Nanobes too small to be living organism

[jnorman]

i did a search, but found no threads on this topic. i am sure all of you are aware of nanobes, but i have some confusion. when i first read about nanobes, they were a minor mystery, and while there was some debate over their nature, it was generally agreed upon that they were too small to be living organisms. a few years later, it turns out that some research indicated that they do exhibit life-like behavior. and they show up in the oldest rocks on the planet, as well as from deep sea corings. then later again, it was shown that nanobes were present in a martian meteorite - possible evidence of panspermia, yes?

my question - are the martian rovers doing any experiements that would identify nanobes in the martian rocks? is there solid scientific support for the idea that nanobes are living organisms (ie, is there conclusive evidence of RNA/DNA, or self-replication?? if so, why didnt the evidence of nanobes in the martian meteorite demonstrate that panspermia was a real occurrence? other thoughts? thanks.

 

[jnorman]

bump:
my goodness - nobody here is interested in, nor knows anything about nanobes? i would think this would be an intriguing topic for biologists and evolutionists.

 

[Monique]

Nanobes, did they really find hard evidence on those? I thought the ones found in the martian meteorites were in fact salt crystals.

 

[jnorman]

hi monique - that is a good question. i googled "nanobes meteorite" and got lots of solid hits, but could not confirm with a few minutes browsing. but that is sort of why i brought this question to this forum. thanks for responding. it seems to be a pretty fascinating little subject.