NASA scientist claims evidence of alien life on meteorite

Discussion in 'Opinions, Beliefs, & Points of View' started by Prinnctopher's Belt, Mar 6, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Prinnctopher's Belt

    Prinnctopher's Belt Antiquities Friend SF Supporter

    We are not alone in the universe -- and alien life forms may have a lot more in common with life on Earth than we had previously thought.

    That's the stunning conclusion one NASA scientist has come to, releasing his groundbreaking revelations in a new study in the March edition of the Journal of Cosmology.

    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 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.

    Though it may be hard to swallow, Hoover is convinced that his findings reveal fossil evidence of bacterial life within such meteorites, the remains of living organisms from their parent bodies -- comets, moons and other astral bodies. By extension, the findings suggest we are not alone in the universe, he said.

    “I interpret it as indicating that life is more broadly distributed than restricted strictly to the planet earth,” Hoover told “This field of study has just barely been touched -- because quite frankly, a great many scientist would say that this is impossible.”

    In what he calls “a very simple process,” Dr. Hoover fractured the meteorite stones under a sterile environment before examining the freshly broken surface with the standard tools of the scientist: a scanning-electron microscope and a field emission electron-scanning microscope, which allowed him to search the stone’s surface for evidence of fossilized remains.

    He found the fossilized remains of micro-organisms not so different from ordinary ones found underfoot -- here on earth, that is.

    “The exciting thing is that they are in many cases recognizable and can be associated very closely with the generic species here on earth,” Hoover told But not all of them. “There are some that are just very strange and don’t look like anything that I’ve been able to identify, and I’ve shown them to many other experts that have also come up stumped.”

    Other scientists tell the implications of this research are shocking, describing the findings variously as profound, very important and extraordinary. But Dr. David Marais, an astrobiologist with NASA’s AMES Research Center, says he’s very cautious about jumping onto the bandwagon.

    These kinds of claims have been made before, he noted -- and found to be false.

    “It’s an extraordinary claim, and thus I’ll need extraordinary evidence,” Marais said.

    Knowing that the study will be controversial, the journal invited members of the scientific community to analyze the results and to write critical commentaries ahead of time. Though none are online yet, those comments will be posted alongside the article, said Dr. Rudy Schild, a scientist with the Harvard-Smithsonian's Center for Astrophysics and the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Cosmology.

    "Given the controversial nature of his discovery, we have invited 100 experts and have issued a general invitation to over 5,000 scientists from the scientific community to review the paper and to offer their critical analysis," Schild wrote in an editor's note along with the article. "No other paper in the history of science has undergone such a thorough vetting, and never before in the history of science has the scientific community been given the opportunity to critically analyze an important research paper before it is published, he wrote."

    Dr. Seth Shostak, senior astronomer at the SETI Institute, said there is a lot of hesitancy to believe such proclamations. If true, the implications would be far-reaching throughout the fields of science and astronomy, the suggestions and possibilities stunning.

    “Maybe life was seeded on earth -- it developed on comets for example, and just landed here when these things were hitting the very early Earth,” Shostak speculated. “It would suggest, well, life didn’t really begin on the Earth, it began as the solar system was forming.”

    Hesitancy to believe new claims is something common and necessary to the field of science, Hoover said.

    “A lot of times it takes a long time before scientists start changing their mind as to what is valid and what is not. I’m sure there will be many many scientists that will be very skeptical and that’s OK.”

    Until Hoover’s research can be independently verified, Marais said, the findings should be considered “a potential signature of life.” Scientists, he said, will now take the research to the next level of scrutiny, which includes an independent confirmation of the results by another lab, before the findings can be classified “a confirmed signature of life.”

    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."

    "I’ve talked with many scientists about this and no one has been able to explain,” he said.
  2. Prof.Bruttenholm

    Prof.Bruttenholm Well-Known Member

    Is this all the evidence you have, bacteria?

    This still doesn't fully prove life of human or greater class of intelligence exists or rather existed.
    For all our scientists know, my idea of an entire universe being dead except for our planet coming up last with life could be right.
    This is what, the third article I've read that has no actual evidence of life beyond microbial bacteria (that is dead).
  3. ZombiePringle

    ZombiePringle Forum Buddy and Antiquities Friend

    Just reminds me of the book Deception Point.
  4. Tim.

    Tim. SF Emoti-King

    I was really excited when I read this article the other day. However, it appears that the claims are not true:!5777460

    Apparently the guy has been claiming this for at least six years.

    Too bad! It would be great news. But it's a big universe. I still think there is plenty of life out there to find.
  5. NoMoneyToPlease

    NoMoneyToPlease Banned Member

    This is mind blowing.The ramifications of actual tiny alien bodies existing for us to study.WOW!

    Actual real tiny alien bodies.I hope they remain sealed off though.
    But actual bona fide alien body parts.
    What do you think of the chances that scientists will be able to examine the meteorite itself in order to determine which planet or area of space it may have come from?
  6. NoMoneyToPlease

    NoMoneyToPlease Banned Member

    @Tim-Aawww! :itachi:
  7. jota1

    jota1 Well-Known Member

    How can he prove they did not come from earth, ramifications from a meteorite explosion sending these chunks into space.

    Untill I see a green man I will not believe in et life.
  8. jxdama

    jxdama Staff Member Safety & Support

    im quite skeptical. i dont think life exists anywhere else.
  9. The Unforgiven

    The Unforgiven Well-Known Member

    lol, the zimple mathematical oddz of it defy any conjecture.
    with the zheer zize of the univerze, itz impozzible for the oddz to be that earth iz the only planet with life on it.
    living with the azzumption that we are the only exizting intelligent life, and the mozt zuperior an evolved beingz iz again, imo, zheer human idiocy.
    but thatz juzt me.
    (not zaying imma be holing up a light pointed to jupiter and zay "drop in for tea". theyre out there zomewhere, but i xcant be arzed with them, enough problemz here without extraplanetary onez too. =P =P )

    pz. zorry, kitten znapped my s key.
  10. jxdama

    jxdama Staff Member Safety & Support

    i cant agree. life is far too complex.
  11. NoMoneyToPlease

    NoMoneyToPlease Banned Member

    @ahurtlilkittykat-LOL! You're charming. :)
  12. Tim.

    Tim. SF Emoti-King

    Here is a fun link:

    It's an online calculator of the Drake Equation. You provide the parameters, it gives you an expected result. From Wikipedia:
    Of course, you're just throwing in your guess for each value. And there may be other factors this equation doesn't take into account. But I think it's a fun and convenient way to think about some very large numbers and some very small probabilities.
  13. jxdama

    jxdama Staff Member Safety & Support

    i just think its clear we are the only life anywhere.
  14. Mystic

    Mystic Well-Known Member

    How can it be clear? Billions upon billions of stars, the discovery of exoplanets (500 so far)....the probability of life exisiting elsewhere is astronomical....even if that life is microbes.
  15. Prinnctopher's Belt

    Prinnctopher's Belt Antiquities Friend SF Supporter

    Clear? Do you know how immense the universe is? Do you know how microscopic our own solar system is? Do you know how many galaxies there are? Do you know how large a single galaxy is? Do you know how many stars (Suns) there are? Do you know how many solar systems there are? Do you know how many planets can be in a single solar system? Do you know the likelihood of any of these trillions of planets being in the so-called Goldilocks zone? Do you know the chances of each of them having life on them?

    With this many anomalies, and this much possibility, probability even, given the HUGE size of a universe which we have not even explored more than 0.000001% of, it's hardly "clear" that we're the only life "anywhere", especially based on such an infinitesimal sample size that we've observed.
  16. NoMoneyToPlease

    NoMoneyToPlease Banned Member

    The Goldilocks zone?
  17. Seems_Perfect

    Seems_Perfect Well-Known Member

    Goldilocks Zone is an excellent point!! :)
    * Its basically the point in a solar system that's not too hot or too cold to support life - the perfect distance from the solar system's star/sun (term taken from the fairy tale "Goldilocks & The Three Bears").

    I'll be the first to admit that I'm an astro-physics geek (and to a lesser extent quantum physics). I've thought and studied this subject quite a bit and my humble opinion starts with drawing a line of demarcation as it relates to the term life. In other words, "biological life" vs. "intelligent life".

    I'm most certainly not the first to make a differentiation between the two, but my opinion, and that of astro-physicists around the planet, is that biological life (i.e., amoeba, bacteria) certainly exists outside of earth. The "water/ice" moon of Europa which orbits Jupiter is a prime contender. The sheer scope of the ever expanding universe also holds an all but certain end to the mystery of does biological life exist elsewhere.

    In terms of intelligent life, both sides of the argument bring interesting points to the table so much so that one can then argue "intelligent life currently exists vs. intelligent life once existed but no longer does". Any astro-physicist will confirm that the universe is approx. 13.7 billion years old (with Earth being approx. 4.5 billion). Age isn't even a point of debate amongst scholars in the field, fore no one takes seriously the far-right wackjobs that say the Earth is "only thousands of years old". Age is relevant b/c some believe intelligent life may have existed hundreds of thousands to billions of years ago before human being walked the Earth or were smart enough to make contact with other civilizations. There are others who believe intelligent life may exist today but the very expanse of the universe keeps us from crossing paths. Then there's the fact intelligent life could be an animal that thinks but has no possible way of traveling outside its environment much less the universe (an alien equivalent of dolphins, dogs, chimps, etc.).

    My personal opinion is biological life certainly exists elsewhere. Intelligent life on the other hand (past or present)? Honestly, I still don't have a solid opinion to express one way or another because both sides present compelling evidence to support their claim. Fun to think about though.
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 9, 2011
  18. Mikeintx

    Mikeintx Well-Known Member

  19. johnnysays

    johnnysays Well-Known Member

    I thought this was interesting at first but then I leanred some background information that really took the wind out of me. So this news isn't all that it was made out to be in the journal that presented it. Oh well. At least it's based on a grain of truth since the man behind this is real and the research is real too. Just needs a lot more peer-review going on and time to sort it out!
  20. Iron Halo

    Iron Halo Active Member

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.