Today at 2pm there will some sort of press release or announcement regarding a discovery in the field of extra terrestrial life.

Might be something about water on other planets or might be something to do with the search for plants outside our solar system. Gonna be fun though.

12/2/2010 9:17:51 AM

These are always exciting, I hope it's at least bacteria

12/2/2010 9:27:23 AM

I hope it's only bacteria. Anything more advanced then that and someone will either want to harvest it for capital gain or see it as a threat and want to obliterate it.

12/2/2010 9:29:18 AM

there are 1000s of things worth harvesting out in the solar system already. they're just not worth getting to (yet)

[Edited on December 2, 2010 at 9:41 AM. Reason : f]

12/2/2010 9:41:00 AM

To be fair, if there is any kind of life my people will find a way to worship it as a deity.

12/2/2010 11:05:50 AM

Still pre-press conference, but some info is coming out:

http://gizmodo.com/5704158/nasa-finds-new-life

Quote :

"Hours before their special news conference today, the cat is out of the bag: NASA has discovered a completely new life form that doesn't share the biological building blocks of anything currently living in planet Earth. This changes everything. At their conference today, NASA scientist Felisa Wolfe Simon will announce that they have found a bacteria whose DNA is completely alien to what we know today. Instead of using phosphorus, the bacteria uses arsenic. All life on Earth is made of six components: carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus and sulfur. Every being, from the smallest amoeba to the largest whale, share the same life stream. Our DNA blocks are all the same. But not this one. This one is completely different. Discovered in the poisonous Mono Lake, California, this bacteria is made of arsenic, something that was thought to be completely impossible. While she and other scientists theorized that this could be possible, this is the first discovery. The implications of this discovery are enormous to our understanding of life itself and the possibility of finding beings in other planets that don't have to be like planet Earth. No details have been disclosed about the origin or nature of this new life form. We will know more today at 2pm EST but, while this life hasn't been found in another planet, this discovery does indeed change everything we know about biology. I don't know about you but I've not been so excited about a bacteria since my STD tests came back clean. And that's without counting yesterday's announcement on the discovery of a massive number of red dwarf stars, which may harbor trillion of Earths."

12/2/2010 11:31:30 AM

SAY WHAT!?!?!

12/2/2010 11:36:05 AM

It was discovered in a lake in california. Non DNA based life form so really pretty cool but not an "extra-terrestrial".

12/2/2010 12:19:18 PM

Some would argue that California is like another planet.

12/2/2010 12:27:28 PM

kinda disappointing, was hoping for discovery of life on an extrasolar planet.

12/2/2010 12:31:09 PM

this is a huge deal for evolutionary biology and genetics

but has nothing to do with extraterrestrial life or other planets.

just shows that even the basic structure of DNA can evolve in extreme conditions.

12/2/2010 12:38:45 PM

I wonder how NASA got involved with this then. I agree, this is an amazing discovery that is going to shake the fields of biology, but since it apparently evolved here on Earth in a toxic lake, I'm not sure how they got involved.

12/2/2010 12:57:03 PM

Quote :

"I don't know about you but I've not been so excited about a bacteria since my STD tests came back clean."

lolz

12/2/2010 1:11:22 PM

What kind of crazed Planet of the Apes meets Dawn of the Dead scenario are we going to see when these things evolve into monkeys?

12/2/2010 1:17:15 PM

^^^ opens up more possibilities for life on other planets that have hostile environments which we wouldn't normally consider could have life.

i guess you could say there's even a possibility of life on Venus with it's dense atmosphere of toxic gas.



[Edited on December 2, 2010 at 1:19 PM. Reason : ]

12/2/2010 1:18:43 PM

They got Bill Nye about to explain this shit on CNN.

12/2/2010 2:11:00 PM

Do you guys never check CC?

12/2/2010 2:34:30 PM

^I never do at work, way too risky.

This is a pretty big deal if everything in the press release turns out to be true. The PI making the announcement was a little annoying and short on details, so hopefully we will learn more once they start publishing. For those in biology and genetics, it definitely is one of those "where were you moments".

I was a little disappointed to hear that they believe it to be the result of a substitution instead of a second abiogenesis, because that would have been even more monumental.

12/2/2010 4:29:12 PM

So where's the link to the press release? Or a cut/paste job...


Also,

Quote :

"Some would argue that California is like another planet."

12/2/2010 4:40:17 PM

nothing new to see here folks. we've known about this for a long time...
[/unc fan]

12/2/2010 5:31:06 PM

Quote :

"So where's the link to the press release? Or a cut/paste job..."

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/astrobiology_toxic_chemical.html

[Edited on December 2, 2010 at 6:02 PM. Reason : .]

12/2/2010 6:01:46 PM

It's not as Earth-shattering as you may think; they took a sample of bacteria that already survived in arsenic-laden soil, gave them an environment with plenty of arsenic and no phosphorus, and noticed that some of them survived by using arsenic in place of phosphorus...but the arsenic-filled bacteria had plenty of empty space even though they took up about 60% more volume, and once returned to a phosphorus-rich environment they eschewed arsenic in favor of phosphorus.

BTW when people ingest arsenic, it does something similar, except that for some reason we end up dying instead of becoming more metal to the core.

12/3/2010 3:16:47 AM

you need to go read the wikipedia page on arsenic poisoning if you think it does something similar in our bodies LOL

12/3/2010 3:33:50 AM

I am pretty sure NASA knows more than they are telling us when it comes to ET Life.

12/3/2010 8:48:11 AM

Quote :

"It's not as Earth-shattering as you may think; they took a sample of bacteria that already survived in arsenic-laden soil, gave them an environment with plenty of arsenic and no phosphorus, and noticed that some of them survived by using arsenic in place of phosphorus...but the arsenic-filled bacteria had plenty of empty space even though they took up about 60% more volume, and once returned to a phosphorus-rich environment they eschewed arsenic in favor of phosphorus. "

Judging by how my biochem friends are reacting this is a Kepler-level achievement

iirc they thought sulfur-based life was more likely, I don't think anybody saw arsenic coming.

12/3/2010 9:48:19 AM

this just proves that god can create life in any form and that science is always playing catch up to him.

12/3/2010 9:49:47 AM

OMG really...no actually it explains how adaptable life is and how it can EVOLVE to survive even the most hostile environments, even changing its own DNA. I think this is a pretty spectacular event. Way to go 2010...just this summer humans designed the very first synthetic living cell and now we have a new life form which could give us insight into how the first COHNP DNA based life evolved out of our primordial soup.

12/3/2010 11:06:56 AM

Quote :

"you need to go read the wikipedia page on arsenic poisoning if you think it does something similar in our bodies LOL"

It takes the place of phosphorus in many of our biological molecules, and then when our bodies try to use them it fails spectacularly and we die

12/3/2010 11:08:25 AM

^^I am certain that Shaggy was being sarcastic.

12/3/2010 11:37:46 AM

^^^^
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_creationism

those crazy creationists!!

12/3/2010 11:56:25 AM

Yeah I didn't add "but there are actually people that would say that shit."

12/3/2010 1:47:48 PM

Quote :

"It's not as Earth-shattering as you may think; they took a sample of bacteria that already survived in arsenic-laden soil, gave them an environment with plenty of arsenic and no phosphorus, and noticed that some of them survived by using arsenic in place of phosphorus...but the arsenic-filled bacteria had plenty of empty space even though they took up about 60% more volume, and once returned to a phosphorus-rich environment they eschewed arsenic in favor of phosphorus"

This is a huge deal. My genetics professor stopped class yesterday so that we could talk about it and watch the press release. He compared it to the moon landing, splitting the atom, etc. He was pretty much giddy the entire time and wanted to cancel class so that he could go read more.

It doesn't just use or or metabolism arsenic, it replaces it's phosphorous structure with arsenic:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/DNA_chemical_structure.svg

The backbone of DNA is phosphorous and now they've found an organism that replaces that with arsenic. Fundamentally a different kind of life on our own planet.

Quote :

"It takes the place of phosphorus in many of our biological molecules, and then when our bodies try to use them it fails spectacularly and we die"

This is true. The poisoning comes about because arsenic is so chemically similar to phosphorous that our body thinks it can use but it can't and the toxic symptoms are a result.

[Edited on December 3, 2010 at 2:09 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on December 3, 2010 at 2:16 PM. Reason : I guess it's clear that you knew that, but I was just clarifying for others.]

12/3/2010 2:08:27 PM

Did anybody ever come across this in September?

http://www.news.com.au/technology/sci-tech/panspermia-theorists-say-indias-red-rain-contains-life-not-seen-on-earth/story-fn5fsgyc-1225913620448

12/11/2010 6:49:03 PM

Quote :

"While the panspermia angle is already being rejected by the scientific community at large, there's plenty of interest in the final finding of Prof Louis's team - the cells contain no DNA. "As a biologist, let me assure you that a cell-sized and shaped organism that reproduces, lives off LB and doesn't appear to have any nucleic acid template (DNA or RNA) is a revolutionary discovery in and of itself," one commenter wrote at TechnologyReview."

12/11/2010 7:23:10 PM

^^ wasn’t there an X-Files episode about that?

12/11/2010 9:56:45 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20101208/sc_yblog_thelookout/scientists-poking-holes-in-nasas-arsenic-eating-microbe-discovery

Quote :

"When NASA announced the discovery of an arsenic-eating microbe in a California lake last week, the agency hailed it as a suggestion that life as we know it, well, isn't life as we know it. "We have cracked open the door to what is possible for life elsewhere in the universe," Felisa Wolfe-Simon of the NASA Astrobiology Institute and U.S. Geological Survey, who led the study, said at a news conference. NASA's team of astrobiologists had taken samples of the bacteria from mineral-dense Lake Mono -- in a volcanic region of Northern California near the Nevada border -- and starved them of phosphate, the meal of choice for most DNA-based organisms. Instead, the scientists force-fed the bacteria a form of arsenic, and, much to the researchers' surprise, the bacteria continued to grow and flourish on their new diet of poison. But then other scientists began digging into the paper outlining NASA's research and findings, and they're now charging that the research behind it is flawed. "I was outraged at how bad the science was," University of British Columbia microbiology professor Rosie Redfield told Slate's Carl Zimmer. Redfield also posted a scathing critique of the report on her blog. Redfield and other detractors point out that when NASA scientists removed the DNA from the bacteria for examination, they didn't take the steps necessary to wash away other types of molecules. That means, according to the critics, that the arsenic may have merely clung to the bacteria's DNA for a ride without becoming truly ingrained into it. The report's detractors also note that the NASA scientists fed the bacteria salts that contained trace amounts of phosphate, so it's possible that the bacteria were able to survive on those tiny helpings of phosphate instead of the arsenic. "This paper should not have been published," University of Colorado molecular biology professor Shelley Copley told Slate's Zimmer. So why would NASA scientists make such a big deal out of a discovery that, according to critics, they must have suspected was questionable? "I suspect that NASA may be so desperate for a positive story that they didn't look for any serious advice from DNA or even microbiology people," UC-Davis biology professor John Roth told Zimmer. A NASA spokesperson brushed off the criticism. The paper's authors have not responded to the firestorm. Needless to say, that posture, too, has drawn the ire of critics. "That's kind of sleazy given how they cooperated with all the media hype before the paper was published," Redfield said."

12/12/2010 4:39:10 AM

Good Lord, NASA can't get a break.

They land on the moon, and people say they lie about it.

They claim a (largely) minor breakthrough in research regarding a new find in (terrestrial) biology, and people say the lie about it.

So they can't go too big or too small, or else people will call them fakers. I have at least a little trouble believing that the government is spending that much money to make shit up, especially in the latter case where it is so unimpressive to so many people.

12/12/2010 5:11:47 AM

The 'doubters' in this case are so highly qualified and are using such strong, accusatory language (and that's rare) that they can't be overlooked.

This is not a fake moon landing conspiracy theory.

12/12/2010 5:25:23 AM

Yeah, I'm thinking that this is more of NASA being desperate for relevance than trying to make stuff up. Funding isn't as good as it used to be and they are quickly becoming forgotten. This had potential to be a huge discovery, and they need it big time. So the jumped the gun.

12/12/2010 11:34:50 AM

Hmm. this is actually serious criticism.

it struck me as odd, that such a major discovery was purely by nasa astrobiologists without any support from traditional geneticists and/or microbiologists who work in this field daily. but like everyone else, i was caught up in all the excitement to suspect any sort of shenanigans.

this actually is detrimental to science. we already have enough problems from anti-science fundamentalists pushing their agendas as "alternate theories". the last thing science needs is unscrupulous researchers putting out halfassed crap.





[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 11:29 AM. Reason : ]

12/13/2010 11:29:08 AM

^ I can see it working for both sides.

In a sense, this is a triumph for science. People published bad research, and the scientific community puts an end to it pretty quickly. That's exactly what it is supposed to do. It's evidence that the process works.

On the other hand, it's ammunition for folks who like to point out how even venerable institutions and people can go really, really wrong. They'll say that similarly flawed research can come out in fields where the research is less easily tested and duplicated. Then the scientific community (because of all the familiar bugaboos - reliance on gov't funding, academic inbreeding, etc.) would be much less reliable for correcting itself.

And both are right.

[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 12:13 PM. Reason : a]

12/13/2010 12:12:44 PM

I think it's just a case of peer-reviewed science proving yet again it's self-correcting mechanism.

12/13/2010 12:37:57 PM

^, ^^ tru. good points.

12/13/2010 3:23:51 PM