Life from Beyond Earth on a Meteorite, or Pareidolia?

| 36 Comments

Fossils of life or inorganic fibers? Image of alleged “microfossils” from “Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites: Implications to Life on Comets, Europa, and Enceladus Richard B. Hoover Journal of Cosmology, 2011, Vol 13, xxx.

A recent paper published in the Journal of Cosmology has claimed to have discovered evidence of fossil bacteria in a rare subclass of carbonaceous meteorite. The implications of this paper, should it be correct, are enormous and the blogosphere has gone into overdrive discussing it. There are interesting analyses by the Bad Astronomer, PZ Myers and Rosie Redfield.

Rosie Redmond’s analysis is more detailed (and Rosie being the microbiologist who burst the “Arsenic Bacteria” bubble, knows she her stuff), but all posts quickly get to the heart of the matter; the “evidence” is a bunch of squiggly stuff that bears little resemblance to actual bacterial fossils unless you obscure the details by rescaling the images.

(scroll down for an update)

Magnesium Sulfate nanobelts from J. Phys. Chem. B, 2006, 110 (27), pp 13387-13392

That’s my conclusion too. While I’m not a professional astrobiologist (nor do I play one on TV), it is a hobby of mine and I’ve spent a fair amount of time looking at genuine images of cyanobacterial fossils (it’s all part of my project). And once upon a time I worked (very briefly) as a microbiologist. I’ve also been exposed to far too much X-ray spectroscopy, due to a collaboration with the Chemistry Department in my waking hours.

I won’t cover the ground already covered by Dr. Redmond and the others, but to briefly recap, trying to establish that rods and spheres seen in rock represent actual bacterial fossils is incredibly difficult. These things look like a wide variety of filamentous non-fossil inorganic material (here’s one example) such as you can find in a variety of rocks. From cyanobacterila fossils in ancient earth rocks, to the Alan Hills Martian meteorite, establishing that a suite of features is distinctively biogenic is a nightmare. There have been several reports of supposed bacteria in meteors before with contamination being the culprit (and Dr. Hoover has reported fossil bacteria before as well, to little effect).

One major bugbear is contamination of samples. Bacteria are everywhere on earth, and can get into the most difficult places, so decades old meteorites can be presumed to be contaminated. Dr. Hoover used X-Ray spectroscopy to do elemental analysis on the presumed fossil structures, so as to eliminate the possibility they were modern contaminants. Despite the strange choices of controls (Skin flakes from mummies?), I think he shows fairly convincingly that these structures are not modern contaminants.

What he doesn’t show anywhere near convincingly at all is that they are fossil biological structures. The elemental signature is quite interesting, with high levels of magnesium and sulfur. Almost like, well, magnesium sulfate. It ought to, as the idea put forward in the paper is that the magnesium sulfate in the meteorite ‘s parent body has infiltrated and replaced the organic material of the original bacteria.

But, and this is a big but, magnesium sulfate can produce ribbon-like structures that look very like the supposed “fossils” (see image above, and compare with the supposed fossil image, as well as supposed “fossils” from Figure 2 and Figure 3). So, how do we decide between ribbon-like magnesium sulfate structures that have replaced bacterial structures and ribbon-like magnesium sulfate structures that form abiotically?

There’s a bit of carbon in it, but contamination of magnesium sulfate with magnesium carbonate (which is quite common) would produce this spectrum (see the spectra in the J Phys Chem paper). Also, the whole meteor is full of organic kerogens, which can be produced abiotically (eg the Urey-Miller reaction, or the UV-mediated reactions that make kerogen in the atmosphere of Titan). So merely having a little bit of carbon is no evidence of a biotic origin.

The paper makes much of differences in sulfur abundances between the filaments and the bulk meteorite. However, the elemental profiles and concentrations are virtually identical between the “fossils” and the matrix, and the variation is almost certainly no more than instrumental error (the X-ray spectroscopy person was not impressed and is on the inorganic, magnesium sulfate/carbonate whisker side)*.

So, the evidence that these filaments are fossil microorganisms is a) They are not modern bacteria (good evidence and a good first step) and that b) They are inorganic (this does not establish that they are fossil organisms at all).

Summing up, what has been reported is a bunch of filaments that look like a variety of mineral filaments (especially figures 2 and 3), and don’t look much like actual cyanobacterial fossils at all. To support the existence of extraplanetary life, you are going to need more than what looks like SEM and X-ray images of magnesium sulfate whiskers.

UPDATE: Smoking gun, observations of magnesium sulfate bacteria-like structures forming in the meteors due to post-landing changes in water content. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/[…]b01827.x/pdf Thanks to commenter Anb at Bad Astronomy for finding the paper

*It would help if they had decent tables, and scaled the X-ray profiles to the same scale, instead of being all over the place. The wildly varying scales of the filament images has also been mentioned, making comparison difficult. And they never actually show elemental analysis of fossil cyanobacteria beyond the amount of nitrogen, you would think this kind of data critical. The control data on the magnesium sulfate is never presented either. The whole paper is a dogs breakfast. **The publicity claims the Journal of Cosmology will publish all the commentaries they have received, but as of writing none have appeared.

UPDATE: Commentaries have now been mounted.

36 Comments

It’s Rosie Redfield not Redmond

On the lighter side, this has been picked up also by our friends at Uncommon Descent, where it is seemingly endorsed by Denyse O’Leary, who cited a Rob Sheldon, a colleague of Hoover’s, as saying (among other things) that

The pictures have made him a sensation in the French Academy, the Belgian Academy and the Russian Academy. Experts in microbiology have examined the pictures and not only verified their biological identity, but asked how he obtained such clarity that exceeds what they can accomplish in the laboratory. (Freeze dry for a thousand years…) The only people that continue to shun him are the US and NASA.

Ah yes, the learned Academies holding general meetings of their memberships to draw dramatic conclusions. A classic Hollywood – and crackpot – view of how science works. Hoover works at NASA and they know him. As NASA has not been timid about making claims in other cases such as the claimed arsenic-based life forms, if they hesitate to publicize this case, maybe they know him all too well.

I don’t think O’Leary was endorsing it. Perhaps your sarcasm meter needs a tune-up.

Neil Rickert said:

I don’t think O’Leary was endorsing it. Perhaps your sarcasm meter needs a tune-up.

She intiially was dismissive, then in the followup post (the one I cited) said

In response to someone who wondered whether American scientists might be letting their imaginations run away with them about this spectacular new alien life find, Rob Sheldon offers “absolutely not”. Au contraire, the French were onto it and NASA dropped the ball. On why that happened, he says, NASA’s attitude is an example of [snip Sheldon quote]

The UD folks are usually immediately negative about any claim of evidence favorable to life outside Earth, such as habitable planets elsewhere. This time O’Leary seems to have succumbed to the temptation of claiming that in this case “Darwinists” are dismissing and surpressing valid science. So she is perhaps ambivalent. I said “seemingly endorsed”, not definitely endorsed.

As O’Leary’s position on anything is usually hard to fathom, I think the real interest to me is the rhetoric from Sheldon about Academies Getting Excited and Other Academies Suppressing Work.

Carbon has a number of allotropes.

But this is not the only element or compound that does. Boron nitride forms nanotubes; and many other compounds can form ribbons as well as a number of other structures.

This phenomenon complicates the search for structures that might form the basis of living organisms in other environments. At the moment, we can only look for what is familiar from our experience here on Earth.

Whether or not some of these structures can form the template or catalyst for living structures in other temperature ranges in the presence of other concentrations of chemicals is still an open question. The sheer complexity and variety in what we already know about portends that we will find much more of these kinds of structure in the search for living organisms.

But jumping to such bold conclusions based on structure is as bad a science as the claim that it looks designed therefore it is designed.

Joe Felsenstein said: As (Denyse) O’Leary’s position on anything is usually hard to fathom…

There’s a reason for that: “Denyse O’Leary is a Canadian intelligent design apologist who claims to be a journalist.” Much more at http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Denyse_O’Leary

I see some unusual material in the press release for the closing down of the journal that published this paper. Apparently it was “killed by thieves and crooks,” i.e. NASA and the US government generally, who are in bed with their competitors. Initially I thought assessments of the outfit were kind of harsh, but now I’m pretty sure all the blogosphere criticism may have been onto something possibly maybe.

NASA is bureaucratic, but the agency has good reasons to be cautious about endorsing astrobiology research since it’s advanced arguable research along such lines in the past. “Once bit …”

The lack of comments here probably reflects the fact that this is being covered very extensively at Pharyngula.

Summary -

1) Small organic molecules can be found on meteorites. Some speculate that this may be related to abiogenesis on earth. But this is NOT what Hoover is talking about.

2) It would be an audacious claim, needing of most rigorous supporting work, to suggest that unique self-replicating forms, adapted to the near zero gravity, extreme temperature, no atmosphere/radiation shielding environment of meteorites, independently arose on meteorites. But EVEN THIS is NOT what Hoover is claiming.

3) Hoover is claiming that a) earth-like prokaryotes live on meteorites and also has a record of arguing that b) these meteorite prokaryotes survived the entry of a meteorite into earth’s atmosphere, colonized the earth, and are the ancestors of today’s terrestrial biosphere. Again, the basic claim here is that highly specialized earth-like prokaryotes not only live on near-zero-gravity, extreme temperature, no atmosphere meteorites, but in fact, originated there and later colonized earth.

Attempting to support a claim this radical with subjective microscopy is silly. Now, if someone can take an uncontaminated sample from a meteorite in outer space that has not recently been in earth’s atmosphere and culture prokaryotes, or at least find earth-like DNA sequences, I’ll be utterly, utterly astounded, but will rethink. In the meantime, this is a pack of nonsense.

It’s nice to know what the stuff in the micrographs probably really is, but even if it couldn’t be identified, the claims made deserve the strongest possible skepticism.

As every TRUE scientist knows, if something looks like something then that something MUST be assumed to be the something that it appears to be unless and until someone proves that it’s impossible for that something to be the apparent something that it looks like, even if that something could potentially (but not certainly) be something else.

Quid pro quo, the meteorites are scientifically proven to be fossilized space life. Or something like that.

Joe Felsenstein said:

On the lighter side, this has been picked up also by our friends at Uncommon Descent, where it is seemingly endorsed by Denyse O’Leary…

Perhaps she ran Hoover’s results through the Explanatory Filter and found evidence of design, confirming Hoover’s conclusions to be true…

Paul Burnett said:

Joe Felsenstein said: As (Denyse) O’Leary’s position on anything is usually hard to fathom…

There’s a reason for that: “Denyse O’Leary is a Canadian intelligent design apologist who claims to be a journalist.” Much more at http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Denyse_O’Leary

I tend to think of Denyse O’Leary as the Dishonesty Institute Minister of Propganda for the British Commonwealth. Am delighted she is doing such a grand job tending to her duties.

jkc said:

Joe Felsenstein said:

On the lighter side, this has been picked up also by our friends at Uncommon Descent, where it is seemingly endorsed by Denyse O’Leary…

Perhaps she ran Hoover’s results through the Explanatory Filter and found evidence of design, confirming Hoover’s conclusions to be true…

Why not, given her friend Bill’s Panglossian view of statistics, confidence limits and so forth.

Paul Burnett said:

Joe Felsenstein said: As (Denyse) O’Leary’s position on anything is usually hard to fathom…

There’s a reason for that: “Denyse O’Leary is a Canadian intelligent design apologist who claims to be a journalist.” Much more at http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Denyse_O’Leary

Sorry Paul, a typo so am reposting this:

I tend to think of Denyse O’Leary as the Dishonesty Institute Minister of Propaganda for the British Commonwealth. Am delighted she is doing such a grand job tending to her duties.

Am sure some will say that irony meter has gone into critical given the fact that I’m also listed at RW, but in retrospect, as others, like Dale Husband have noted here, that entry pertaining to me reads more like high school classroom juvenalia. In Denyse’s case, she is really worthy of this “honor”. Moreover, I believe she has replaced our mutual “friend” Bill Dembski as the leading UD commentator par excellence (I guess Bill must be busy trying to use his “Christian” probability theory and statistics to demonstrate to us all that he’s still more of a “genius” as based upon his world-shattering discoveries of the Explanatory Filter and Complex Specified Information, Of course I can’t wait to read that he’s translated this back into the original Klingon.).

this is classical “magical” thinking - it looks like “x” so it effexts “x” (sort of like hhow in the middle ages walnuts were belived to be good for headaches - beause they resembled brains)

from wikipedia The Principle of Similarity: The principle of similarity, also known as the “association of ideas,” which falls under the category of “sympathetic magic,” is the thought that if a certain result follows a certain action, then that action must be responsible for the result. Therefore, if one is to perform this action again, the same result can again be expected. One classic example of this mode of thought is that of the rooster and the sunrise. When a rooster crows, it is a response to the rising of the sun. Based on sympathetic magic, one might interpret these series of events differently. The law of similarity would suggest that since the sunrise follows the crowing of the rooster, the rooster must have caused the sun to rise.[11] Causality is inferred where it should not have been. Therefore, a practitioner might believe that if he is able to cause the rooster to crow, he will be able to control the timing of the sunrise.

(sorry for double post I hit submit vs preview)

this is classical “magical” thinking - it looks like “x” so it effects “x” (sort of like how in the middle ages walnuts were believed to be good for headaches - because they resembled brains)

from wikipedia The Principle of Similarity: The principle of similarity, also known as the “association of ideas,” which falls under the category of “sympathetic magic,” is the thought that if a certain result follows a certain action, then that action must be responsible for the result. Therefore, if one is to perform this action again, the same result can again be expected. One classic example of this mode of thought is that of the rooster and the sunrise. When a rooster crows, it is a response to the rising of the sun. Based on sympathetic magic, one might interpret these series of events differently. The law of similarity would suggest that since the sunrise follows the crowing of the rooster, the rooster must have caused the sun to rise.[11] Causality is inferred where it should not have been. Therefore, a practitioner might believe that if he is able to cause the rooster to crow, he will be able to control the timing of the sunrise.

so based on that thinking - these structures resemble ‘bacteria’ , bacteria is the most ‘primitive’ form of life on earth - therefore the meteorites caused life on earth- see perfectly logical from a dark ages wizardry point of view

John Kwok said:

I tend to think of Denyse O’Leary as the Dishonesty Institute Minister of Propaganda for the British Commonwealth.

Do you think we could get her sent on a prolonged mission to evangelise the inhabitants of Rockall?

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockall )

I was assuming that the discussion of coffee on the Geyser thread was a satirical dig.

Kevin B said:

John Kwok said:

I tend to think of Denyse O’Leary as the Dishonesty Institute Minister of Propaganda for the British Commonwealth.

Do you think we could get her sent on a prolonged mission to evangelise the inhabitants of Rockall?

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockall )

I was assuming that the discussion of coffee on the Geyser thread was a satirical dig.

I think a far more hospitable place for my favorite Canadian DI mendacious intellectual pornographer might be Lake Vostok:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Vostok

I think that might be a far more appropriate locale for her evangelising, don’t you think?

Jasonmitchell -

I strongly agree with your points, but there is some preliminary evidence that a diet high in beneficial oils may reduce migraine frequency and severity.

This has not been tested with walnut oil, and the results with olive oil and fish oil were suggestive, but there was no control group. It’s worth noting that some people think that nuts trigger their migraine headaches, too, and that there are no similar studies for the more common tension headache (which is relatively harmless and easily treatable, and thus not a priority for funding).

I bother to mention this because, as disorganized, brutal, superstitious, etc, as people tended to be in the “middle ages”, and as poor as their folk medicine choices were, a fair amount of their traditional folk medicine (note - NOT their “academic” medicine) was based on empiricism, and some of our more powerful non-antibiotic medications are based on originals from either Native American or Medieval folk medicine.

I also bother to mention it to note that, relative to available means of reality-testing, beer-guzzling Medieval peasants were perhaps more rational than post-modern reality denying crackpots.

Hi everyone. It’s my first time posting on PT, although I’ve been reading the site for quite a while.

The Journal of Cosmology has recently issued a statement regarding the Hoover article, right before the article. If anyone had any doubts about this journal’s credibility (or lack thereof), these may now be forever laid to rest.

Here is a brief excerpt:

Have the Terrorist Won? Only a few crackpots and charlatans have denounced the Hoover study. NASA’s chief scientist was charged with unprofessional conduct for lying publicly about the Journal of Cosmology and the Hoover paper. The same crackpots, self-promoters, liars, and failures, are quoted repeatedly in the media. However, where is the evidence the Hoover study is not accurate? Few legitimate scientists have come forward to contest Hoover’s findings. Why is that? Because the evidence is solid. But why have so few scientists come forward to attest to the validity? The answer is: They are afraid. They are terrified.

Hmm. Sounds like they failed to get the prescription for the meds refilled.

But why have so few scientists come forward to attest to the validity? The answer is: They are afraid. They are terrified.

hells yeah!

anyone who isn’t never saw the documentary:

The Andromeda Strain

good thing all it took was a good rain to clear that mess up.

:P

They published a list of comments about the paper now. Lots of comments from people who cite lots of other JoC publications (gee..), at least 3 comments from people associated, or published by, the JoC. Some positive feedback, but few from people claiming a relevant background. Lots and lots of speculations on the implications of the paper. Yawn.

slang said:

They published a list of comments about the paper now. Lots of comments from people who cite lots of other JoC publications (gee..), at least 3 comments from people associated, or published by, the JoC. Some positive feedback, but few from people claiming a relevant background. Lots and lots of speculations on the implications of the paper. Yawn.

Funny how a small bunch of magnesium sulfate ribbons is causing such a ruccus.

Prometheus68 said:

slang said:

They published a list of comments about the paper now. Lots of comments from people who cite lots of other JoC publications (gee..), at least 3 comments from people associated, or published by, the JoC. Some positive feedback, but few from people claiming a relevant background. Lots and lots of speculations on the implications of the paper. Yawn.

Funny how a small bunch of magnesium sulfate ribbons is causing such a ruccus.

Seems like Rosie Redfield has hit the proverbial nail on the head with regards to this. This paper was poorly vetted IMHO.

not true. There is no life outside the earth. First because the bible says Gods spirit gave life as a special action on earth. Secong because of the fall and the reality in the universe thats its in a damaged state there could not be life out there that would also be under the fall curse. Unfair. Life out there either could not decay or its decay is our fault. The former is impossible and the latter is impossible. Don’t bet your savings on this rock with bugs.

Robert, I’m really curious what the response from the JournalOfCosmology will be when you send them this scathing, rock solid review. :)

Aha! Proof at last! The moon landings were a hoax! Life “outside the Earth” is impossible!

Hey Robbie, are there live people in the ISS? Is there even a real ISS, or is it all a hoax by evolutionist NASA conspirators to make little kids believe in “evolutionism”?

Seriously, can you grasp the difference here between science and your fundamentalist religious attitude?

Science says “We don’t know if there’s life beyond Earth yet. There could be. We can see no physical reason why there can’t be, since the same laws of nature seem to apply throughout the observable universe. In fact, it seems likely that there should be extraterrestrial life somewhere. However, since we have seen no real proof of its existence yet, we’re going to be very skeptical of any such claims until there’s indisputable, verified, repeatable proof.”

Robert’s crackpot religion says “There can’t possibly be any because of what I think the Bible means when it’s not even talking about extraterrestrial life.”

The same crackpotterey once held that it was impossible for the Earth to be spherical, since the Bible clearly says it’s flat. And that the Sun goes around it. And that there’s no such thing as germs, and they don’t cause disease.

Hmm…science or the Bible–which one is more likely to provide the real answers about the physical world?

What’s most interesting is the standard such a claim must meet to be considered likely. For science, that standard is so obvious (sufficiently unambiguous evidence) that the Byers standard (what he thinks his scripture says about something else) seems incomprehensible. But Byers applies the same standard to everything, he’s entirely consistent. Yeah, he’s always hilariously wrong, but always for the same reason.

Robert Byers said:

not true. There is no life outside the earth. First because the bible says Gods spirit gave life as a special action on earth. Secong because of the fall and the reality in the universe thats its in a damaged state there could not be life out there that would also be under the fall curse. Unfair. Life out there either could not decay or its decay is our fault. The former is impossible and the latter is impossible. Don’t bet your savings on this rock with bugs.

You need to consult with the Klingons, Vorlons and the Time Lords. I think they may respectively beg to differ.

Anyway, on the Byers Scale of Breathtaking Inanity, yours rates a 7.0 for me. Not bad Booby, not bad. Maybe next time you can coach your fellow delusional Canadian, Denyse O’Leary, better known as the Dishonesty Institute Minister of Propaganda for the British Commonwealth.

prof.Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya: March 16, 2011 at 5:36 am The earliest unicellular life in earth is a bacterium and life came in the earth possibly from an asteroid

Authors_: Professor Pranab kumar Bhattacharya- MD(cal) Patho, FIC Path(Ind),Presently Professor of Pathology, RIO , The Medical college, Kolkata -73 W.B and Ex- Additional Professor of department of Pathology, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education & Research,244 AJC Bose Road, Kolkata-20, West Bengal, India** Mr. Rupak Bhattacharya-Bsc(cal), Msc(JU), 7/51 Purbapalli, Sodepur, Dist 24 Parganas(north) Kol-110,West Bengal, India ***Mr.Ritwik Bhattacharya B.com(cal), ***Mr Soumyak Bhattacharya MBA of residence7/51 Purbapalli, Sodepur, Dist 24 parganas(north) ,Kolkata-110,WestBengal, India****Miss Upasana Bhattacharya- Student, Mahamayatala, Garia, kol-86, only daughter of Prof.PK Bhattacharya**** Mrs. Dalia Mukherjee BA(hons) Cal, Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north) West Bengal, India**** Miss Aindrila Mukherjee-Student ,Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north), West Bengal, India****; Mr. Surajit Sarkar BSC DMLT Technician Pathology, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education & Research,244 a AJC Bose Road, Kolkata-20, West Bengal, India , Kolkata-20

When the life did was actually originated in the earth and the rate of evolution and diversification of the earliest biota is still continued to be a very fascinating question before the astrobiologist and before the world scientific community. Similarly it is still unclear that when and how physiologically modern ecosystem based on oxygen producing photosynthesis really became established in the planet the earth [12]. The sole source of direct evidence relevant to such a question is plaeo-biologic record, contained in the rocks deposited during the Archieanon period of the earth history. It is almost >3500 MYR [Million years Ago]. The search for Archiean fossils was done with very difficulties. Few Archean sedimentary rocks had survived to the present time and paleobiological evidence in most of such rocks had been possible severely altered by metamorphism. In order to establish authenticity, arching microfossils, five principals criteria must be satisfied as per present authors. The positive microfossils I) must occur in rocks of known province ii) must be of established Archaean age by carbon dating iii) be demonstrably indigenous IV) synergic with primary deposition of enclosing rocks v) be assured biological origin by all microbiological, rRNA and DNA tests. All but a few of the microfossils like objects reported from Archean sediments have failed to meet one or more of these requirements. Other then filamentous Apex fossils, Archean Micro fossils record consist of two types of Cyano bacterium like filaments from~2750MYR old collnial uni- cell nonspecific bacterium like filaments ~3450MYR of Swazi land super group of south Africa. Apex filaments indicate that these primitive families of filamentous cyanobacteria were already highly diverse at the apex time. Although some cyanobacteria were capable of temporarily carrying out anoxic bacterial photosynthesis, oxygen producing photo autotrophy was then universal. These cyanobacteria had advanced level of physical evolution as early as ~3465MYR[William J Schoof- Science Vol260; P640; 1993]. Today all eukaryotes and other prokaryotes share a common ancestor with all the Archie bacteria whose members led pretyg exotic lives. The methane producing Methanogens, halophytes that dwell in salty environments and the eocytes. The rRNA study showed that Archie bacteria, an in other super class of prokaryotes, the eu-bacteria which include pathogen E.Coli are all closely related to each other and as a group they are very closely related to eu-karyotes. Archie-bacteria constitute one of the major evolutionary lineages on earth. Previously these prokaryotes were thought to predominate in only a few unusual and disparate niches, characterized by hyper saline, extremely hot or strictly anoxic conditions. In 1992, phylotypes of Archie bacteria had been detected in coastal and in subsurface of marine water also. Edward [Edward F Delong- Nature Vol371; P695; 1994] described high abundance of exceptionally archival in frigid marine surface water of Antarctica. Pre algae Archie constituted up to 34% of prokaryotic biomass in coastal Antarctica surface water and they were also abundant in a verity of other cold pelagic marine environment. These bacteria were typified by rRNA. Of al Antarctica bacteria sample collected in late austral water contained exceptionally high abundance of Archieal rRNA about18-30% of total pico plenkoton rRNA or 21-34% of total prokaryotic rRNA was archieal origin. Finding of Archie bacteria in these days was unexpected event and stands against Darwin’s theory of evolution. The Archie bacteria are live members of a group of microorganism that seem almost too Alien to have evolved on each. They resemble normal bacteria but are actually no more close to those bacteria than are to humans. The most obvious characteristics appear to be a taste for extreme temperature environment, which a large percentage of them inhibited. Various species live at temperature above the boiling point of water in lakes satire than the Dead Sea, in water more alkaline than household ammonia, more acidic environment than gastric juice and at consisting pressure of ocean depth. An Archie bacterium thus belongs to an independent kingdom, separate from eukariotes and also from other bacteria. The most dramatic selling of Arachae bacteria is found today in volcanic areas both on land and sea. On land, the hot gas and sulfurous fumes that leak out from earth produces Solfatara fields which can be found in such places as Iceland, Italy and yellow stones park. On the sea floor hydrothermal vents spew out sulfurous gas along with water at temperature that can reach hundred of degrees centigrade. Arachae bacteria is found to survive and grow at temperature up to 120 0c which is the highest temperature at which any organism not been ever found to survive. Methanopyrous a genus of Arachae bacteria family survive even at this temperature. Thermo toga Genus can survive up to 90 0c. Many of these thermophylic organisms live on organic materials combining carbon with hydrogen to form methane gas. Others get their energy by combining sulpher with hydrogen to form hydrogen sulphide. Arachae bacteria must have found some way to keep their DNA from unraveling. That might be possible by a type of his tone like protein discovered in microbes. When this protein is added to DNA in vitro, DNA can withstand temperature 30-40c higher than usual temperature The other possibility was that the double stranded DNA of arachaebacteria were twisted more strongly then the DNA of other creature evolved which would make it harder for the strand to separate.[Bhattacharya Pranab Kumar-2005] [ 1] Probably about once in almost every decade a scientific discovery is reported that brings out passionate debate concerning the possible existence of extraterrestrial life, and panspermia theory [Bhattacharya-2009] [13], past or present. Nagy et al. (1961) [2] reported the occurrence of biogenic hydrocarbons in the Orgueil meteorite and then subsequently went on to describe possible relict microstructures that looked similar to microbial life forms on Earth (e.g. Nagy et al., 1963) [3]. Levin and Straat (1976) [4] reported the results of experiments performed during the Viking Mission to Mars that could be interpreted as possible evidence for extant microbial life in the outer space. Engel and Nagy (1982) [5] reported the occurrence of non-racemic amino acids in the Murchison meteorite (L-enantiomer excess) that could be interpreted as possible evidence for past extraterrestrial life. McKay et al. (1996) [ 6] reported possible evidence for fossil microbial life in the Martian meteorite ALH84001. The question was whether life started first in Rocks or in ocean? For last decade, geologists also have looked at water droplets entangled in ancient Rocks — called fluid inclusions – of thousands years old trapped in the rocks found in death valley or saline valley of California USA and from Michigan, Kansas and Italy[ temperature in these locations are 130 degree Fahrenheit or more] and they wondered that microbes could be extracted from them. Fluid inclusions have been found inside salt crystals ranging in age from thousands to hundreds of millions years old. But there had always been a question about whether the organisms cultured from salt crystals are genuinely ancient material or of extraterrestrial origin or whether they are modern-day world contaminants,[science daily 22nd November-2010] and research on reviewed existing literature and they confirmed that microbes or allege DNA were over 100,000 years back and could survive as the conditions inside these water droplets are ideally suited to preserving their DNA Richard Hoover[2011] [7] very recently had discovered evidence of microfossils similar to Cyanobacteria, as we discussed early in the article, in freshly fractured slices of the interior surfaces of the Alais, Ivuna, and Orgueil CI1 carbonaceous meteorites and in ALH 84001 meteorite based on Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM) and other measures, This me- teorite seemed to have been ejected from the Planet Mars on earth, a few billion years ago and after a long and circuitous journey fell to Earth and remained buried in the Antarctic region for a few thousand years. Woo ! it proves pan-spermia theory and life in this planet appeared from Asteroids [1,13] Richard Hoover [7] has concluded they are indigenous to these meteors and are similar to trichomic cyanobacteria and other trichomic prokaryotes such as filamentous sulfur bacteria. He concludes these fossilized bacteria are not Earthly contaminants at all but are the fossilized remains of living organisms which lived in the parent bodies of these meteors, e.g. comets, moons, and other astral bodies. The implications are that life is everywhere, and that life on Earth may have come from other planets. [1,13]. Based on a genomic analysis, that DNA-based life has a genetic ancestry leading backwards in time over 10 billion years [8,9,10] (Joseph, Wickramasinghe, Wainwright 2011; Sharov 2009), which is twice the age of Earth. Comet / asteroid was a source of origin of life in this planet the earth? A comet is a dirty icy snowball and much of the dirty materials are organic material formaldehyde, hydrogen and more complex substances. In cold interstellar molecular clouds gaseous species such as H2O2, CO, CO2, CH3OH, H2O and NH3 are believed to condense on to sub micron carbonaceous grain to form these icy mantes. By a combination of process that included gas grain, chemical reactions, ultraviolet photolysis and cosmic ray bombardment these components could meet further to produce small amount of complex organic compound. Icy planetismals that probably formed through successive aggregation and agglomeration of such ice-coated grain might have carried significant amount of pre-biotic organic molecules to this earth during its early history. But these organic substances must had been destroyed by the heat generated of impact as comet bombarded in the early earth? If these fragile compounds had some how survived, they could have provided the starting point for the chemical evolution that led to more complex molecules like amino acids, nucleic acids and ultimately giant molecule “The RNA or DNA’. So in that case there needed extra terrestrial source of organic compounds. Carl Sagon [Science 27th July 1990, P366] told that only small parts of comets flowing in the earth atmosphere would stay cool enough to preserve the organic chemicals. J.Mayo Greenberg was however in favoring of comet as source of compounds as origin of life in this planet the earth. According to Greenberg the Icy particles make up the comets. In his laboratory, he made icy particles that make up comets. To create them he condensed mixture of water vapor, methane, CO, and other gases present in the interstellar spaces on a glass plate cooled to~100K. The Icy was amorphous like a comet ice, having a disorderly molecular structure rather then crystalline one. Amorphous ice conducts heat more slowly then the crystalline ice. Greenberg found that when ice was deposited very slowly as it would be in the interstellar grains it’s thermal conductivity become slower and slower by a factors 10,000-100,000, because of lesser connectedness’ of water molecules that had accumulated slowly. The effect of this lower thermal conductivity might have to insulate the organic materials against the heat of a cometary’s impact. While the outer layer of grains were vaporized during the comet collision on earth atmosphere, the inner part might survived unscalled and floated gently on sea of earth. But one of the most mysterious feature of present day is the fact that ribose and deoxyribose sugar in RNA and DNA are all right handed while amino acids that make up proteins are all south. This is a puzzle because sugars and amino acids are chiral molecule i.e. they can exist in two different mirror image. But on earth they do not exist as chiral. No one could answer how this enantiomeric excess came about on earth.

So It will be highly necessary for independent experts in microbiology to determine whether the photomicrographs of microfossils in meteorites published by Hoover (2011) [7 ]are sufficiently similar in morphology to modern analogs to likely be the remains of extraterrestrial cyanobacteria and are truly biological one by microbiological DNA and rRNA tests .microstructures in carbonaceous meteorites may be obvious contaminants from modern worlds too. Just last month in the journal Nature, similar filamentous structures have been explained by non-biological processes [11] (Marshall et al., 2011). A confirmed discovery of life that has evolved outside Earth is no doubt a big step according to authors, but it is still just a beginning and hypothetical one. After that, the next big task is to learn more about life in the universe. How common is life? How diverse is it? How complex? In what sort of environmental conditions can life survive? These are big questions before us References

1] Prof. Pranab kumar Bhattacharya; Rupak Bhattacharya, Ritwik Bhattacharya, Miss upasana Bhattacharya and Dalia Mukherjee “The Life in Our Planet the Earth” once published“ in the E book form Published at http://www.unipathos.com” in 2005 presently in2011 unipathos.com had been sold.

2] Nagy, B., Meinschein, W.G. and Hennessy, D.J. (1961) Mass spectroscopic analysis of the Orgueil meteorite: evidence for biogenic hydrocarbons. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 93, 25-35.

3] .Nagy, B., Fredriksson, K., Urey, H.C., Claus, G., Anderson, C.A. and Percy, J. (1963) Electron probe microanalysis of organized elements in the Orgueil meteorite. Nature 198, 121-125.

4] Levin, G. V. and Straat, P.A. (1976) Viking labeled release biology experiment: Interim results. Science 194, 1322-1329.

5] Engel, M.H. and Nagy, B. (1982) Distribution and enantiomeric composition of amino acids in the Murchison meteorite. Nature 296, 837-840

6] McKay, D.S., Gibson, E.K., Thomas-Keprta, K.L., Vali, H., Romanek, C.S., Clemett, S.J., Chillier, X.D.F., Maedling, C.R. and Zare, R.N. (1996) Search for past life on Mars: Possible relic biogenic activity in Martian meteorite ALH84001. Science 273, 924-930

7] Richard B. Hoover Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites Journal of Cosmology, 2011, Vol 13, March, 2011

8] Joseph R. Schild, R. (2010). Biological Cosmology and the Origins of Life in the Universe. Journal of Cosmology, 5, 1040-1090

9] Wickramasinghe, C. (2011). The Biological Big Bang: Panspermia and the Origins of Life. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge.

10] Sharov, A.A. (2009). Exponential Increase of Genetic Complexity Supports Extra-Terrestrial Origin of Life. Journal of Cosmology, 1, 63-65.

11] Marshall, C. P., Emry, J. R. & Olcott Marshall, A. (2011). Nature Geosci. advance online publication doi:10.1038/NGEO1084 12] Rupak Bhattacharya, Prof Pranab kumar Bhattacharya, Ritwik Bhattacharya, Miss Upasana Bhattacharya, Dalia Mukherjee, Aindrila Mukherjee, Soumyak Bhattacharya etal “The early earth, the evolution of the early atmosphere and life” comment# 9991 Published for the article Methane-eating microbes make their own oxygen Bacteria may have survived on Earth without plants, thanks to unique metabolism by author Amanda Leigh Mascarelli, published online on 24 March 2010 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2010.146 13] Rupak Bhattacharya, Prof Pranab kumar Bhattacharya, Ritwik Bhattacharya, Miss Upasana Bhattacharya, Aindrila Mukherjee, Soumyak Bhattacharya etal Theory of Pan-spermia aswell breaking the symmetry is however essential for development of life in other worlds in other universes too Published comment for the article “ Infinity Success in coping with infinity could strengthen case for multiple universes” By Tom Siegfried at Science News June 6th, 2009; Vol.175 #12 (p. 26) ttp://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/47511/title/Comment

After googling TL;DR to find out what the heck it means, I have to agree.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Ian Musgrave published on March 7, 2011 4:51 AM.

Extinctions paper: Why grad school is cool, and what creationists don’t get about evolutionary biology was the previous entry in this blog.

Geysir is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.38

Site Meter