100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
| Topic: Genetic Material in Meteorites | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Confirmed – Genetic Material in Meteorites is extraterrestrial in Origin
An important component of early genetic material found in meteorite fragments is extraterrestrial in origin, say scientists from Europe and the USA. They say their research in Earth and Planetary Science Letters provides evidence that life’s raw materials came from sources beyond the Earth. The materials they have found include the molecules uracil and xanthine, which are precursors to the molecules that make up DNA and RNA, and are known as nucleobases. The team discovered the molecules in rock fragments of the Murchison meteorite, which crashed in Australia in 1969. They tested the meteorite material to determine whether the molecules came from the solar system or were a result of contamination when the meteorite landed on Earth. The analysis shows that the nucleobases contain a heavy form of carbon which could only have been formed in space. Materials formed on Earth consist of a lighter variety of carbon. Lead author Dr Zita Martins, of the Department of Earth Science and Engineering at Imperial College London, says that the research may provide another piece of evidence explaining the evolution of early life. She says: “We believe early life may have adopted nucleobases from meteoritic fragments for use in genetic coding which enabled them to pass on their successful features to subsequent generations.” Between 3.8 to 4.5 billion years ago large numbers of rocks similar to the Murchison meteorite rained down on Earth at the time when primitive life was forming. The heavy bombardment would have dropped large amounts of meteorite material to the surface on planets like Earth and Mars. Co-author Professor Mark Sephton, also of Imperial’s Department of Earth Science and Engineering, believes this research is an important step in understanding how early life might have evolved. He added: “Because meteorites represent left over materials from the formation of the solar system, the key components for life -- including nucleobases -- could be widespread in the cosmos. As more and more of life’s raw materials are discovered in objects from space, the possibility of life springing forth wherever the right chemistry is present becomes more likely.” http://www.scientificblogging.com/news_releases/confirmed_genetic_material_in_meteorites_is_extraterrestrial_in_origin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We are all Extraterrestrials.....Most of us anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds very logical indeed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Confirmed – Genetic Material in Meteorites is extraterrestrial in Origin Actually this is a gross misrepresentation by scientists to claim that they have found Genetic Material in Meterorites. They even fess it up actaully: The materials they have found include the molecules uracil and xanthine, which are precursors to the molecules that make up DNA and RNA, and are known as nucleobases. If what they actuallly found are merely molecules that are so-called "precursors" to genetic material, then it's false to say that they actually found genetic material. Right? “We believe early life may have adopted nucleobases from meteoritic fragments for use in genetic coding which enabled them to pass on their successful features to subsequent generations.” They believe? What they should be saying here is that they are speculating. Between 3.8 to 4.5 billion years ago large numbers of rocks similar to the Murchison meteorite rained down on Earth at the time when primitive life was forming. The heavy bombardment would have dropped large amounts of meteorite material to the surface on planets like Earth and Mars. So what? According to the astrophysicists the entire planet Earth itself was formed by meteorites accumulating and clumping together over time. In a very real sense the Earth itself is basically just one huge meteor. ~~~ Here's something to think about. Modern Geneticists have determined that all life on Earth started from a single primordial cell. They have determined this by looking at the genome of many different lifeforms on earth; plants, animals, fungus, humans, the whole shebang. They see the same genes and long strings of gene sequences of genes that show that all this DNA is related. We share something like 50% of the DNA that's in a tree for example. In any case, they are convinced that all the DNA of planet Earth had to have started from a single cell. The reason being that if other cells had spontaneously formed the living creatures that resulted from those cells would have had entirely different DNA sequences and therefore entirely different genes. So what's my point? My point is that there are many reasons in Chemistry to believe that the so-called 'precursors' of DNA and RNA were around everywhere. Yet, clearly they didn't automatically give rise to life. So is it even correct to call them 'precursors'? That almost makes it sound like given the 'precursors' DNA should automatically form and a cell should rise up from any soup of 'precursors. But does that truly happen? I personally believe that it doesn't. And here's why: We already know that amino acids exist all over the place. This is how cells replicate and grow. If they didn't have amino acids readily available to construct into DNA they wouldn't be able to replicate their DNA and multiply. Moroever, when living cells are destroyed or die and fall apart, there's a bunch of raw material there for totally new cells to arise from randomly. But clearly that has never happened (if we believe the Geneticists claim that all life came from a single cell). So even though amino acids (and all the other molecules required for life) were clearly present all over the Earth. No 'secondary' life ever arose. Do you see what I'm getting at? If just having the precursors around implies that DNA and life should automatically evolve, then clearly life should have been much more diverse. Because those so-called raw precursor materials were clearly around once life did get started, yet no new (and totally randomly different cells) even evolved on their own. If we can believe that geneticists that all life on Earth came from a single cell, then having precursors to DNA laying around doesn't automatically give rise to life. Because clearly the raw materials were indeed laying around ever since that first cell got started. Clearly everything I'm saying here is all based on this claim that all life on Earth can be traced back to a single solitary primordial cell. But that is the claim of modern genticists today. At least according to the course I just took anyway. So finding the so-called 'precursor' molecules of life, doesn't truly mean much at all. It most certainly isn't right to call it 'genetic material' because it's not genetic material until after it's been made into DNA or RNA. And there is no reason to believe that the so-called 'precursor' molecules would automatically form DNA easily. Clearly (if the geneticists claim is true) that event is extremely rare. So rare, in fact, that it had only happned once on planet Earth in over 4.5 billion years. If life is an accident, it's a far more rare accident than people realize. At least if we assume that geneticists are correct that all life on Earth evolved from a single solitary primordial cell. That would mean that even in the best of conditions in soup of so-called 'precursor' molecules, it would still be extremely rare for life to get started. We may be far luckier to exist than we can even begin to imagine. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How did that genetic material get on those rocks?!
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How did that genetic material get on those rocks?! They probably had an affair with a commet. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
these weren't the meteorites from the display in the oval office where they?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I bet yoda knows!
(----------------- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I bet yoda knows! (----------------- yoda knows everything, yoda very wise 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't think this was news. This view of life's orgins have long been held in the earth science community. Perhaps though they have just discovered evidence that confirms the theory..
who knows? we're all made of star dust anyways. Every atom in the universe heavier than iron (Fe) was made in supernovae explosions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think it is impossible that huge chunks or rocks (whatever you want to call them) have fossils or tiny traces of somekind of life at one time from perhaps a exploding planet of somekind from a different universe. Now that it can travel and hit this planet is another question. The probability is like trying to win the lottery, yet perhaps somewhere in a galaxy far far away a planet of Artureans or Nibirans with sophisticated technology had the privilige to have such a rock hit their atmosphere.
I am a type that says "never say never" for you never know what might happen. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually this is a gross misrepresentation by scientists to claim that they have found Genetic Material in Meterorites. Its usually not the scientists, its the science journalists. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Confirmed – Genetic Material in Meteorites is extraterrestrial in Origin Actually this is a gross misrepresentation by scientists to claim that they have found Genetic Material in Meterorites. They even fess it up actaully: The materials they have found include the molecules uracil and xanthine, which are precursors to the molecules that make up DNA and RNA, and are known as nucleobases. If what they actuallly found are merely molecules that are so-called "precursors" to genetic material, then it's false to say that they actually found genetic material. Right? “We believe early life may have adopted nucleobases from meteoritic fragments for use in genetic coding which enabled them to pass on their successful features to subsequent generations.” They believe? What they should be saying here is that they are speculating. Between 3.8 to 4.5 billion years ago large numbers of rocks similar to the Murchison meteorite rained down on Earth at the time when primitive life was forming. The heavy bombardment would have dropped large amounts of meteorite material to the surface on planets like Earth and Mars. So what? According to the astrophysicists the entire planet Earth itself was formed by meteorites accumulating and clumping together over time. In a very real sense the Earth itself is basically just one huge meteor. ~~~ Here's something to think about. Modern Geneticists have determined that all life on Earth started from a single primordial cell. They have determined this by looking at the genome of many different lifeforms on earth; plants, animals, fungus, humans, the whole shebang. They see the same genes and long strings of gene sequences of genes that show that all this DNA is related. We share something like 50% of the DNA that's in a tree for example. In any case, they are convinced that all the DNA of planet Earth had to have started from a single cell. The reason being that if other cells had spontaneously formed the living creatures that resulted from those cells would have had entirely different DNA sequences and therefore entirely different genes. So what's my point? My point is that there are many reasons in Chemistry to believe that the so-called 'precursors' of DNA and RNA were around everywhere. Yet, clearly they didn't automatically give rise to life. So is it even correct to call them 'precursors'? That almost makes it sound like given the 'precursors' DNA should automatically form and a cell should rise up from any soup of 'precursors. But does that truly happen? I personally believe that it doesn't. And here's why: We already know that amino acids exist all over the place. This is how cells replicate and grow. If they didn't have amino acids readily available to construct into DNA they wouldn't be able to replicate their DNA and multiply. Moroever, when living cells are destroyed or die and fall apart, there's a bunch of raw material there for totally new cells to arise from randomly. But clearly that has never happened (if we believe the Geneticists claim that all life came from a single cell). So even though amino acids (and all the other molecules required for life) were clearly present all over the Earth. No 'secondary' life ever arose. Do you see what I'm getting at? If just having the precursors around implies that DNA and life should automatically evolve, then clearly life should have been much more diverse. Because those so-called raw precursor materials were clearly around once life did get started, yet no new (and totally randomly different cells) even evolved on their own. If we can believe that geneticists that all life on Earth came from a single cell, then having precursors to DNA laying around doesn't automatically give rise to life. Because clearly the raw materials were indeed laying around ever since that first cell got started. Clearly everything I'm saying here is all based on this claim that all life on Earth can be traced back to a single solitary primordial cell. But that is the claim of modern genticists today. At least according to the course I just took anyway. So finding the so-called 'precursor' molecules of life, doesn't truly mean much at all. It most certainly isn't right to call it 'genetic material' because it's not genetic material until after it's been made into DNA or RNA. And there is no reason to believe that the so-called 'precursor' molecules would automatically form DNA easily. Clearly (if the geneticists claim is true) that event is extremely rare. So rare, in fact, that it had only happned once on planet Earth in over 4.5 billion years. If life is an accident, it's a far more rare accident than people realize. At least if we assume that geneticists are correct that all life on Earth evolved from a single solitary primordial cell. That would mean that even in the best of conditions in soup of so-called 'precursor' molecules, it would still be extremely rare for life to get started. We may be far luckier to exist than we can even begin to imagine. |
|
|
|
|
