Posted on 05/13/2004 10:27:11 AM PDT by Junior
BILLINGS, Mont. - Scientists at Montana State University in Bozeman say they have discovered a heat-loving, acid-dwelling virus that could help provide a link to ancient life on Earth.
The virus found in Yellowstone National Park could help to understand a common ancestor that scientists believe was present before life split into forms such as bacteria, heat-loving organisms and the building blocks that led to plants and animals, researchers said.
"It's a clue that helps you say, `Yeah, there probably was a common ancestor at some point or sets of ancestors,'" said George Rice, one of the MSU scientists who participated in the study. "It's food for thought."
The scientists' discovery was published in the May 3 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (news - web sites).
Rice began hunting for heat-loving "thermophilic" viruses in Yellowstone five years ago. In 2001, he and others found several apparently unique viruses associated with an organism living near Midway Geyser Basin where temperatures ranged from 158 to 197 degrees Fahrenheit.
"It was basically something living in boiling acid," Rice said. Although several new viruses were discovered, one in particular caught their eye. After characterizing the structure and genome of the virus, they found that its protein shell was similar to a bacterial virus and an animal virus. The similarity suggests to the scientists that the three viruses may share a common ancestor that predates the branching off of life forms more than 3 billion years ago. "This is something that was predicted but hadn't been shown before," Rice said. For a long time, scientists classified all life forms as plant or animal. That classification system expanded as more life forms were discovered. Eventually, biologists divided life into five kingdoms — plants, animals, bacteria, fungi and protists. A more recent approach divides life into three domains: bacteria, eukarya — which includes plants, fungi, animals and others — and archaea, which means ancient. Archaea, similar to bacteria, is likely the least understood of the domains, according to the paper's authors. Archaea may have been among the first forms of life on Earth. Able to thrive in the hot, gaseous and volcanic terrain of early Earth, they could also survive in the very inhospitable geothermal features of the Yellowstone of today. Now that scientists know the Yellowstone virus's ancient structure seems to span all three domains of life, scientists plan additional studies on its genes to figure out what they tell the virus to do. "Anywhere there's life, we expect viruses," Young said. "They are the major source of biological material on this planet." Researchers said the virus and others found at Yellowstone will give researchers a hand in the search for life on other planets, including Mars. "These bugs are living and doing business in a harsh environment," Rice said. "This may be clues about what to look for."
It's not as if creationists caught the mistake. Evos made it and evos caught it while following the best data available all the way.
By comparison, let's look at the finding of "walking whale" or feathered dinosaur (or any other transitional) fossils. Evolutionary theory said that all of these things once existed on the Earth and thus many of them would turn up somewhere sooner or later. Creationism not only scoffed at the predictions before they were fulfilled but on purely doctrinaire grounds it can't see the predicted things after they have been found. (It remains a bullet-item in the mantra list that these things don't exist, so by God they don't.)
In other words, an evo can make a mistake. He can also see that he's made a mistake. A creationist can't make a mistake. Apparently, God wouldn't allow it or something. However, creationists are allowed to brazen any instance which might otherwise be embarrassing. I don't see where the creationist approach to facts and data offers any improvement over current methods.
Your claim that we would have cured cancer by now but for science's odd habit of following the currently available best picture of things is interesting. This statement probably cannot be disproven. However, it looks unsupportable. Heck, it looks ridiculous.
Lots of people believe in God. Only a handful of physical scientists believe the Earth is 6000 years old.
If there are no creation scientists then is stands to reason that there is no such thing as creation science, and all the books about Flood theory and such are the work of charlatans.
If there are creation scientists, then their work must necessarily meet the same standards as other scientists and be reiewed in the same way.
I take it to mean they they are being honest. Religious fundamentalists should follow the example.
Viruses aren't alive. They exist in a harsh evironment because the host is there, much like football helmets exist in a football stadium.
You say that authoritatively. However, biolgists are still of two minds on the subject.
Well, then those of the other mind should produce the phylogeny of these "living" viruses rooted in the tree of life.
Pithy, very pithy. I like that.
Okay, how about 10 years from today? Is that soon enough for you?
You and Michael Moore. I'm still waiting for a working "evolutionary" produced cubic function generator. I won't hold my breath.
_________________________________________________
You and Michael Moore.
Huh? Your face matches an orangutan's butt? Is that the kind of ingenious, ad hominem thing you meant, but lacked the wit, to say?
I'm still waiting for a working "evolutionary" produced cubic function generator. I won't hold my breath.
Cubic, schmubic. Go ahead, hold your breath. About 10 minutes at the bottom of a lake should do it.
Oh, and my tag line came to mind when I thought about you.
_________________________________________________
There, that should about do it. Have I forever discredited all science in your eyes now? Can you get on with your life, such as it is, without spewing more of your ID/IOT bile here? I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Naww. Heavens no! You have only proved that my statement was correct in describing you. I've observed kindergarteners with more wit and savvy in their taunts than you in your pitiful "locution". Rave on mad troll.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.