Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    15 Nov '13 12:03
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10445788/Oldest-signs-of-life-on-Earth-found.html
  2. 15 Nov '13 13:22
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10445788/Oldest-signs-of-life-on-Earth-found.html
    Are these life forms as old as the ones they found in the Mars rock that helped NASA funding for missions to mars?
  3. 15 Nov '13 13:32 / 5 edits
    Originally posted by joe beyser
    Are these life forms as old as the ones they found in the Mars rock that helped NASA funding for missions to mars?
    There were no such Martian lifeforms found. If you referring to the so-called fossilized microbes found in a martian meteorite, they were actually elongated volcanic crystals with their corners and edges corroded off which just happened to end up being exactly the same kind of shape as typical bacterial cells -a simple case of mistaken identity.

    They should have suspected something was wrong with their interpretation right from the start because I suspected something was wrong right from the start because those tiny shapes were actually too small to credibly once have been living cells -unlike typical fossils of bacteria on Earth, they were not big enough to carry the minimum amount of genetic material thought to be needed to support a viable living cell -a glaring fact that seemed to be quietly stupidly ignored during all that silly hype were the stupid news media was practically saying it was 'scientifically proven' to be fossilized microbes. I didn't even bother to try and say "I told you so" when the truth eventually came out.
  4. 15 Nov '13 14:15
    Originally posted by humy
    There were no such Martian lifeforms found. If you referring to the so-called fossilized microbes found in a martian meteorite, they were actually elongated volcanic crystals with their corners and edges corroded off which just happened to end up being exactly the same kind of shape as typical bacterial cells -a simple case of mistaken identity.

    They should ...[text shortened]... icrobes. I didn't even bother to try and say "I told you so" when the truth eventually came out.
    Interesting. Do you think these crystals had any impact on the funding for NASA? It sounds plausible that life can be transported by meteors when everywhere we look including really hostile environments on earth there is life.
  5. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    15 Nov '13 14:15
    Originally posted by humy
    There were no such Martian lifeforms found. If you referring to the so-called fossilized microbes found in a martian meteorite, they were actually elongated volcanic crystals with their corners and edges corroded off which just happened to end up being exactly the same kind of shape as typical bacterial cells -a simple case of mistaken identity.

    They should ...[text shortened]... icrobes. I didn't even bother to try and say "I told you so" when the truth eventually came out.
    Definitely a case of wishful thinking. There may have been deeper motives also, along the line of using that discovery as leverage to get more money for NASA, bad part was it failed.
  6. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    16 Nov '13 22:15
    Originally posted by humy
    There were no such Martian lifeforms found. If you referring to the so-called fossilized microbes found in a martian meteorite, they were actually elongated volcanic crystals with their corners and edges corroded off which just happened to end up being exactly the same kind of shape as typical bacterial cells -a simple case of mistaken identity.

    They should ...[text shortened]... icrobes. I didn't even bother to try and say "I told you so" when the truth eventually came out.
    All of us should suspect something wrong every time they make claims that something is millions and billions of years old.

    The Instructor
  7. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    17 Nov '13 05:39
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    All of us should suspect something wrong every time they make claims that something is millions and billions of years old.

    The Instructor
    Fortunately for science we ignore such trolling and focus on reality.
  8. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    17 Nov '13 10:22
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Fortunately for science we ignore such trolling and focus on reality.
    It is unfortunate that so many are so gullible like you and will believe anything said in the name of science without doubt.

    The Instructor
  9. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    17 Nov '13 15:05
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    It is unfortunate that so many are so gullible like you and will believe anything said in the name of science without doubt.

    The Instructor
    No, scientists get to doubt, that is what enables other scientists independent proof of a given hypothesis. Doubt is powerful in science.

    YOU are the one unable to doubt, you are inculcated with a brainwashing system that destroys the ability to doubt.

    I feel sorry for what is left of your mind.
  10. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    18 Nov '13 21:40
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    No, scientists get to doubt, that is what enables other scientists independent proof of a given hypothesis. Doubt is powerful in science.

    YOU are the one unable to doubt, you are inculcated with a brainwashing system that destroys the ability to doubt.

    I feel sorry for what is left of your mind.
    I did not say scientists do not get to doubt. I said people like you are so gullible that you do not doubt what some scientists say, even when they make false claims concerning something that supposedly happened millions and billions of years that they can not possibly know.

    The Instructor
  11. 19 Nov '13 01:02
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I did not say scientists do not get to doubt. I said people like you are so gullible that you do not doubt what some scientists say, even when they make false claims concerning something that supposedly happened millions and billions of years that they can not possibly know.

    The Instructor
    Why can't we know what happened billions of years ago?

    I was there and saw it happening, I can tell you the scientists have it right.
  12. Standard member caissad4
    Child of the Novelty
    19 Nov '13 01:08
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Why can't we know what happened billions of years ago?

    I was there and saw it happening, I can tell you the scientists have it right.
    Me too !
  13. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    19 Nov '13 01:28 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I did not say scientists do not get to doubt. I said people like you are so gullible that you do not doubt what some scientists say, even when they make false claims concerning something that supposedly happened millions and billions of years that they can not possibly know.

    The Instructor
    Just out of curiosity, why are there no recorded histories of humans seeing all those strikes on the moon? Surely A&E would have seen all the fires on the moon since all those craters are for sure there and it had to have happened only 6000 years ago when A&E were alive.
  14. Standard member Soothfast
    0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,
    19 Nov '13 03:14
    "In the beginning, there was Strom Thurmond…"
  15. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    19 Nov '13 08:37
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Just out of curiosity, why are there no recorded histories of humans seeing all those strikes on the moon? Surely A&E would have seen all the fires on the moon since all those craters are for sure there and it had to have happened only 6000 years ago when A&E were alive.
    Those records were probably destroyed or buried deep in the ocean during the worldwide flood. Next.

    The Instructor