Tough Earth bug may be from Mars

New Scientist ^ | 25 September 02 | Stuart Clark

[AndrewC]

I doubt that. Their starting 99.9 lethality rate seems way too high for the radiation dose used. But... the sensitivity variance may be very large.

I can't believe any of their numbers. They started off by killing nearly all(how can they determine that before the fact?)of the bacteria with a dose one hundredth of the lethal dose for humans. They improved it by a factor of 50 after 44 trials. That means that they achieved a kill of nearly all the bacteria while still only using 50% of the dose needed to kill a human(whatever that means, MLD is a clear standard). See my post 6 for the fact that E.Coli resistance is 1000 times greater that human resistance by the numbers of my unattributed citation.

[Nebullis]

They are clearly talking about a fixed population of microbes.

44 cycles. 0.1% survives at each cycle. You tell me how many E. coli they would have had to start with. I imagine at each cycle they had to test a series of radiation doses as well.

Each cycle represent several generations.

[Nebullis]

how can they determine that before the fact?

By titration and estimation of original population.

[AndrewC]

By titration and estimation of original population.

Before the fact?

You mean that it was a shoot-look-shoot... tally endeavor?

[VadeRetro]

"It seems that in biology there are exceptions to every rule," says Weeks.

There is an exception to this rule. Or there isn't.

[Nebullis]

You mean that it was a shoot-look-shoot... tally endeavor?

Senator Daschle, you may call it what you like. I'm outta here.

[Heartlander]

This doesn't prove evolution….

I do not see this as proof of evolution. I see this as proof of speculation, quick conclusions, and dogma within the scientific community.

I am no ‘theory of common descent’ advocate.
Actually, I was curious to see how the ‘theory of common descent’ advocates would respond to one of their own – that is the scientist in this article – Pavlov.

I’m just ringing the bell for him :)

[TN4Liberty]

It isn't hard to come up with billions of E-coli bacteria. It's not like you have to buy them. If you want to play Mr Scientific Method, knock yourself out. But you do a disservice to your argument when you extrapolate beyond what the data saya, and that is what you are doing in this case. I am not taking sides in this debate you folks want to have everyday. But this experiment does not appear to deal with generations, and is not generalizable into some proof of evolution. Not saying such proof does not exist in laboratory settings. But this isn't it.

[AndrewC]

Senator Daschle, you may call it what you like. I'm outta here.

I'm sorry you find questions of simple protocol difficult to answer. I don't know how they supposedly accomplished this feat since their numbers don't make sense. That is why I ask the questions. 1.5KGrays to 3KGrays seem to be close to 500 to 1000 times greater that 3Grays as my citation lists. So I don't know where they got the "sissy" E. Coli.

[Nebullis]

There is an exception to this rule. Or there isn't.

There must be! Exept if... If there were only some place where there isn't any trouble. Somewhere....

[Cleburne]

I'm a (Biblical!) creationist, and I have no problems with evolution. Actually, I think it's esentially necesary if one wishes to accept the Flood of Noah. A good deal of species and porbably genera development would need to happen in the period after the flood to fill in the numerous landscapes that would appear. I do not accept the spontaneous formation of life however, nor have I seen evidence for the development of families and the like- though I'm open on that. I think the rate of evolution is rather fast in certain circumstances, though I must say that is mostly speculation on my part, as I have not done enough study in that field yet.

[PatrickHenry]

Getting ready to bail out for the night placemarker.

[AndrewC]

Also from the New Scientist High-flying physicist sacked for falsifying data (AKA Peer review works after a fashion)

Schön's productivity was astonishing too. In 2001 he is reported to have averaged a new paper every eight days including four in each of the leading journals Nature and Science. Most scientists would be delighted with four papers a year in any journal.

In an appendix to the report, Schön says he disagrees with several of the report's conclusions but admits to have made "mistakes", which he "deeply regrets". He adds that he remains convinced that the physical effects he reported are real, and will be reproduced in future

[Nebullis]

It isn't hard to come up with billions of E-coli bacteria. It's not like you have to buy them. If you want to play Mr Scientific Method, knock yourself out.

No problem. For this experiment, without regeneration, you'd need 1x10^88 bacteria. Not in the billions as you propose. A billion would take about one night to grow in a 1/2 liter flask.

[AndrewC]

No problem. For this experiment, without regeneration, you'd need 1x10^88 bacteria.

My abacus comes up with the same number.

[Heartlander]

Haploid sexual species. Interesting.

Are human males next by an “infection by an as yet unclassified bacterium”? LOL!

[Boot Hill]

The "New Scientist" is to science what "Debka" is to truth.

--Boot

[Henchman]

If I eat enough of these bugs can I quit radiation treatment?

[Heartlander]

C’mon, be honest, you aren’t going through radiation treatment – you just got a bad hair cut and you don’t want people to hassle you:) LOL

[Physicist]

That's precisely the point of the statement in the article.

Then I don't at all understand what they are saying in the sentences I quoted. It certainly sounds to me that they are integrating the radiation dose over a 3.8-billion-year timescale, and saying that the result is too small (a totally invalid calculation).