Posted on 06/04/2006 4:06:50 PM PDT by wagglebee
They're red, cell-like, replicate easily in water superheated to nearly 600 degrees Fahrenheit and, according to the physicist who isolated them from mysterious blood-colored rains that fell on India in 2001, they have no DNA which is why the scientist believes he may have the first confirmed evidence of alien life.
Godfrey Louis |
Godfrey Louis presented evidence for his hypothesis in the April issue of the peer-reviewed journal, Astrophysics and Space Science. Louis works as a solid-state physicist at Mahatma Gandhi University.
Louis isolated thick-walled, red-colored cell-like structures from water collected during the "red rain" that fell in Kerala, India, from July to September, 2001.
For a two-month period, sporadic heavy downpours occurred in which the rain was red in color, often appearing like blood. The red color was due to small red particles held in suspension, initially theorized to be spores of a common lichen in India. Analysis of the isolated sediment, however, found the presence of aluminum an element not usually found in living cells and much lower levels of phosphorus than would be expected if the particles were biological in origin.
Other theories have pointed to red dust picked up by winds crossing the Arabian peninsula and even a fine mist of blood cells produced by a meteor striking a flock of bats.
Louis argued none of these theories can explain what he's observed in the lab.
Algae and fungus, which make up lichen, have DNA, Louis said, noting that his strange red "cells" do not. Further, blood cells have thin walls, unlike his microbes, and quickly die when exposed to water and air and they are unable to replicate. Louis' particles thrive in water at temperatures approaching 600 degrees Fahrenheit far beyond the 250 degrees known to be the upper limit for life and they reproduce themselves.
"We've already got some stunning pictures transmission electron micrographs of these cells sliced in the middle," astronomer Chandra Wickramasing, a scientist at Cardiff University in Wales who is attempting to replicate Louis' work, told Popular Science. "We see them budding, with little daughter cells inside the big cells."
In his journal article, Louis speculated the cell-like particles could be extraterrestrial bacteria transported to Earth on a comet or meteor that broke apart in the upper atmosphere and fell suspended in rain drops.
Wickramasing's interest in the red structures is related to the modern theory of panspermia the idea that Earth was seeded with life from space which he co-proposed in 1974.
"If it's true that life was introduced by comets four billion years ago," the astronomer said, "one would expect that microorganisms are still injected into our environment from time to time. This could be one of those events."
Louis and Wickramasinghe plan further tests to determine the levels of specific carbon isotopes and to determine if their proportions fall outside of what would be expected.
Another British team is currently analyzing Louis' samples to confirm whether DNA is present or not. One preliminary test has returned positive.
"Life as we know it must contain DNA, or it's not life," said University of Sheffield microbiologist Milton Wainwright. "But even if this organism proves to be an anomaly, the absence of DNA wouldn't necessarily mean it's extraterrestrial."
Is this supposed to ressurect the theory of evolution somehow or other?
But it's from a "peer reviewed" journal... You Pro-Evilution guys are all about the peer review, aren't you??? Seems you only like the peer reviews that agree with your own kooky theories...
regards...
We need to refer to an expert on extraterrestrial life
who also knows all about sewage tanks
Like, duh! I guess you never heard of geosynchronous orbit?
I'm sorry, I wasn't really thinking along the lines of nutjob conspiracy theories about unseen geosynchronous comets seeding the planet.
"The physicists I've run into, however, are sharp as scalpels and probably constitute the best minds in all of science."
No doubt physicists are smart, but that doesn't mean they know squat about biology. Would you let Einstein fix your transmission?
Maybe it is just a complex virus that has not been seen before.
Of course. He had manifold talents, right?
"Resurrect?"
I don't see how. You've been on these threads long enough to know that evolution doesn't address the origin of life. It's possible life originated somewhere else, came here, and then evolved. We don't know enough to rule that out as a possibility, though there isn't any evidence to support it, yet.
How can life have evolved on earth, and then have evolved from outer space at the same time?
We don't know enough about abiogenesis yet to answer that. though we don't know enough to rule it out as a possibility, either.
The odds for THAT are, what? squared?
We don't know enough about the mechanism by which life originates to make that calculation.
If life transported to outer space, how could it survive, and live to return WITHOUT DNA?
Don't know yet. Certainly we don't know enough to rule out the possibility. It doesn't have anything to do with do with evolution, though.
Nope: as another poster reminds us, the theory was first proposed by Svante Arrhenius in 1903. It was the basis of a couple of classic 1930's science fiction stories by P Schuyler Miller.
ROFL!
I wouldn't say that about biologists. The Great Synthesis of molecular biology with evolutionary theory has meant that biologists need at least a good grasp of basic physics as well as chemistry in order to do research. They may be much more conservative than physicists, but it has more to do with the subjects of inquiry than any form of intellectual acument. Also, although there are physicists who have moved smoothly between important work in both physics and biology (such as Erwin Schrodinger and Carl Sagan), a good, or even great physicist doesn't necessarily have the expertise to do work in biology. (By expertise, I mean not any qualifications of intelligence, but rather, proper training and knowledge of the field that goes beyond the basics).
<< Nope: as another poster reminds us, the theory was first proposed by Svante Arrhenius in 1903. >>
The article did not say that the first such proposal was in 1974, only that Wickramasing had co-proposed it in 1974 -- and that is the truth.
Thanks for posting that link to the world-science article. Of course, it raises more questions than answers...
Wow. That's weirdtastic!
And the original paper...
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0601022
http://www.bsn.org.uk/view_all.php?id=11615
For more info google "Wickramasinghe kerala dna"
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.