in outer space had been found in meteorites on Earth. The US space agency formally distanced itself from the paper by NASA scientist Richard Hoover, whose findings were published Friday in the peer-reviewed Journal of Cosmology, which is available free online. "That is a claim that Mr Hoover has been making for some years," said Carl Pilcher, director of NASA's Astrobiology Institute.

Now how stupid is that ?

Whilst trying to find a copy of Hoover's paper on the Cosmology Journal's website I stumbled upon this most intrigueing post titled "Final Statement by the Journal of Cosmology on the
Hoover Microfossil-Meteorite Discovery - All Roads Lead to the Obama White House ". It's on the homepage of www.cosmology.com but you will need to scroll down quite far.



Please take a read, it's fascinating stuff. Basically it appears as if Obama's cronies in the Whitehouse jumped on this story as soon as it went public and set about (via NASA) in totally discrediting this gentlemens research.

I won't waste your time with too much analysis but in my humble opinion this is yet more evidence of the "power that be" trying to desperately maintain the illusion that we are alone and that if the US and its alphabet agencies say something does not exist then it does not exist!

reply to post by zarniewoop


Wow, that was quite the read.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention Zarniwoop.