NASA Scientist claims to have found concrete evidence for extraterrestial life

Do you believe his findings are accurate?

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 3.7%
  • No

    Votes: 9 33.3%
  • Too early to tell

    Votes: 16 59.3%
  • Don't know

    Votes: 1 3.7%

  • Total voters
    27
  • #1
180
1
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011...ntists-claims-evidence-alien-life-meteorite/".

Snippet:

Dr. Richard B. Hoover, an astrobiologist with NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, has traveled to remote areas in Antarctica, Siberia, and Alaska, amongst others, for over ten years now, collecting and studying meteorites. He gave FoxNews.com early access to the out-of-this-world research, published late Friday evening in the March edition of the Journal of Cosmology. In it, Hoover describes the latest findings in his study of an extremely rare class of meteorites, called CI1 carbonaceous chondrites -- only nine such meteorites are known to exist on Earth.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
111
0
Hoover says he isn’t worried about the process and is open to any other explanations.

“If someone can explain how it is possible to have a biological remain that has no nitrogen, or nitrogen below the detect ability limits that I have, in a time period as short as 150 years, then I would be very interested in hearing that."

Dose anyone know what this quote in the article is about? And honestly this seems way to familier to me. Mineral morphologies that appear to be "Giant bacteria" wouldnt be anything new. I hope some of these "specimens" are removed for chemical analysis. That would be convinceing to me.
 
  • #3
Pythagorean
Gold Member
4,217
276
It might be worth asking folks in the astro forums what are the chances of chunks of Earth being ejected in collisions, then returning to Earth.

What is the known history of the Cl1 meteorite?
 
  • #4
Ouabache
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
1,340
8
It may be useful to link the source article published in Journal of Cosmology, Vol13 March 2011, Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites

Snippet:
Dr. Hoover has discovered evidence of microfossils similar to Cyanobacteria, in freshly fractured slices of the interior surfaces of the Alais, Ivuna, and Orgueil CI1 carbonaceous meteorites. Based on Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM) and other measures, Dr. Hoover has concluded they are indigenous to these meteors and are similar to trichomic cyanobacteria and other trichomic prokaryotes such as filamentous sulfur bacteria.....
 
Last edited:
  • #5
110
0
Is this not the same Hoover who made a very similar announcement in about 2004 or so? If so, I will wait a long while before getting any excitement about this. Seems like he may just be finding what he is so desperatately looking for.
 
  • #6
Some of the meteorites he is analysing e.g. Orgeuil meteorite have been shown to have been contaminated with pollen (from ragwort) and fungal spores.
Is it possible, I wonder, that these samples were contaminated with a terrestrial bacteria, which has been fossilised in an aqueous solution of the elements contained in the meteorite samples. Say for example by permineralisation or authigenic mineralisation.....

They are therefore interpreted as the indigenous remains of microfossils that were present in the meteorite rock matrix when the meteorite entered the Earth’s atmosphere. EDS elemental analyses carried out on the meteorite rock matrix and on living and fossil cyanobacteria and old and ancient biological materials have shown that the Orgueil filaments have elemental compositions that reflect the composition of the Orgueil meteorite matrix but that are very different from living and old microorganisms and biological filaments.
http://journalofcosmology.com/Life100.html

I'll say no..........
 
  • #7
Evo
Mentor
23,202
3,013
You may want to read this.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/03/did_scientists_discover_bacter.php [Broken]

Did scientists discover bacteria in meteorites?
Category: Kooks
Posted on: March 6, 2011 9:44 AM, by PZ Myers

No.

No, no, no. No no no no no no no no.

No, no.

No.

Fox News broke the story, which ought to make one immediately suspicious — it's not an organization noted for scientific acumen. But even worse, the paper claiming the discovery of bacteria fossils in carbonaceous chondrites was published in … the Journal of Cosmology. I've mentioned Cosmology before — it isn't a real science journal at all, but is the ginned-up website of a small group of crank academics obsessed with the idea of Hoyle and Wickramasinghe that life originated in outer space and simply rained down on Earth. It doesn't exist in print, consists entirely of a crude and ugly website that looks like it was sucked through a wormhole from the 1990s, and publishes lots of empty noise with no substantial editorial restraint. For a while, it seemed to be entirely the domain of a crackpot named Rhawn Joseph who called himself the emeritus professor of something mysteriously called the Brain Research Laboratory, based in the general neighborhood of Northern California (seriously, that was the address: "Northern California"), and self-published all of his pseudo-scientific "publications" on this web site.

It is not an auspicious beginning. Finding credible evidence of extraterrestrial microbes is the kind of thing you'd expect to see published in Science or Nature, but the fact that it found a home on a fringe website that pretends to be a legitimate science journal ought to set off alarms right there.
continued...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #8
1,564
7
Dog garnet, I just made a thread about this in the skepticism forum.
 
  • #9
You may want to read this.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/03/did_scientists_discover_bacter.php [Broken]

continued...

Very good blog post.
Pareidolia is the most pertinent word.......
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
I also have some of the same questions that many of you have proposed. I have been wondering though on how he came to the conclusion that these 'organisms' were not from Earth (if they are even fossils in the first place).

I am not familiar with much in the way of biology and how such things are decided but still you would think that he would have stated the tests he had done in order to reach such a conclusion.

Thehare
 
Last edited:
  • #11
I believe it's true... Why should we doubt that we are alone in this universe? Imagine, One in a billion star, there is a slight possibility that there will be a star that will be born that can support life?

We are not alone in this universe... :)
 
  • #12
While I also believe that we are definitely not alone is the universe, I have trouble understanding how this scientist could have come to the conclusion that this fossil was not of Earthly origin considering that it had impacted the Earth several hundred years ago and had been observed several times since it has been discovered.

Now if they (NASA, etc) had the capabilities to examine meteors like this in space and found another such organism than it would be incredibly hard (yet not entirely impossible I would guess) to say that it would not be from Earth.

Sorry for this cliche but:

I want to believe.
 
  • #13
110
0
I believe it's true... Why should we doubt that we are alone in this universe? Imagine, One in a billion star, there is a slight possibility that there will be a star that will be born that can support life?

We are not alone in this universe... :)

Just to try and make sure I understand your argument for whether this 'discovery' is correct or not.

You are saying it is true, the meteorite contains extraterrestial life due to there being a 'slight possibility' that 1/1,000,000,000 stars can support life, therefore we are not alone in the universe, therefore one should believe that this journal of cosmology article is fact?
 
  • #14
bobze
Science Advisor
Gold Member
647
18
I believe it's true... Why should we doubt that we are alone in this universe? Imagine, One in a billion star, there is a slight possibility that there will be a star that will be born that can support life?

We are not alone in this universe... :)

I think you'd be hard pressed to find many people in science who think we are alone in the cosmos. But wanting to believe we aren't alone, doesn't make this 'evidence' true.

This is some really sloppy science, but someone with about as much electron microscopy qualifications as me (which really isn't that much).

I'm confident we'll find evidence of extra-terrestrial life eventually, but in the mean time lets not spend on money on snake oil.
 
  • #15
@Noir

Sorry I got confused with my English... Yup! You got my point! And addition, why should we argue that the evidence is fake or not? As long as they got scientific explanations and evidence up to conclusions. Then, doubts should be phased out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #16
cristo
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
8,107
73
The article cited in the OP has not been posted in a peer-reviewed journal, thus this thread is closed.
 

Related Threads on NASA Scientist claims to have found concrete evidence for extraterrestial life

Replies
110
Views
9K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
320
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
767
Replies
4
Views
895
Replies
4
Views
1K
Top