Slashdot Mirror
3.46-Billion-Year-Old 'Fossils' Were Not Created By Life Forms
sciencehabit writes: What are the oldest fossils on Earth? For a long time, a 3.46-billion-year-old rock from Western Australia seemed to hold the record. A 1993 Science paper (abstract) suggested that the Apex chert contained tiny, wormy structures that could have been fossilized cell walls of some of the world's first cyanobacteria. But now there is more evidence that these structures have nothing to do with life. The elongated filaments were instead created by minerals forming in hydrothermal systems, researchers report (abstract). After the minerals were formed, carbon glommed on to the edges, leaving behind an organic signature that looked suspiciously like cell walls.
More like the Church of Robotology now that there is conclusive evidence that machines were first and created all life
Suck it meatbags!
Wherever You Go, There You Are
Nothing has been overturned here. Just a question settled, perhaps.
Full disclosure: the lead author is Martin Brasier, who just happens to be the guy who discovered slightly younger 3.4 billion year old fossils just 20km away.
http://news.sciencemag.org/201...
Ah, so no possibility of any confirmation bias there, of course.
I really hate it when headlines declare something like this as a fact, when clearly everyone involved is just promoting competing theories. The headline should really read 3.46-Billion-Year-Old 'Fossils' May Not Have Been Created By Life Forms. Just because someone published a paper disputing one theory and promoting another doesn't mean we can automatically assume it to be factual.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
And to think, you're the successful product of 3.5 billion years of evolution. I guess this is proof that not every branch or individual is viable.
Look where all this talking got us, baby.
Australia has lots of weird animals. Hell, they've got moths down there that are as big as cocker spaniels. Animals that look like Jim Henson rejects. They've got freakin' yowies down there that make Sasquatch look like Pee-Wee Herman. I didn't actually see a yowie, but after I saw something that looked like a three-way cross between a rat, a jackrabbit and Dwayne Johnson, I don't doubt for a second that they exist. I went there a few years ago and visited a huge national park and it was like Land of the Lost.
I mean, it's a nice place. Nice people. They find out you're from Chicago and you won't have to pay for another drink. Great looking women. Good food. If it wasn't for the annoying accents, you'd think you were somewhere on the West Coast. But the wildlife, man. Way too spooky for me.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You take it as gospel or you are shown the door, and any scientist worth his salt will tell you to quit pretending that's science because it's not.
Never actually worked with actual scientists have ya? These guys and gals argue about everything, and constantly try to disprove their theories and make fun of each other's hypothese'.
Lot's of stuff is proven wrong all the time. you accept it, and move on. Meanwhile the fundies are busy trying to insist that enough rain fell to cover the entire earth up to and over the tops of the highest mountains, and then mysteriously vanished.
It's why science schoolbooks from 25 years ago are obsolete, but Grandpa's King James version of the bible is just as up to date as it never was.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.