Slashdot Mirror


'Worms From Hell' Unearth Possibilities For Extraterrestrial Life

An anonymously submitted article says, "For the first time, scientists have found complex, multi-celled creatures living a mile and more below the planet’s surface, raising new possibilities about the spread of life on Earth and potential subsurface life on other planets and moons (abstract). ... The research is likely to trigger scientific challenges and cause some controversy because it places far more complex life in an environment where researchers have generally held it should not, or even cannot, exist."

145 comments

  1. is it just me? by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Informative

    the link doesn't work

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:is it just me? by CFBMoo1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Tried it on both Windows and Linux. Link isn't functional.

      --
      ~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
    2. Re:is it just me? by cculianu · · Score: 1

      Yeah, same here.

    3. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anchor with no href. Clicking the feed link will direct you towards more links.

    4. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/discovery-of-worms-from-hell-deep-beneath-earths-surface-raises-new-questions/2011/05/31/AGnzJTGH_story.html

    5. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Isn't there supposed to be a href inside an anchor tag? I think I read that somewhere...

    6. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here you go : functionnal link

    7. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Slashdot is just screwed up.

      * The link doesn't work at all
      * I come read the comments and see others are having the same problem, so I go to log-in and comment
      * If I try to log in, my username password appears behing a banner ad.
      * When I do succeed in logging in, I can no longer see any comments.
      * So, here I am posting as AC.

    8. Re:is it just me? by MurukeshM · · Score: 2

      The original firehose submission contains plenty of links. http://science.slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=21377118 .

    9. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the a tag is empty, the link doesn't work for anyone.

    10. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    11. Re:is it just me? by dredwolff · · Score: 2

      awesome, the anchor tag is empty, just "a", not "a href=..."

    12. Re:is it just me? by phorm · · Score: 1

      It appears to be an "A" tag without the "HREF" portion...

    13. Re:is it just me? by theonesandtwos · · Score: 3, Funny

      I thought it was a feature. I mean no one RTFA's anyway right?

    14. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    15. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If link availability would change from one OS to the other, we would soon all be doomed, for sure. It would be like a revival from IE6 times, but worse.

    16. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They put in 'a HTML' tags but failed to include the 'href' attribute, so it looks like a link but it isn't one.

    17. Re:is it just me? by junglee_iitk · · Score: 1

      Hehehe... you could have just viewed the source:

      <a>multi-celled creatures living a mile and more below the planetâ(TM)s surface</a>

      That thing won't open even in lynx.

    18. Re:is it just me? by Roblimo · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's a bug of some sort. I'm putting the link in right, but something is wrong. The link is to this WaPo story.

    19. Re:is it just me? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      the link doesn't work

      Now that the worms have been outed, they're trying to suppress it before everyone finds out.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    20. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn Canadians, eh?

    21. Re:is it just me? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      What has the OS to do with it? Ah ... you thought a reboot would fix the link? *facepalm*

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    22. Re:is it just me? by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 1

      the link doesn't work

      The worms have cut the cable.

    23. Re:is it just me? by Intron · · Score: 1

      IE6 is no longer supported

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    24. Re:is it just me? by underqualified · · Score: 1

      Probably more like a test.

    25. Re:is it just me? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      the link doesn't work

      The worms have cut the cable.

      What do you mean, "*The worms* cut the cable"? How could they cut the cable, man? They're animals! Oh dear Lord Jesus, this ain't happening, man... This can't be happening, man! This isn't happening! Aw, man. And I was getting short. Four more weeks and out. Now I'm going to buy it on this rock! It ain't half-fair, man! Four more weeks! Aw, man!

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    26. Re:is it just me? by fractalspace · · Score: 4, Funny

      Tried on LCD monitor, then on CRT. Still doesn't work.

    27. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ha ha ;)

    28. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      So much for the theory that Linux users are always more sophisticated! - a Debian user

    29. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tried on LCD monitor, then on CRT. Still doesn't work.

      It works on my phone, maybe your resolution is too high!

    30. Re:is it just me? by slackbheep · · Score: 1

      " Are you sure it's plugged in on both ends? "

    31. Re:is it just me? by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

      Well, tried it with a mouse, then a trackball, then a touchscreen. Nada.

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    32. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geesh, aren't there enough twists/turns implied in the subject matter without the link(s) issue? :-)
      Or, perhaps all the posters just believe in 'one good turn deserves another.'

    33. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe try it on a laptop, or desktop?

    34. Re:is it just me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's a Windows user, what did you expect? The reboot-reflex is very strong with them.

    35. Re:is it just me? by BranMan · · Score: 1

      "Game over man! GAME OVER!"

  2. Challenge Accepted. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    As a Wikipedia frequenter, I take the broken link as proof that there is no evidence.

    1. Re:Challenge Accepted. by Flyerman · · Score: 1

      As a slashdot frequenter, I can't believe this many people even click on TFA.

    2. Re:Challenge Accepted. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People frequently click the link, how do you think slash dotting works?

      They just don't READ it

    3. Re:Challenge Accepted. by Chemisor · · Score: 1

      You mean it isn't enough to just shade the link in blue?

    4. Re:Challenge Accepted. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just look at the pictures.

    5. Re:Challenge Accepted. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If worms had been meant to fly they'd have been given wings. As is, they are pretty good at tunnels. Scientific fact.

      "Fat, drunk, Jimmified and stupid is no way to go through life, son" - Dean Vernon Wormer, Animal House

      Oh,oh Wormer, sniffs air, senses Wikitroll ...

  3. It's not that inconceivable. by MMC+Monster · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's not such a big deal. It's only a mile's commute to the nearest Starbucks.

    --
    Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    1. Re:It's not that inconceivable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not such a big deal. It's only a mile's commute to the nearest Starbucks.

      A whole mile? That in itself is pretty inconceivable. I have 1 within 100m of my house, and another at about 500m.

    2. Re:It's not that inconceivable. by Trails · · Score: 2

      And yet there's no complex life there, either...

    3. Re:It's not that inconceivable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lucky.

      Nearest Starbucks to my house by road length: 41 miles.
      Nearest non-Starbucks coffee house: 34 miles.

  4. Here it is: by rizole · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here it is
    Multicellular life deep in the earth is interesting but I'd like to find sentient slashdot editors.

    1. Re:Here it is: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How would being self-aware help an editor? Wouldn't it help more if they were aware of other things besides themselves?

    2. Re:Here it is: by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      It would at least be a step in the right direction...

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    3. Re:Here it is: by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

      Most life is sentient. It's how they find food, mates and avoid threats.

      --
      Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
  5. Borked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well when an anchor "a" tag has no href, links generally don't work...

    1. Re:Borked by Abstrackt · · Score: 1

      Computers are stupid that way, only working with what you give them....

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
  6. For those who want to RTFA by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here is at least some information for it at Nature. Wherever there is some usable energy, some kind of life seems to attach to it. Fascinating.

    --
    Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    1. Re:For those who want to RTFA by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I wonder if life could actually start in an environment like that, as opposed to starting in the oceans like it did on earth and then migrating downwards over millions of years. If life needs relatively hospitable conditions to start then we should not expect to find life on planets with only harsh environments.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:For those who want to RTFA by hitmark · · Score: 1

      Now i am thinking about mind worms, for Alpha Centauri...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    3. Re:For those who want to RTFA by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      I wonder if life could actually start in an environment like that, as opposed to starting in the oceans like it did on earth and then migrating downwards over millions of years. If life needs relatively hospitable conditions to start then we should not expect to find life on planets with only harsh environments.

      This answers a different question - essentially "what are the (current) parameters for environmental conditions that allow life (as we know it)". We just kicked that can down the road a bit. Obviously, if lifeforms cannot survive in a particular environment it makes it unlikely that the started out in that environment but the converse isn't necessarily true. The planetary environment was markedly different when life started - warmer temperatures, little oxygen and just the fact that there weren't any other critters to eat made things very, very different.

      So, this just expands the biosphere a bit and suggests that life doesn't necessarily need air conditioning. They just don't make primordial ooze like they used to.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:For those who want to RTFA by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Don't see anything fundamentally against it. However, as the emergence of life seems to be a rather rare event, I still favor the oceans - more chemicals there, more energy. Everything going on in the deep biosphere is damn slow due to resource constraints. In my opinion, the chance for life emerging is still higher in the oceans.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    5. Re:For those who want to RTFA by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Now I am digging through my age-old backups to find the Alpha Centauri install disc...

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    6. Re:For those who want to RTFA by hitmark · · Score: 1

      What, not permanently installed? Oh wait, that would result in a catastrophic reduction of productivity...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  7. Linky! by TrisexualPuppy · · Score: 3, Informative
    1. Re:Linky! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      yup, it works. why dont we make you an editor instead of the random guy that approved the article?

  8. Not surprising by memojuez · · Score: 2

    More from the article: "The research is likely to trigger scientific challenges and cause some controversy because it places far more complex life in an environment where researchers have generally held it should not, or even cannot, exist."

    I thought they stopped saying that after finding life in the Challenger Deep section of The Mariana Trench.

    --
    Signature applied for, Patent Pending
    1. Re:Not surprising by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 2

      It's somewhat different, though - the deep sea regions still get a constant supply of nutrients that basically rain down from the more productive ocean layers. In the deep geosphere, all the worms can live off are lithotrophic bacteria that live from certain anorganic chemicals found down there. But yeah, in the end, not surprising - life seems always to find a way.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    2. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More from the article: "The research is likely to trigger scientific challenges and cause some controversy because it places far more complex life in an environment where researchers have generally held it should not, or even cannot, exist."

      I thought they stopped saying that after finding life in the Challenger Deep section of The Mariana Trench.

      To be fair, the researchers probably have said stuff like 'According to what we currently know about life, it doesn't seem very likely that there would be complex life in a place like that'. And, as we all know, the media will report that sentence as 'RESEARCHER MOCKS DOUBTERS, PROMISES TO CUT OFF LEG, ARM IF DEEP LIFE DISCOVERED'.

  9. Worms deep down, hunh? by JockTroll · · Score: 2

    Bless the maker and his water, bless the coming and going of him, may his passing cleanse the world.

    --
    Geeks are so full of shit that "beating the crap out of them" takes a whole new meaning.
    1. Re:Worms deep down, hunh? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Bless the maker and his water, bless the coming and going of him, may his passing cleanse the world.

      Not that kind of worm. This kind. We have to wait a couple of million years until the planet dries up for the big ones. Oh, a FTL travel. And Spice.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  10. How big are these hell-worms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The spice must flow...

    1. Re:How big are these hell-worms? by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      Half a millimetre long. (The spice must trickle.)

      (About 1/50th of an inch, for the uneducated.)

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    2. Re:How big are these hell-worms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The National Geographic article says half a millimeter, but the Washington Post article says they're up to 1/3 of an inch (8.5 mm, for the uneducated). I wonder which one is correct...

    3. Re:How big are these hell-worms? by idontgno · · Score: 1

      Sandtrout fry.

      If the scientists had been looking for it, they'd have seen a pre-spice mass among the rock strata there. Lucky they didn't use water in their drilling system.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  11. I was expecting bazookas :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    or at least a concrete donkey.

  12. Rules for life by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

    How many times now have we found life in extreme conditions where we were convinced life couldn't exist?

    And given that we believe life adapted to the environment on Earth (early organisms didn't even breathe oxygen) then why we are so convinced that theoretical life in the universe must conform to the rules on Earth?

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    1. Re:Rules for life by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wouldn't say that we generally assume conditions to be necessarily earth-like for life to arise. However, there are hard constraints on conditions that allow complex chemistry to happen - and those limit the habitable range. Basically, the only reasonably complex chemistry happens with carbon - so you are automatically limited to conditions where carbon compounds are stable. That sets an upper bound for temperatures, for example. On the other hand, you want some reactivity - life has to be dynamic, after all. That gives you a lower bound for temperatures. Earth happens to be in the middle there, but there are quite some deviations from earth-like conditions where life would be possible, biochemically.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    2. Re:Rules for life by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      We're now seeing examples where DNA can be built using arsenic. The principle still applies that life on Earth is believed to be a response to the environment on Earth. Why wouldn't that be true elsewhere?

      Our entire precept of what is required for life to exist could be flawed based upon our limited perspective.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    3. Re:Rules for life by Trailer+Park+Boy · · Score: 1

      We're now seeing examples where DNA can be built using arsenic.

      We're now seeing examples where DNA can be contaminated with arsenic. Fixed that for ya,

    4. Re:Rules for life by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The potentially arsenic-"based" bacteria are still carbon based. Only the phosphate links in the sugar-phosphate backbone of their DNA are possible replaced by arsenate links, possible the phosphates in their ATP or GTP, too. This is interesting, but not too surprising, as arsenic is chemically quite close to phosphorus.

      I am not arguing that earth-like conditions are a necessity, but that there are hard limits on conditions. If you want to have life you need a chemistry that is sufficiently complex to store information and to build structures. With that, you are down to carbon. Nothing else (with the very, very low possibility of silicon being an exception) makes a sufficiently complex chemistry. You need metabolism, so you need some kind of energy gradient and therefor chemical dynamics on a timescale that makes exploiting that gradient possible. Another hard limit. Those limits are not given by taking earth as a standard, this is basic thermodynamics, in the end.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    5. Re:Rules for life by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "How many times now have we found life in extreme conditions where we were convinced life couldn't exist?"

      Approximately once per research facility on the cusp of closure.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    6. Re:Rules for life by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      utter rubbish, several atoms and also certain groups of atoms can form chained, non-linear complex structures, such as phosphazenes. Your carbon chauvinism based on sample size of one is showing.

    7. Re:Rules for life by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 2

      Ah, ruby, polite as ever. Now please show me the functional diversity on phosphazenes, anything except being a base? And show me the stable phosphazenes without carbon based attachements. Also, show me a phophazene polymer that could be used for information storage. They are useful reagents, but making up a biochemistry on that basis? Highly doubtful.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    8. Re:Rules for life by cavebison · · Score: 1

      If you want to have life you need a chemistry that is sufficiently complex to store information and to build structures.

      That may depend on what constitutes "life". We have no idea what "consciousness" is, and even raise hypotheticals about whether a sufficiently complex computer could be called "alive". So even if we don't find life "like us", there still could be life out there, which is to say consciousness, but we may not recognise it until our own understanding of it matures.

    9. Re:Rules for life by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      see, there you go with your carbon chauvinism again, only knowing the organic nonlinear phosphazenes, while nonlinear inorganic ones such as with sulfur exist. Information storage can be a simple matter of substituting those "R"s the polymer chemists so love to put in their diagrams with some variety of other things. Worth mentioning too that many metal oxides can form nonlinear polymers including cyclical patterns. A life form based on such things might exist in conditions we would think of as totally hostile to life.

      As for politeness, slashdot is more fun without too much of it. Rather like the more lively debates in the UK legislature.

  13. live there, or just displaced to there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really that exciting?

    "H. mephisto was found in water flowing from a borehole about one mile below the surface in the Beatrix gold mine."

    So, how sure are we the buggers weren't just swept down there by an underground stream or tracked in by the gold miners?

    Finding them down there doesn't mean they actually 'live' there.

    1. Re:live there, or just displaced to there? by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Read the rest of the article.

      "The nematodes he ultimately discovered live in extremely hot water coming from boreholes fed by rock fissures and pools."

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    2. Re:live there, or just displaced to there? by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 3, Informative

      They were found at depths ranging from 900m down to 3.6km (3000ft-2mi). Carbon dating their environment showed they'd been there for at least 3000 years. (The team that found this also found radiation eating bacteria at similar depths five years ago, they been through the standard objections before.)

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    3. Re:live there, or just displaced to there? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      Is carbon dating viable in a radioactive environment?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    4. Re:live there, or just displaced to there? by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's especially radioactive. It's just rock. So it's the same level of radiation that radiometric dating has been calibrated for. (That said, IDFK. And the article I read had the phrase "they carbon-dated the water", so I don't know if they are using the phrase "carbon-dating" as a dumbed down way of saying "radiometric dating", or "water" to mean "nematode's environment". Either way, not much help there.)

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
  14. SEM by tsa · · Score: 1

    Pity that the only picture available is some unclear SEM picture of the worm's head. Why not a picture of the whole animal? Now we still don't know what it looks like and how long it is.

    --

    -- Cheers!

    1. Re:SEM by Intron · · Score: 1

      The worm is now claiming that its twitter account was hacked and somebody else sent that picture. But it does admit that it really is that long.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    2. Re:SEM by PitaBred · · Score: 2

      Wired's article said 0.05cm. So half a millimeter. Can't really get a picture of that too easily. I mean, it's just a roundworm... it's not like it's that amazing unless you get up close.

    3. Re:SEM by Njoyda+Sauce · · Score: 1

      TFA mentions that they grow to a third of an inch. Huge, no, multicellular yes.

      --

      You can only be young once, but you can be immature forever.
  15. I hope these are not Graboids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope these are not Graboids?

  16. oblig... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one, welcome our new hell-worm overlord.

  17. Karma whoring for jesus by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 2

    Actually it worked in the submission (I saw it after I'd submitted an unintentional dupe.) From memory it was Cosmos.

    My own links were via NewScientist: This story.
    A story about the discovery of radiation eating bacteria by the same team.
    And a long article from '96 about what this all means for the search for life on (or in) Mars.

    --
    Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
  18. And in winter all the Gorillas die from the cold.. by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 2

    lithotrophic bacteria that live from certain anorganic chemicals found down there

    According to the team that found these nematodes (and the bacteria five years earlier), the bacteria lives off of radiation in the rocks, not chemistry. (Come back in a few years to see what eats the worms?)

    --
    Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
  19. Re:And in winter all the Gorillas die from the col by Intron · · Score: 1

    lithotrophic bacteria that live from certain anorganic chemicals found down there

    According to the team that found these nematodes (and the bacteria five years earlier), the bacteria lives off of radiation in the rocks, not chemistry. (Come back in a few years to see what eats the worms?)

    Trapped miners?

    --
    Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
  20. I'm wary of this theory. by wcrowe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My question is this: just because you find life in extreme conditions, does not mean it can develop in those conditions. It seems more likely to me that life develops in more ideal conditions, then migrates to areas where conditions are more harsh. Am I being too skeptical or pessimistic?

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by greymond · · Score: 1

      I tend to agree with that thought. Looking at human history as an example, we have adapted to live in some very extreme conditions, albeit we often create artificial devices to do so, however, it still stands that we have found a way to live in both arctic climates as well as deserts and tropical forests for centuries. While animals don't have the mechanical capacity we do, life still adapts to new challenges and environmental changes.

    2. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by Fractal+Dice · · Score: 1

      But (unless I missed a memo) we actually don't know what conditions the first life formed in. Although we tend to focus on the ocean environment, it's entirely possible that the first cells formed in some more exotic deep crevise and only later migrated to the surface. In many ways, walking around in the open air makes *us* one of the most exotic extremophiles of the world.

    3. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by danlip · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I agree with you, but this still has implications for the possibility of extraterrestrial life. Mars used to be much warmer and wetter, so it is possible that life developed under more ideal conditions and continued to survive under harsh conditions.

      But my doubts come because TFA says the worms were "found in water flowing from a borehole about one mile below the surface". That seems like plenty of opportunity for contamination. I'd be very skeptical that there are worms one mile below the surface of the earth in locations not touched by human activity. If you found them in a freshly drilled borehole with no water flowing that would be much more interesting.

    4. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      But (unless I missed a memo) we actually don't know what conditions the first life formed in. Although we tend to focus on the ocean environment, it's entirely possible that the first cells formed in some more exotic deep crevise and only later migrated to the surface. In many ways, walking around in the open air makes *us* one of the most exotic extremophiles of the world.

      Here is one of the later memos. Yes, the conditions on earth at the beginning of biogenesis (as opposed to the other Genesis) were very, very different that the current environment. We wouldn't like it at all. Many theories of biogenesis use solid phase chemicals (like various clays) as early catalysts and / or structural parts of the earliest life forms.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by PitaBred · · Score: 3, Informative

      Neither. You've just proposed a hypothesis. That's what all of science is about.

      Really, it's ok to say "we don't know". We can't say for sure if it developed down there or migrated. I doubt the scientists said anything to that effect, either. Or even if they did, most of them wouldn't. Science articles are typically rife with horribly inaccurate "paraphrasing" because the journalist doesn't know what they're talking about and try to translate scientific jargon to "layman" speak.

    6. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Early earth atmosphere was not this kind of garden atmosphere we enjoy today. Life forms existed in that era (such as cyanobacteria).

    7. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Develop? Life was created as is, it didn't develop or "evolve"

      Only FSM can create life, it doesn't just suddenly appear.

    8. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by gman003 · · Score: 1

      In principle, that seems plausible. Life could have migrated there, not evolved. That may be the case for the worms, but the bacteria they feed on seem different. Feeding off radiation in a high-pressure, anaerobic environment? That seems too big a difference to easily explain via evolution from aboveground organisms. I wouldn't rule that out as a possibility, but it still seems dubious.

    9. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by radtea · · Score: 1

      It seems more likely to me that life develops in more ideal conditions, then migrates to areas where conditions are more harsh. Am I being too skeptical or pessimistic?

      It seems more likely to me that the Sun and planets move around the Earth.

      It seems more likely to me that the continents stay put.

      It seems more likely to me that humans were created by a conscious act of a supreme being rather than evolved by chance over billions of years.

      It seems to me that motion just naturally comes to rest after a time.

      It seems to me that if I spin around and throw something it will follow a curved path for a while before straightening out.

      It seems to me that people might have learned from the past three hundred years that what seems likely to them is unrelated to what actually is.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    10. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the Earthly Human population spread disproves completely your suggestion : right now, most births occurs in the poor 2/3rd of the world (harsh conditions : checked), to subsequently migrate to the wealthy (and subjectively nicer conditions) parts of it ...

      Weapons and their carrying soldiers move the other way around (the same behaviour is also seen in Western garbage), and are considered living, through their free will is not their distinguishing feature.

    11. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      I don't think you're being skeptical, but too narrow-viewed.

      Earth may have served as an optimal place for life to develop in some areas, and then evolve to tolerate/inhabit less-optimal environs.

      That doesn't preclude the idea that the process took place one step earlier, either: that life getting to earth in the first place may have ALSO been a matter of it surviving inhospitable conditions until it reached a place where it could flourish.

      In fact, it suggests that (with the sample size of 1, of course) that life probably is opportunistic generally, and wherever it finds a place to get a foothold, it will expand to every conceivable niche (and a few inconceivable ones). Considering the wealth of 'footholds' in the universe, I'd say that every extremophile discovered just broadens the likelihood that we're going to stumble on life out there. Whether we recognize it as such is another question.

      --
      -Styopa
    12. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > That seems like plenty of opportunity for contamination.

      By what route?

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    13. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by danlip · · Score: 1

      By the borehole, which sounds like it's been there for a while. By the water, which may be flowing into the borehole from the surface. By the humans, which from looking at the picture are gathering samples without wearing gloves or a mask, or at least are visiting the area without gloves and masks. I don't see any precautions against these.

    14. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That seems like plenty of opportunity for contamination. I'd be very skeptical that there are worms one mile below the surface of the earth in locations not touched by human activity.

      And here, ladies and gentlemen, we witness how life, piggybacking on humans who will be long forgotten in five billion of years, moved to the inside of the earth and survived the end of its star.

    15. Re:I'm wary of this theory. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree. Life on earth probably originated in more ideal conditions, but, at best, all this tells us is that more ideal conditions produce life much faster. On a planet without ideal conditions, life could still come about given enough time, though much longer than it took on Earth, no doubt. It might even take longer than seeding from comets. None-the-less, I think anywhere with significant potential energy gradients and a good selection of elemental building blocks is capable of generating life.

  21. Why controversy? by LongearedBat · · Score: 1

    The research is likely to trigger scientific challenges and cause some controversy because it places far more complex life in an environment where researchers have generally held it should not, or even cannot, exist.

    If the critters have conclusively been found to live there, then people will just have to accept it, recalibrate their views on what's possible, and continue from there. Why the controversy?

  22. Archaia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Very interesting. So far, I was only aware of the archaia that seem to be responsible for oil production and other mineral deposits.

    1. Re:Archaia by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Very interesting. So far, I was only aware of the archaia that seem to be responsible for oil production and other mineral deposits.

      Nice troll. Abiogenic production of oil has been completed refuted as a valid hypothesis.

      Although the abiogenic hypothesis was accepted by many geologists in the former Soviet Union, it allegedly fell out of favor because it never made any useful prediction for the discovery of oil deposits.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Archaia by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      Unless I'm misreading him, GP didn't say anything about abiogenic oil production. He said that oil is produced by archaea, which I thought was more or less the standard theory of oil production (plus or minus bacteria).

    3. Re:Archaia by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Hmm. I still think that's not a currently accepted theory. You certainly see archea in wells and in oil tanks, but you see them everywhere. The quick Google search didn't enlighten me much. My reply was assuming that the OP did mean essentially abiogenic oil production, could be wrong.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  23. just because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you call yourself an "expert" and thus come to a "logical conclusion" doesn't mean your statement is the end-all, be-all of human ingenuity and knowledge.

    It actually makes you look like a damn idiot, to be truthful.

  24. life probably orginated in extreme conditions by peter303 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Many biological reactions at surface pressures and temperatures require catalysts called enzymes to proceed. Protein synthesis and the citric cycle are two basic examples. These do not require catalysts at high temperature and pressures according to work Robert Hazen of Carnegie Institute.

    After life began it evolved enzymes to expand into other ecological niches. For example, the ocean surface is an energy rich area with solar radiation.

    1. Re:life probably orginated in extreme conditions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention that life on Earth was theorized to have begun in the primordial sea which would be entirely uninhabitable by most (if not all) life forms on Earth these days.

  25. Extraterrestrial Underground Worms, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When is the Spice gonna flow?

  26. Beware! by munozdj · · Score: 1

    Anything about locusts?

    --
    Democracy: Crowdsourcing a country near you
  27. Do the worms get their 15 minutes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great it's going to be the Chilean miners all over again. Anderson Cooper will interview them about being trapped a mile underground and Oprah will give them a trip to Australia.

  28. Please.... by sconeu · · Score: 1

    Allow me to be the first to say it...

    It's life, Jim, but not as we know it.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  29. Not Knowing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    multi-celled creatures living a mile and more below the planet’s surface,

    There goes that certainty of apocalypse. We just don't do knowing very well.

  30. one word... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    tremors....

  31. "Worms of the Earth"? ... by lwriemen · · Score: 1

    What's next? "Pigeons from Hell"?

  32. The reason by aztrailerpunk · · Score: 1

    Worms make the dirt
    And the dirt makes the earth
    And all of the roots have a place to sleep now
    All the chanuks have squash to eat now
    Worms make the dirt
    And the dirt makes the earth
    And people hold hands and feel terrific
    Food comes from dirt
    It's scientific

    --
    Foot placed squarely in mouth since 1983.
  33. Documentary by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

    Does this mean that Tremors was a documentory?

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  34. SNL by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    So the SNL parody about the movie titled "The Core" wasn't too far off.

  35. Landfills by XLR8DST8 · · Score: 1

    i've always wondered what creepy creatures will evolve and emerge from landfills millions of years from now.

    1. Re:Landfills by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      i've always wondered what creepy creatures will evolve and emerge from landfills millions of years from now.

      Why wait millions of years? You can visit retired landfills now and prove your "Landfills eventually yield creepy creatures" hypothesis correct. Some of the most prevalent of the creepy of creatures you'll find there are: Lawyers, Politicians, and Stock Marketeers.

      Some say that these life-forms do not emerge from the the abandoned rubbish of society, that they instead are attracted to the Golf Courses built atop the land-fills; To them I must issue a reminder: Correlation is not Causation...

  36. relative by XLR8DST8 · · Score: 1

    what makes conditions 'extreme'? the fact that humans can't live in them? we are not the center of the universe.

    1. Re:relative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the fact that the conditions involve snowboarding off a cliff through a hoop of fire with a mountain dew in one hand and a bag of doritos in the other.

  37. Re:And in winter all the Gorillas die from the col by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lithotrophic bacteria that live from certain anorganic chemicals found down there

    According to the team that found these nematodes (and the bacteria five years earlier), the bacteria lives off of radiation in the rocks, not chemistry. (Come back in a few years to see what eats the worms?)

    Trapped miners?

    Ouch. I for one don't want to wait for what comes to eat the trapped miners.

  38. Re:And in winter all the Gorillas die from the col by StikyPad · · Score: 2

    Hard to say for sure, but it's a safe bet they'll be our new overlords.

  39. Cold fusion at the planets core? by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    If the Rossi/Focardi eCat (a claimed nickel-hydrogen LENR cold fusion device) really works, maybe cold fusion also happens at the boundary of the Earth's nickel-iron crust? And maybe the core even ejects neustrons, as suggested about the sun? And the end result might be abiotic oil and other "food" that could support an underground biosphere? Could life have even started down there (if bacteria did not come from beyond the solar system)? What other scientific dogma remains to be overturned? Related comment by me:
        http://aleklett.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/the-sun-rossi%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Denergy-catalyzer%E2%80%9D-and-the-%E2%80%9Cneutron-barometer%E2%80%9D/#comment-5891

    And:
        http://www.thesunisiron.com/
        http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  40. Re:And in winter all the Gorillas die from the col by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this will eat them then us : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100814/

  41. Answer from TFA: by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

    A primary hurdle the team had to overcome was proving that the nematodes had not come into the mines on the shoes or clothing of miners or through mine ventilation water. The contamination issue was resolved through extensive testing of the soil and mining water, which contains two disinfectant bleaches that would kill nematodes.

    --
    Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
  42. Worms from Hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Extraterestrial" may be quite meaningless. Perhaps all life, even beyond our planet, is related?

    Who knows? Perhaps we share the same creator? Or, Perhaps, we share the the same "accident", by which we came to existence?

  43. Thomas Gold, "The Deep Hot Biosphere" by doom · · Score: 1

    I just thought I would mention Thomas Gold's book The Deep Hot Biosphere. Gold's thesis is that "fossil fuels" aren't, and have an abiological origin, much like the hydrocarbons we can see in interstellar nebulae. An essential part of the theory is that "extremophiles" aren't all that rare, and permeate the earth down to unsuspected depths... that explains why the oil coming up out of the ground looks biological in origin (handedness): it's been messed with by the deep bacteria.

    So myself, what I learned from this abstract is that the "deep hot biosphere" has apparently become an accepted fact. (Needless to say, the "abiological origin of oil" is not (yet?) on the "mainstream science" list.)