• Existing user of old message board?

    Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.

Asteroid contains building blocks of life

Location
in a hidey-hole
Country
Wales
i was going to post this in News and Politics, but thought it might get lost in the hostile environment 😀
"
The chemical building blocks of life have been found in the grainy dust of an asteroid called Bennu, an analysis reveals.
Samples of the space rock, which were scooped up by a Nasa spacecraft and brought to Earth, contain a rich array of minerals and thousands of organic compounds.
These include amino acids, which are the molecules that make up proteins, as well as nucleobases - the fundamental components of DNA.
This doesn't mean there was ever life on Bennu, but it supports the theory that asteroids delivered these vital ingredients to Earth when they crashed into our planet billions of years ago." (BBC)


This sits very well with the theory that life was seeded around the universe by comets and asteroids. However, theories can change or be dismissed. The initial findings open a massive door, but ultimately will raise more questions than it answers.
It still doesn't disprove of a God, but perhaps some religious books might need revising quite soon 😀
 
i was going to post this in News and Politics, but thought it might get lost in the hostile environment 😀
"
The chemical building blocks of life have been found in the grainy dust of an asteroid called Bennu, an analysis reveals.
Samples of the space rock, which were scooped up by a Nasa spacecraft and brought to Earth, contain a rich array of minerals and thousands of organic compounds.
These include amino acids, which are the molecules that make up proteins, as well as nucleobases - the fundamental components of DNA.
This doesn't mean there was ever life on Bennu, but it supports the theory that asteroids delivered these vital ingredients to Earth when they crashed into our planet billions of years ago." (BBC)


This sits very well with the theory that life was seeded around the universe by comets and asteroids. However, theories can change or be dismissed. The initial findings open a massive door, but ultimately will raise more questions than it answers.
It still doesn't disprove of a God, but perhaps some religious books might need revising quite soon 😀
Or maybe not...... since scientist already know, and have known for years, the building blocks, and have them available here on Earth, yet they still haven’t been able to put them all together and create a life form, nor can they still explain where any of these came from in the first place.
 
Fred Hoyle speculated that comets contain viral and bacteriological material and when they opened one up hey ho! tons of the stuff. He reckoned the idea that life emerged on Earth without input from outer space was as geocentric as believing Earth was the centre of the solar system. Francis Crick also thought panspermia was a far more likely explanation but thought that the organic entities would be destroyed by radiation so their source could have been far-off, ancient civilisations. Both men were confirmed atheists so religion has nothing to do with it, people confuse mystery with mysticism and the origin of life is an eternal mystery. Even if you advocate panspermia it only kicks the can down the road because both these giants of bio-chemistry dismissed the idea that DNA could simply emerge from inorganic compounds, and cell walls are not made of protein so they cannot be generated by DNA. Terence Deacon hypothesises that auto catalytic reactions which produce a protective wall as a by-product would be the most rational starting point, and in cycles of wet and dry the walls would break allowing these autogenic bodies to regenerate, protect themselves and source the chemicals required to maintain their energy and work cycle - the three properties needed for life. But it's only a theory cos nobody has a scooby, that's why we have religion - the myticism to fill the gap left by the mystery.
 
Fred Hoyle speculated that comets contain viral and bacteriological material and when they opened one up hey ho! tons of the stuff. He reckoned the idea that life emerged on Earth without input from outer space was as geocentric as believing Earth was the centre of the solar system. Francis Crick also thought panspermia was a far more likely explanation but thought that the organic entities would be destroyed by radiation so their source could have been far-off, ancient civilisations. Both men were confirmed atheists so religion has nothing to do with it, people confuse mystery with mysticism and the origin of life is an eternal mystery. Even if you advocate panspermia it only kicks the can down the road because both these giants of bio-chemistry dismissed the idea that DNA could simply emerge from inorganic compounds, and cell walls are not made of protein so they cannot be generated by DNA. Terence Deacon hypothesises that auto catalytic reactions which produce a protective wall as a by-product would be the most rational starting point, and in cycles of wet and dry the walls would break allowing these autogenic bodies to regenerate, protect themselves and source the chemicals required to maintain their energy and work cycle - the three properties needed for life. But it's only a theory cos nobody has a scooby, that's why we have religion - the myticism to fill the gap left by the mystery.
Did you have Wikipedia for lunch?
 
i was going to post this in News and Politics, but thought it might get lost in the hostile environment 😀
"
The chemical building blocks of life have been found in the grainy dust of an asteroid called Bennu, an analysis reveals.
Samples of the space rock, which were scooped up by a Nasa spacecraft and brought to Earth, contain a rich array of minerals and thousands of organic compounds.
These include amino acids, which are the molecules that make up proteins, as well as nucleobases - the fundamental components of DNA.
This doesn't mean there was ever life on Bennu, but it supports the theory that asteroids delivered these vital ingredients to Earth when they crashed into our planet billions of years ago." (BBC)


This sits very well with the theory that life was seeded around the universe by comets and asteroids. However, theories can change or be dismissed. The initial findings open a massive door, but ultimately will raise more questions than it answers.
It still doesn't disprove of a God, but perhaps some religious books might need revising quite soon 😀

It explains how life may have got here but not how life started itself.....I was listening to an audio book on that topic and they regard the odds of life starting as exceedingly long, crazy long...It's quite interesting.
 
Did you have Wikipedia for lunch?
breakfast and dinner, I have a long term project going on which involves interviewing scientists, so I've had to bone up so I'm not too far out of my depth. I've interviewed six with one published, but I'm not with a production company or backer so it's very hard getting interviews unless they know the end product is definitely going to be widely aired or published, so it's all a bit stop go but I soldier on. I recommend 'The origin of life in the universe' by Fred Hoyle, several levels above Brian Cox.
 
Can't remember who said it but the jist was the chances of having the basics all in a primordial soup, and somehow the molecules fall into place and form a living thing, is the same as having all the components of a 747 in a giant shaker and a functioning aircraft to appear.
 
breakfast and dinner, I have a long term project going on which involves interviewing scientists, so I've had to bone up so I'm not too far out of my depth. I've interviewed six with one published, but I'm not with a production company or backer so it's very hard getting interviews unless they know the end product is definitely going to be widely aired or published, so it's all a bit stop go but I soldier on. I recommend 'The origin of life in the universe' by Fred Hoyle, several levels above Brian Cox.
Yep Hoyle, despite the silly criticism he gets, was a giant of his era.
 
breakfast and dinner, I have a long term project going on which involves interviewing scientists, so I've had to bone up so I'm not too far out of my depth. I've interviewed six with one published, but I'm not with a production company or backer so it's very hard getting interviews unless they know the end product is definitely going to be widely aired or published, so it's all a bit stop go but I soldier on. I recommend 'The origin of life in the universe' by Fred Hoyle, several levels above Brian Cox.
I could sense you had good scientific knowledge. Thanks for the heads up.
 
Can't remember who said it but the jist was the chances of having the basics all in a primordial soup, and somehow the molecules fall into place and form a living thing, is the same as having all the components of a 747 in a giant shaker and a functioning aircraft to appear.
Unfortunately Boeing can get the recipe wrong!
 
Scientists worked out how amino acids could be produced naturally, many decades ago. It's making the jump from amino acids to proteins that they can't figure out. Seeding by comets and asteroids seemed an easier way to explain things rather than messing about with a chemistry set.
Finding the ingredients for life, still puts us the same position as to how life formed. Just that all the right material is also whizzing about the universe.
 
Scientists worked out how amino acids could be produced naturally, many decades ago. It's making the jump from amino acids to proteins that they can't figure out. Seeding by comets and asteroids seemed an easier way to explain things rather than messing about with a chemistry set.
Finding the ingredients for life, still puts us the same position as to how life formed. Just that all the right material is also whizzing about the universe.
according to Hoyle the probability that cells emerged from amino acid soup is 1 with a hundred zeros after it to 1. take the biggest distance in the cosmos and divide it by the smallest distance and you only get 60 zeros - it's a super astronomical number and an infiniessimal probability, slightly smaller than our new stand being built in the near future.
 
according to Hoyle the probability that cells emerged from amino acid soup is 1 with a hundred zeros after it to 1. take the biggest distance in the cosmos and divide it by the smallest distance and you only get 60 zeros - it's a super astronomical number and an infiniessimal probability, slightly smaller than our new stand being built in the near future.
What do you do for an encore?

😗
 

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top