Discussion on:
Top
Rated
Rated
Extremophiles
Posted by sboverie
17th Apr 2012
Just
In
In
re Life at its basics
Posted by YetAnotherBob
23rd Apr 2012
Show:
-1
Votes
I have an invisible friend...
but he doesn't like me other friends.
Posted by bb_apptix
17th Apr 2012
0
Votes
Conspiracy Theory
Gilbert Levin, the PI for the Labeled Release experiment, is an engineer, with an MS in Sanitary Engineering, and a PhD in Environmental Engineering. He was not a NASA employee. It has been suggested that NASA's extraordinary reluctance to admit the success of the Labeled Release experiment is due to snobbery and envy at NASA's upper management level. If they can only keep delaying until Levin dies (he's quite old now), he won't win the Nobel and embarrass NASA's chemists and biologists.
http://www.gillevin.com/
http://www.gillevin.com/
Posted by dmm99
17th Apr 2012
+1
Vote
Extremophiles
I am surprised that the article did not mention extremophiles. These are usually bacteria that thrive in very hostile environments, extreme heat or extreme PH levels are some of those environments. There are weird life forms that thrive near volcanic vents in the ocean, some forms are familier like crabs and shrimps but others are very different.
The science of exobiology is in the infant stage as we have not found conclusive forms of non terran life forms. The extremophiles are good for study to form a base for exobiology. The sea vent life forms get their energy from the super heated water and not from the sun; exobiology life could get energy from other sources and not need to be in the "Goldilocks" area near a star to live.
Life on Earth has restarted several times with a few major extinction events. Not all life is wiped out but many dominate forms are lost. It is possible that we may find most exobiology life to be stuck at a low level for different reasons and the complex development for self conscious and intelligent life may be rare for similar reasons. There is a lot to learn from our planet to help us find life elsewhere.
The science of exobiology is in the infant stage as we have not found conclusive forms of non terran life forms. The extremophiles are good for study to form a base for exobiology. The sea vent life forms get their energy from the super heated water and not from the sun; exobiology life could get energy from other sources and not need to be in the "Goldilocks" area near a star to live.
Life on Earth has restarted several times with a few major extinction events. Not all life is wiped out but many dominate forms are lost. It is possible that we may find most exobiology life to be stuck at a low level for different reasons and the complex development for self conscious and intelligent life may be rare for similar reasons. There is a lot to learn from our planet to help us find life elsewhere.
Posted by sboverie
17th Apr 2012
-2
Votes
Creationists vs. Evolutionists
And do evolutionists live in a world where the creator doesn't change its mind and try something different?
Posted by Giniaalan
17th Apr 2012
0
Votes
lol
no, we live in a world without a creator to change its mind in the first place. Wrong question!
Posted by belli_bettens@...
20th Apr 2012
-2
Votes
DNA ... RNA ???
Until it is known what is beyond the beyond, might I suggest that the human brain isn't capable of ever understanding the information we so eagerly desire? However; being a scientist, with acceptability to never fully achieve your goal, is a very lucrative profession, (i.e. it definitely beats other means of income?) ... We have such a short life on this planet ... Why not just take care of our current needs, and get off the road to destruction? ... We wish to explore another planet to possibly colonize it with the same trash that we contain here on Earth?... May I make another suggestion: GET REAL ... Thank you TEd ...
Posted by tla@...
17th Apr 2012
0
Votes
This is just as lightly as all the other stuff......
Is this proof there are bad aliens on the moon?
http://www.ssrichardmontgomery.com/download/moondrive.jpg
http://www.ssrichardmontgomery.com/download/moondrive.jpg
Posted by ronangel
17th Apr 2012
0
Votes
Life at its basics
At its basics, I would like to use the definition of something that can reproduce itself without outside interference. Viruses aren't much more than reproducing molecules, but they fit the definition.
I would guess that over 99% (mass) of Terrestrial organisms use oxygen as part of their energy transfer mechanism. Yet it is fairly common to find sulfur-metabolizing bacteria, and someone told me they found some truly weird organisms near some of the deep-sea heat vents that get their energy from thermal cycling. Given this diversity, is it unrealistic to find life using bizarre, unknown energy cycles out there?
The big problem is going to be how to shoot the breeze with something where the only things you have in kind are that you are alive and intelligent.
I would guess that over 99% (mass) of Terrestrial organisms use oxygen as part of their energy transfer mechanism. Yet it is fairly common to find sulfur-metabolizing bacteria, and someone told me they found some truly weird organisms near some of the deep-sea heat vents that get their energy from thermal cycling. Given this diversity, is it unrealistic to find life using bizarre, unknown energy cycles out there?
The big problem is going to be how to shoot the breeze with something where the only things you have in kind are that you are alive and intelligent.
Posted by metaphysician
20th Apr 2012
0
Votes
re Life at its basics
"I would guess that over 99% (mass) of Terrestrial organisms use oxygen as part of their energy transfer mechanism. "
No, by mass, and including the bacteria in the deep rocks, close to 70% of the weight (mass) of life is bacterial. and much more than half of the bacterial life is anerobic, which means that oxygen is a toxin for them. True, they are out of sight, but still, big things are so vastly outnumbered by little things that most of the mass of life is in the very little things.
As one Biologist put it, "We are not really living in the Age of Mammals, We are now and have always been living in the age of bacteria."
No, by mass, and including the bacteria in the deep rocks, close to 70% of the weight (mass) of life is bacterial. and much more than half of the bacterial life is anerobic, which means that oxygen is a toxin for them. True, they are out of sight, but still, big things are so vastly outnumbered by little things that most of the mass of life is in the very little things.
As one Biologist put it, "We are not really living in the Age of Mammals, We are now and have always been living in the age of bacteria."
Posted by YetAnotherBob
23rd Apr 2012
0
Votes
Not exactly a new idea
This is what scientists like Carl Sagan have been saying for years!
Posted by wcecsharp@...
20th Apr 2012