Cientista da NASA afirma: Existem sinais de vida extraterrestre nos meteoritos

domingo, março 06, 2011

Journal of Cosmology, 2011, Vol 13, March, 2011

Richard B. Hoover, Ph.D. NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center


Dr. Hoover has discovered evidence of microfossils similar to Cyanobacteria, in freshly fractured slices of the interior surfaces of the Alais, Ivuna, and Orgueil CI1 carbonaceous meteorites. Based on Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM) and other measures, Dr. Hoover has concluded they are indigenous to these meteors and are similar to trichomic cyanobacteria and other trichomic prokaryotes such as filamentous sulfur bacteria. He concludes these fossilized bacteria are not Earthly contaminants but are the fossilized remains of living organisms which lived in the parent bodies of these meteors, e.g. comets, moons, and other astral bodies. The implications are that life is everywhere, and that life on Earth may have come from other planets.

Members of the Scientific community were invited to analyze the results and to write critical commentaries or to speculate about the implications. These commentaries will be published on March 7 through March 10, 2011.

Official Statement from Dr. Rudy Schild, 
Center for Astrophysics, Harvard-Smithsonian, 
Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Cosmology.

Dr. Richard Hoover is a highly respected scientist and astrobiologist with a prestigious record of accomplishment at NASA. Given the controversial nature of his discovery, we have invited 100 experts and have issued a general invitation to over 5000 scientists from the scientific community to review the paper and to offer their critical analysis. Our intention is to publish the commentaries, both pro and con, alongside Dr. Hoover's paper. In this way, the paper will have received a thorough vetting, and all points of view can be presented. No other paper in the history of science has undergone such a thorough analysis, and no other scientific journal in the history of science has made such a profoundly important paper available to the scientific community, for comment, before it is published. We believe the best way to advance science, is to promote debate and discussion.


Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites: 
Implications to Life on Comets, Europa, and Enceladus

Richard B. Hoover, Ph.D. 

NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL


Environmental (ESEM) and Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM) investigations of the internal surfaces of the CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites have yielded images of large complex filaments. The filaments have been observed to be embedded in freshly fractured internal surfaces of the stones. They exhibit features (e.g., the size and size ranges of the internal cells and their location and arrangement within sheaths) that are diagnostic of known genera and species of trichomic cyanobacteria and other trichomic prokaryotes such as the filamentous sulfur bacteria. ESEM and FESEM studies of living and fossil cyanobacteria show similar features in uniseriate and multiseriate, branched or unbranched, isodiametric or tapered, polarized or unpolarized filaments with trichomes encased within thin or thick external sheaths. Filaments found in the CI1 meteorites have also been detected that exhibit structures consistent with the specialized cells and structures used by cyanobacteria for reproduction (baeocytes, akinetes and hormogonia), nitrogen fixation (basal, intercalary or apical heterocysts) and attachment or motility (fimbriae). Energy dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDS) studies indicate that the meteorite filaments are typically carbon rich sheaths infilled with magnesium sulfate and other minerals characteristic of the CI1 carbonaceous meteorites. The size, structure, detailed morphological characteristics and chemical compositions of the meteorite filaments are not consistent with known species of minerals. The nitrogen content of the meteorite filaments are almost always below the detection limit of the EDS detector. EDS analysis of terrestrial minerals and biological materials (e.g., fibrous epsomite, filamentous cyanobacteria; mummy and mammoth hair/tissues, and fossils of cyanobacteria, trilobites, insects in amber) indicate that nitrogen remains detectable in biological materials for thousands of years but is undetectable in the ancient fossils. These studies have led to the conclusion that the filaments found in the CI1 carbonaceous meteorites are indigenous fossils rather than modern terrestrial biological contaminants that entered the meteorites after arrival on Earth. The δ13C and D/H content of amino acids and other organics found in these stones are shown to be consistent with the interpretation that comets represent the parent bodies of the CI1 carbonaceous meteorites. The implications of the detection of fossils of cyanobacteria in the CI1 meteorites to the possibility of life on comets, Europa and Enceladus are discussed. 

Keywords: Origins of life, CI1 meteorites, Orgueil, Alais Ivuna, microfossils, cyanobacteria, comets, Europa, Enceladus

Paper here/Artigo aqui: Journal of Cosmology



Será que a Nomenklatura científica não vai se incomodar nenhum pouco com a frase final do Dr. Rudy Schild: 

"We believe the best way to advance science, is to promote debate and discussion." [Nós cremos que a melhor maneira de avançar a ciência é promover o debate e a discussão].

Debate e discussão quando a questão é Darwin e a sua teoria da evolução através da seleção natural e/o n mecanismos de A a Z, é coisa que a Nomenklatura científica foge assim como o Diabo foge da Cruz. Será que é por que esta realmente é a maior ideia que toda a humanidade já teve? Será que é por que Darwin locuta, evolutio finita??? 

Por que não há discussão e nem debate sobre a falência heurística da Síntese Evolutiva Moderna? Será que é por que uma nova teoria geral da evolução está sendo elaborada -- a Síntese Evolutiva Ampliada, e que pela montanha de evidências negativas, não pode ser selecionista, mas pode ter nuances lamarckistas? E quando não há debates e nem discussões fica todo mundo pensando a mesma coisa e ninguém pensando em nada!!!

A elaboração da nova teoria geral da evolução está seguindo um processo lento e gradual, e será entregue somente em 2020. Existe algum sinal de vida teórica realmente novo, ou vai ser a mesma miragem epistêmica???