[meteorite-list] CI1 meteorites and cyanobacteria

From: Becky and Kirk <bandk_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 21:44:20 -0600
Message-ID: <AD3EE79453604894913E59BE2C7CC850_at_owner55652f88b>

I would agree with your assessment Linton. I presume time will tell if that
proof indeed presents itself.

Cheers,
Kirk....:-)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Linton Rohr" <lintonius at earthlink.net>
To: "Becky and Kirk" <bandk at chorus.net>
Cc: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2011 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] CI1 meteorites and cyanobacteria


> Kirk, Marc, and listoids at large,
> I'm hardly qualified to opine scientifically, but I think we can all agree
> that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof".
> A good weekend to all.
> Linton
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Becky and Kirk" <bandk at chorus.net>
> To: "Marc Fries" <fries at psi.edu>; "Meteorite-list List"
> <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2011 4:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] CI1 meteorites and cyanobacteria
>
>
>> Hi All,
>> But---on the other hand---what Marc is saying could also be used for his
>> own "negative" analysis or his own "Lowell Effect" of this possible new
>> E.T. discovery. Indeed, Marc is in fact, "letting your own doubts make a
>> fool of your reason".
>>
>> Since everyone will always have their own "predisposed opinion"---one
>> could say this about both sides of the coin----yes? We need to wait and
>> see what future analysis may find before pronouncing something as "110 %
>> bullshit".
>>
>> Just my two cents.
>> Kirk.....:-)
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Marc Fries" <fries at psi.edu>
>> To: "Meteorite-list List" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2011 5:19 PM
>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] CI1 meteorites and cyanobacteria
>>
>>
>>> Howdy all
>>>
>>> Here's my two cents, pure and simple - this paper is 110% bullshit. The
>>> filaments the paper addresses are nothing new. They are apparently
>>> amorphous sulfates formed from aqueous alteration of fine sulfides in
>>> the CI's. You can see that in the EDS spectra published in the paper -
>>> the predominant elements are sulfur, oxygen and magnesium. I.e., they
>>> are sulfates (e.g. Mg2SO4 + hydration water). Some silicon "leaks" into
>>> the measurement from materials behind one of the filaments.
>>> I happen to have two CIs on loan to me right now - Orgueil and Tonk. I
>>> have Raman spectra of the filaments found in both meteorites. They are
>>> sulfates. My personal Surprise Meter registers a whopping Zero.
>>> The argument is made that the lack of nitrogen in these "fossils"
>>> implies that they pre-date their residence on Earth. This argument
>>> starts with the assumption that the filaments are fossils, and then uses
>>> the non-detection of nitrogen to "prove" that they are fossils. This is
>>> a circular argument. Here's a more supportable hypothesis: no nitrogen
>>> was detected because they are not fossils, but rather exactly what has
>>> been known for decades - they are amorphous sulfate filaments caused by
>>> hydration of fine sulfides in the rock.
>>>
>>> This paper is a result of something I like to call the Lowell Effect.
>>> Basically, it is what happens when someone stares into an instrument
>>> expecting (or hoping) to see proof of life in the target. Percival
>>> Lowell did it through a telescope with Mars, drawing elaborate "canals"
>>> in his mind which indicated (to him) an advanced martian civilization.
>>> Certain other scientists do it with the Apex chert while peering through
>>> microscopes, and with hydrothermal graphite found in rocks from Isua,
>>> Greenland through all manner of instruments. The author of this paper
>>> pulled a Lowell Effect result out of his posterior after looking at CIs
>>> with an electron microscope. Where I come from, we also call that
>>> "letting your hopes make a fool of your reason".
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Marc Fries
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 5, 2011, at 6:56 AM, drtanuki wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear List,
>>>> There is a very interesting newly published paper about cyanobacteria
>>>> found inside CI1 meteorites:
>>>>
>>>> Journal of Cosmology, 2011, Vol 13, xxx.
>>>> JournalofCosmology.com, March, 2011
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> The abstract can be read here:
>>>>
>>>> http://lunarmeteoritehunters.blogspot.com/2011/03/fossils-of-cyanobacteria-in-ci1.html
>>>>
>>>> Best Always, Dirk Ross...Tokyo
>>>> ______________________________________________
>>>> Visit the Archives at
>>>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> Visit the Archives at
>>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> Visit the Archives at
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>
Received on Sat 05 Mar 2011 10:44:20 PM PST