NASA Scientist Revive 10,000-Year-Old Microorganisms (bbc.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Scientist Revive 10,000-Year-Old Microorganisms (bbc.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on Sunday February 19, 2017 @11:30PM from the bacteria-to-the-future dept.

"Scientists have extracted long-dormant microbes from inside the famous giant crystals of the Naica mountain caves in Mexico -- and revived them," reports the BBC. An anonymous reader writes: "The organisms were likely to have been encased in the striking shafts of gypsum at least 10,000 years ago, and possibly up to 50,000 years ago," according to the BBC, which calls the strange lifeforms "another demonstration of the ability of life to adapt and cope in the most hostile of environments." With no light, extremophile species must "chemosynthesise," deriving all their energy by extracting minerals from rocks. These ancient microbes "are not very closely related to anything in the known genetic databases," according to the new director of NASA's Astrobiology Institute, who helped conduct the research, and believes that the microbes could help suggest what life might look like on other planets. The BBC adds that many other scientists "suspect that if life does exist elsewhere in the Solar System, it is most likely to be underground, chemosynthesising like the microbes of Naica."

110 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 23:41 · Score: -1, Troll

These microbes will probably to have a better chance of understanding things than Trump. And they'd be far less likely to make up fake news stories of terrorist attacks whilst hilariously criticising the media (without evidence or justification) for the same thing. How all Trump supporters weren't questioning his leadership qualities then I will never understand.
1. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:21 · Score: -1
  
  What do trump and a microbe have in common?
  Both are in the oval office right now. Take that, Hillary supporters!
2. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:29 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  "How all Trump supporters weren't questioning his leadership qualities then I will never understand."
  We were. Just the other option was worse.
  Lesser of two evils really sums up US presidential elections.
3. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:45 · Score: 0
  
  It's not just Hilary supporters who are suffering though is it... he's obviously planning on screwing over everyone besides his rich buddies. I hope you're happy in you delusional bubble where you think you might have in any way even slightly had a net benefit from this tragedy. Take that.... nearly everyone in the US of A
4. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:51 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  "How all Trump supporters weren't questioning his leadership qualities then I will never understand."
  We were. But we thought the other option was worse.
  We honestly didn't think Trump would actually try to appoint white supremacists, Russian spies and entire board of Goldman Sachs, to key positions. I mean, sure, a bunch of libtards said he'd do that but Trump said he wouldn't and why would we believe that he'd continue doing the same things he's been doing for his entire life when he was promising to Make America Great Again?
  Who would have thought he'd eliminate environmental protections, allow pollution by the coal industry, repeal Obamacare without bothering to offer a replacement and try to build an insanely expensive and impractical wall that will do nothing to stop the flow of drugs and illegal immigrants. I mean, yeah, he literally said he was going to do all that and all the libtards told us we should listen, but the whole campaign was about taking him seriously but not literally and who listens to libtards?
  And we had no way of knowing that a thin-skinned man who has consistently used SLAPP lawsuits to silence people and drive them into bankruptcy would be a vindictive little shit once he was given power. Nobody could have seen that coming. Well, I mean, yeah, the libtards. Blah blah blah. We're never going to listen to them no matter how many times they're right, so just stop bringing them up okay?
  Anyway, Hillary's emails! OMG!! No, Scott Pruitt's emails are fine. Hillary's emails are the problem!
  FTFY
5. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Errol+backfiring · 2017-02-20 01:16 · Score: 0
  
  Believe it or not, but even in the US there are more than two options. Leave bitching about the lack of choice to the stalinists.
  
  --
  Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
6. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by ChrisMaple · 2017-02-20 05:03 · Score: 1
  
  I'll start out buy not being forced to spend $6,000 a year on insurance that I don't need and don't want.
  
  --
  Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
7. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 05:05 · Score: 0
  
  Wow. You sound like a miserable ass to be around. I am benefiting directly today from all the lefties losing their minds over their loss. It has already helped me immensely.
8. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by ChrisMaple · 2017-02-20 05:06 · Score: 0
  
  a vindictive little shit once he was given power.
  Perfect description of Obama.
  
  --
  Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
9. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 06:15 · Score: 0
  
  Sure you will, buddy. Just keep holding your breath. I'm sure it'll come any day now.
  I also love the implication that without the ACA, your insurance will become cheaper. Again, just hold your breath until it comes. Any day now...
10. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 06:18 · Score: 0
  
  If you are retarded and don't know the definition of "vindictive", sure. Those of us who speak English natively see things accurately. Sad for you.
11. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 07:09 · Score: 0
  
  *facepalm*
  (brought to you by pretty much every other country. Except Russia: they seem strangely happy for some reason)
12. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by ChatHuant · 2017-02-20 08:15 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Perfect description of Obama.
  Man, I have seen idiocy before, but this takes the cake. The problem with Obama was that he was not vindictive at all - on the contrary, he went much too far in trying to mend fences with the Republicans. After the catastrophe of the Bush administration, what the country needed was a cleansing. The guilty parties (most of the Bush administration, and at least half of the Republicans in Congress) should have been investigated - and many of them should have ended up in jail for lying through their teeth, wasting trillions of dollars, dragging the country into two wars and costing the lives of thousands of Americans, putting loyalty above aptitude, doubling the deficit, and so many other sins. Republicans needed to be slapped hard - it would have saved America lots of pain and suffering since.
  Instead, Obama chose not to prosecute any of the Republican malefactors. He was willing to let bygones be bygones, he tried to build consensus, to have a dialogue. He even adopted Republican policies - even Obamacare was based on Mitt Romney's weaker design, to make it palatable to Republicans.
  And, after all this effort you call *him* vindictive? I mean, as an obvious Trump supporter, you probably have only a tenuous connection to reality, but really, are you so far gone you can't even understand the meaning of "truth" anymore?
13. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by dev-in-seattle · 2017-02-20 09:01 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  >> "I'll start out buy not being forced to spend $6,000 a year on insurance that I don't need and don't want."
  Sure, maybe you are the 1 in 300 million people who will never get sick, you'll never have an accident. But when you do get sick or old, or can't pay your bill because you had a car wreck 6 months ago and can't work, well then the rest of us will pay your bill. Because the hospital won't charge those who can't pay. You'd probably prefer someone die if they can't pay their bill. You might be that special person who never needs to go to the doctor, and you'll die without needing any medical care. Congradulations!
  It saves money for us overall if there aren't millions of people who don't have health insurance. There are some other things that work like this, such as vaccines. Similarly, we pay taxes for firemen, even though, damnit, my house is never going to burn down.
14. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 10:38 · Score: 0
  
  > I'll start out buy not being forced to spend $6,000 a year on insurance that I don't need and don't want.
  It's obvious you don't understand the meaning of the word "insurance".
  Captcha: "together". Even the AI here understands it. You're dumber than a robot. Congrats.
15. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Dog-Cow · 2017-02-20 18:37 · Score: 1
  
  The fuckwad you replied to is saying he doesn't bother with insurance. This is because when he gets into an accident and breaks some bones, people like you will pay for it. (I don't live in the US anymore.)
16. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Dog-Cow · 2017-02-20 18:40 · Score: 1
  
  Trump supporters, almost by definition at this point, have no understanding of truth.
17. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by SandWyrm · 2017-02-21 07:05 · Score: 1
  
  It's not that most Trump supporters actually liked Trump. There were almost no signs out for him in my conservative neighborhood. But in a contest between a demonstrably evil candidate, and a chaotic one, the nation decided to roll the dice and go with chaos. Because at least an agent of chaos can do good as well as evil.
  You act as if Hillary's only flaw was her illegal email server. Ignoring, of course, the reason that she had that illegal server. So that she could (and did) solicit "donations" to her foundation from foreign countries while Secretary of State. Including taking "donations" from Russia that just so happened to coincide with the sale of US uranium to them. There's also her stated policy positions on Russia (no-fly zone in Syria) that would have sparked off WWIII. There's also her widely known temper (going back to her husband's presidency), and her serious lack of judgement during stressful situations (such as marching into the white house to yell at Obama). SHE was the one I didn't want near the nuclear football.
18. Re:Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 07:59 · Score: 0
  
  Wanna be our test subject to see what kind of disease they produce in the animal body?
19. Re: Lets elect them to be president of the US by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-22 11:19 · Score: 0
  
  Can you please provide some proof to your claims? Every such argument that I've tried to chase down has turned out to be a will-o-wisp.
The striking shaft of a gypsy by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 23:46 · Score: -1

Damn romani penis. I guess one should not revive a 10,000 year old gypsy micropenis. I think Michael Crichton wrote about this.
Whythe vaguness about the age? by Applehu+Akbar · 2017-02-19 23:46 · Score: 4, Interesting

Even though these bacteria are still alive, carbon dating should still work as long as the organism is no longer absorbing carbon from its environment.
1. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:03 · Score: -1
  
  Carbon dating has been proven to be a fraud, mainly perpetrated by scientists who want to push their evolutionary theories. Scientists have tested modern organisms with know ages and carbon dating predicts they are thousands of years old. What a hoax. Yet you just bought in hook line and sinker.
  I thought you scientist types were supposed to have an open mind? Yet you absolutely refuse to even consider anything religious. Yet, we both know you can't prove it wrong, so why be so closed minded?
2. Re:Whythe vaguness about the age? by rmdingler · 2017-02-20 00:22 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed. Other than a protestation to the contrary by the lead researcher, Dr Penelope Boston,
  it isn't clear these microorganisms weren't the result of contamination by researchers or the miners who discovered the cave 100 years ago.
  
  --
  Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
  Ernest Hemingway
3. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:46 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Citation needed.
  Do you mean the crazy creationist claims?
4. Re:Whythe vaguness about the age? by Gilgaron · 2017-02-20 00:53 · Score: 2
  
  How much material does one need to perform a carbon dating test? Given they will have at least some motility, the matrix their in isn't necessarily the same age as they are, and you can culture bacteria from amounts far smaller than necessary to perform some chemical tests. Perhaps there isn't enough until after you've grown them up, at which point the carbon test won't tell you anything.
5. Re:Whythe vaguness about the age? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 01:16 · Score: 0
  
  Grow more and they will use carbon from the current environment. No good for a carbon dating test.
6. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by Mascot · 2017-02-20 01:29 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Yet you absolutely refuse to even consider anything religious.
  That's profound ignorance, or an outright lie. E.g. there are several published experiments regarding the efficacy of prayer (summary: praying doesn't help). At least one of the studies was funded by the alleged pro-religious Templeton Foundation.
  There seems to be some confusion in superstitious circles about what "keeping an open mind" actually means. It does not mean "accept anything you're told without evidence," or "accept anything you're told unless you can prove the opposite." It does mean "be open to evaluating new evidence when presented with it."
  In other words, present your evidence for your religious claims. If the evidence holds up to scrutiny, the claim will be accepted. To my knowledge, this has yet to happen.
7. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 02:02 · Score: 1
  
  OK, *which* religion? And which religion will design jet airliners for me?
  *EVERY* religion "can't be proven wrong" too. So .... do you have Apollo's phone number? He looks like he could design an F-15 for me.
8. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by Nunya666 · 2017-02-20 02:21 · Score: 1, Offtopic
  
  I thought you scientist types were supposed to have an open mind? Yet you absolutely refuse to even consider anything religious.
  Because religion is made-up bullshit. Being a scientist requires intelligence and the ability evaluate factual evidence. Once most scientists evaluate the "evidence" of religion, they realize that it is a man-made concept.
  
  Yet, we both know you can't prove it wrong, so why be so closed minded?
  Nor can you prove it right. Why do you insist in believing in fairy tales?
9. Re:Whythe vaguness about the age? by quenda · 2017-02-20 02:44 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Carbon dating tells you when the carbon was taken from the atmosphere. It depends on a known ratio of carbon-14 isotopes in the air.
  It does not work for underground organisms, where the air may contain CO2 from the rocks.
10. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · 2017-02-20 02:58 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Buddy, why pick on science? Law does not accept supernatural explanation as defense. Why don't you religious nuts demand religious explanations to be given equal footing with forensic evidence in court cases?
  
  --
  sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
11. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-02-20 03:12 · Score: 1
  
  Buddy, why pick on science? Law does not accept supernatural explanation as defense. Why don't you religious nuts demand religious explanations to be given equal footing with forensic evidence in court cases?
  Because they are brainwashed. Seriously.
12. Re:Whythe vaguness about the age? by bruce_the_loon · 2017-02-20 04:13 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Having watched the National Geographic documentary on the expeditions into the caves, the chances of external contamination for the samples looked acceptably low. The samples were taken from an inch or more inside the crystals, from liquid inclusions accessed by drilling with sterilized drill bits and sterile transfer. The sample sites were in deeper areas of the cave to further reduce the risk.
  Combine that with the lack of a close genetic match to modern samples, and the level of confidence in the samples been uncontaminated should be satisfactory high. To contaminate the inclusion, you'd have to breach it, contaminate it and the crystal would have to regrow (something it doesn't do when out of water) all deep inside a cave so hot that it can kill in a couple of minutes without protection.
  
  --
  Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
13. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by someone1234 · 2017-02-20 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  There is no religious scientific theory to consider. Call back, when you got one.
  
  --
  Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
14. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by MightyMartian · 2017-02-20 06:12 · Score: 1
  
  This Creationist meme is about forty years old now, and was long ago debunked. But nice trolling.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
15. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 06:30 · Score: 0
  
  The age estimate comes from the growth rate of the gypsum crystal and the depth in the crystal the sample was taken from. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/02/crystal-caves-mine-microbes-mexico-boston-aaas-aliens-science/
  I'd be skeptical of carbon dating. This cave had some sort of exposure to the outside world, so there should be interfering tritium from the 40's and 50's. Not as much as outside, but not zero either.
16. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by Applehu+Akbar · 2017-02-20 07:17 · Score: 1
  
  "I'd be skeptical of carbon dating. This cave had some sort of exposure to the outside world, so there should be interfering tritium from the 40's and 50's. Not as much as outside, but not zero either."
  Cold War tritium is not going to affect carbon uptake by an organism that has not uptaken anything for 10K or more years.
17. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by Applehu+Akbar · 2017-02-20 07:18 · Score: 1
  
  EDIT: And besides, tritium is hydrogen, not carbon.
18. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 10:00 · Score: 0
  
  Hm... yup, C-14 spiked in the atmosphere from bomb testing due to neutrons rather than tritium. I wonder where I got that particular bit of nonsense came from... anyway, thanks for making me look it up. If the gypsum really was solid then there should be no issue with contamination. Concern withdrawn.
19. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 17:06 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, I was just trolling. And despite being almost immediately down voted to -1 I still got quite a few responses.
  Thanks for letting me have my fun!
20. Re: Whythe vaguness about the age? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 08:13 · Score: 0
  
  Because "We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams"
  Some people require more than just the belief in science. Science is sometimes not enough. Some people need an existential explanation not for how we got here, but why. Knowing I came from the shit stain of the universe is okay, but why did the universe shit me out in the first place is another. I know you'll say that there is no why, it just is the way it is, but some of us can't accept that and need more or we may consider terminating our futile existence if there is no more purpose than to simply exist. And because fairy tales, at the very least, are entertaining and bring a sense of wonder, joy, or simply something more to ponder than mere scientific fact.
We are all dead! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:00 · Score: 0

Good job NASA, now it will grow ad infinitum and kill us all.
1. Re:We are all dead! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:11 · Score: 1
  
  Good job NASA, now it will grow ad infinitum and kill us all.
  Nope, they had their chance ~1000 years ago and failed.
  BTW: I get the joke, but this is for those who doesn't.
2. Re: We are all dead! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:46 · Score: 0
  
  fuck u
3. Re:We are all dead! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 02:18 · Score: 0
  
  Didn't Mulder and Scully already warn against these microbes?
4. Re: We are all dead! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 08:02 · Score: 0
  
  Witty retort.
What could possiby go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:04 · Score: 0

BREAKING NEWS - 10,000 year-old germ escapes into the wild with no known cure.
1. Re:What could possiby go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 02:06 · Score: 0
  
  BREAKING NEWS - 7 billion versions of the human immune system get to work and find the antibody!
2. Re:What could possiby go wrong? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-02-20 03:17 · Score: 1
  
  BREAKING NEWS - 7 billion versions of the human immune system get to work and find the antibody!
  Isn't working so well for MRSA. Or HIV.
  
  Yes, there are AIDS-resistant people. But that doesn't seem to be capable of being generalized into a vaccine/cure.
  
  And MRSA is having a field-day, out-evolving our immune systems and antimicrobial drugs.
3. Re:What could possiby go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 03:48 · Score: 0
  
  Right, that's why there's 200000 more people every day. It's about the species as a whole. HIV is rare, and I'm not even sure it's real.
  "Yes, there are AIDS-resistant people. But that doesn't seem to be capable of being generalized into a vaccine/cure."
  You don't even seem to understand what "AIDS" is, and why what you wrote makes no sense.
4. Re:What could possiby go wrong? by Gilgaron · 2017-02-20 05:02 · Score: 1
  
  You're already covered in SA, the MR part just means if it gets into parts of you it shouldn't you have extra issues. It isn't particularly worse in terms of pathogenicity versus vanilla Staph apart from that our treatments don't work.
Osteoporosis anybody? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:08 · Score: 0

Osteolysis? Tooth decay? Do we really need to play around with mineral-eating bacteria?
Revive? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:08 · Score: -1

How the fuck can you revive something that wasn't even dead in the first place? Fucking clickbait summary yet again, making it sound like Jurrasic Park shit when it's just natural bacterial abilities to restore consciousness when conditions are right.
1. Re:Revive? by TheFakeTimCook · 2017-02-20 03:13 · Score: 1
  
  How the fuck can you revive something that wasn't even dead in the first place? Fucking clickbait summary yet again, making it sound like Jurrasic Park shit when it's just natural bacterial abilities to restore consciousness when conditions are right.
  Bacteria are conscious???
2. Re:Revive? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 03:15 · Score: 0
  
  I suggest you look up the word Revive. It's not a synonym for resurrect (though that's one form of revival).
3. Re:Revive? by Hognoxious · 2017-02-20 10:15 · Score: 0
  
  Compared to mactards, yes.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
4. Re:Revive? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 08:03 · Score: 0
  
  Only if they are Mexican?
Reviving acient microorganisms... by OpenSourced · 2017-02-20 00:14 · Score: 4, Interesting

I've seen that film.
It doesn't end well.

--
Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
1. Re:Reviving acient microorganisms... by TheDarkMaster · 2017-02-20 01:09 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  We still have contact with the laboratory in the Antartic?
  
  --
  Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
2. Re:Reviving acient microorganisms... by Zocalo · 2017-02-20 02:11 · Score: 1
  
  It appears Hollywood may have also essentially done a remake set on the ISS in "Life" due out next month, complete with a 155 second Youtube trailer that seems to pretty much give the entire plot away. As if that's not bad enough, it's entirely possible there may also be some kind of message about the current political situation regarding illegal aliens in there too just for good measure, but at least it looks pretty...
  
  --
  UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
3. Re:Reviving acient microorganisms... by Waffle+Iron · 2017-02-20 04:13 · Score: 1
  
  People are going to be scrambling for privacy after every sheet of drywall on the planet has been consumed by these voracious microbes.
4. Re:Reviving acient microorganisms... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2017-02-20 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  So it starts like Andromeda Strain then briefly turns into The Thing then turns into Alien complete with escape at the end with the alien hitching a ride on the escape pod.
  And no exposed boobs. Nothing redeeming.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
5. Re:Reviving acient microorganisms... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 12:16 · Score: 0
  
  We used to.
Professor Quatermass was quoted as saying, by magusxxx · 2017-02-20 00:31 · Score: 2

"They look like little grasshoppers."

--
Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
Dominant life Forms by JimSadler · 2017-02-20 00:43 · Score: 2

I have no clue as to the numbers or mass of these bacteria that munch on rocks beneath our surface. But just maybe they might displace algae as being the predominant life form on Earth. It has been said in the past that an alien species might see algae as the significant life form on Earth and only be interested with communications with algae. Even termites might have more effect upon our world than humans.
1. Re:Dominant life Forms by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:54 · Score: 0
  
  It's the grasses. Definitely the grasses. Corn, wheat, and the green stuff we manicure. We are all slaves to grass.
2. Re:Dominant life Forms by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 01:45 · Score: 0
  
  It has been said in the past that an alien species might see algae as the significant life form on Earth and only be interested with communications with algae.
  
  Right, because counting individual particles of something is more important than mass, volume, or complexity. Riight...
3. Re:Dominant life Forms by ChrisMaple · 2017-02-20 05:15 · Score: 1
  
  Termites cause global warming.
  
  --
  Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
4. Re:Dominant life Forms by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 07:48 · Score: 0
  
  To be fair, if viewed as a single organism Earth could very well have a better understanding of the universe than what humans posess locked away is some other complex organic system thaw we don't see as intelligent because it doesn't interact with us in a way that we can comunicate with it.
  An analogy might be your gut bacteria reasoning that because they poses more volition than the cells which make up your digestive tissue and have out competed otehr strains of microorganisms attempting to live in your gut that they are the dominate form of life inside you.
  This isn't really supported by evidence so it's not a scientific theory but it's an interesting plyslosophicasl thought the implications of which to ponder.
5. Re:Dominant life Forms by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 03:28 · Score: 0
  
  "Dominate" is not an adjective. You're looking for "dominant".
armageddon by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:48 · Score: 0

don't revive them . armageddon coming .
All this talk about exobiology ... by Nutria · 2017-02-20 01:36 · Score: 2

never mentions how that life might have started.
Terrestrial proto-life had Sol and warm seas agitated by tidal motion, but Mars gets 56% less sunlight, and Titan gets just 1% of Earth's solar energy.

--
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
1. Re:All this talk about exobiology ... by Gilgaron · 2017-02-20 02:37 · Score: 1
  
  That's why research like this into life that derives its energy chemically is interesting for exobiology. You take the factors you mention out of the equation.
2. Re:All this talk about exobiology ... by Jason+Levine · 2017-02-20 03:26 · Score: 1
  
  Europa - another moon where the possibility of life exists - had a liquid water ocean agitated by radiation from and gravitational interactions with Jupiter. No, we likely wouldn't find plants using photosynthesis, but any life we find there would likely have evolved to make use of radiation/gravitational flux as an energy source instead of solar energy. Just because life evolved one way on Earth doesn't mean that's the only way for life to arise/evolve.
  
  --
  My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
3. Re:All this talk about exobiology ... by Gavagai80 · 2017-02-20 06:52 · Score: 1
  
  We know for a fact that Mars had warm seas when life was getting started on Earth. How it could've started on Mars is no mystery. Whether it could've survived to today underground is the mystery.
  
  --
  This space intentionally left blank
4. Re:All this talk about exobiology ... by Nutria · 2017-02-20 09:55 · Score: 2
  
  Isn't chemosynthesis much less efficient? That -- to me -- would imply that jump-starting life on Mars or Titan would be significantly more difficult than on Earth.
  
  --
  "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
5. Re:All this talk about exobiology ... by Nutria · 2017-02-20 10:04 · Score: 1
  
  How it could've started on Mars is no mystery.
  But with 56% less sunlight, the likelihood is much lower.
  
  --
  "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
6. Re:All this talk about exobiology ... by Goragoth · 2017-02-20 12:18 · Score: 1
  
  Actually early on conditions for life were likely more favourable on Mars than on Earth for several hundred million years. In fact there is a very credible hypothesis that life began on Mars and was transferred to Earth later (meteorites with Martian material have been found on Earth).
7. Re:All this talk about exobiology ... by Nutria · 2017-02-20 15:37 · Score: 1
  
  Evidence that early conditions for life were likely more favourable on Mars than on Earth and that life began on Mars and was transferred to Earth? ("Martian meteorites found on Earth" hardly reaches that standard.)
  
  --
  "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
8. Re:All this talk about exobiology ... by Gilgaron · 2017-02-21 01:54 · Score: 1
  
  Eh... the efficiency is going to depend on the enzymes/biochemistry. I don't think you could say one source of energy is necessarily more efficient than another when posting about a novel lifeform. Not as much light on Titan, so even if there were autotrophs they wouldn't necessarily have as much of an advantage as they would on Earth.
9. Re:All this talk about exobiology ... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-22 11:14 · Score: 0
  
  They said a, "credible hypothesis", not proof.
But I thought age was a property of atoms? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 01:59 · Score: 0

How can 10000 year old atoms be alive? ... Oh wait, atoms are ageless and each element's atoms are all identical ... So why can't we have anti-aging again?
1. Re:But I thought age was a property of atoms? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 02:20 · Score: 0
  
  I suggest looking into atomic half-life for possible answers.
2. Re:But I thought age was a property of atoms? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 03:07 · Score: 0
  
  And I suggest you tell me what you think this has to do with anything?
3. Re:But I thought age was a property of atoms? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 06:14 · Score: 0
  
  Sure. A definition for timeless I found on wikipedia is:
  Ageless is an adjective describing a person or thing whose age cannot be defined, is non-existent, or appears not to change. It can also describe something that has always existed without a precise beginning or an end.
  If I take what you said about atoms being ageless to mean they never change, then i disagree. I am under the impression that ALL atoms have a half-life. There are also some accounts of scientists changing the structure of an atom so that it is transformed into an alternate element. If you would like an interesting example of this procedure I suggest you read up on turning mercury into gold(aka HG -> Au).
  There is also a case to be made about the second part of your argument about all atoms of a particular element are exactly the same. Specifically in relation to the possibility of a different isotope of an element in existence. Different isotopes of an element are still basically the same element due to the number of protons in the said element. However, an isotope of a particular element is not necessarily exactly the same due to electrons available.
  Hopefully that answers your question.
Finally! by Mats+Svensson · 2017-02-20 02:09 · Score: 1

Why should those dinosaurs have all the fun?!
I , for one, by jennatalia · 2017-02-20 02:26 · Score: 0

welcome our 10,000 year old microorganism overlords.
FTFY by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 02:35 · Score: 0

:-)
Oh, yeah. Thank you for that.
In the Dark Ages, every bit of light counts!
What could possibly go wrong? by Ensign_Expendable · 2017-02-20 02:47 · Score: 1

I mean, really.
Haven't I Seen This Movie? by avgjoe62 · 2017-02-20 02:48 · Score: 1

I've seen this movie about giant crystals threatening the world. It was actually pretty good, so I'm off to make some popcorn and wait for those things to burst out of the ground.

--
How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?
Do you want Thing monsters? by GameboyRMH · 2017-02-20 02:51 · Score: 1

Because that's how you get Thing monsters :-P

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Patient Zero by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 03:02 · Score: 0

I eagerly await patient zero.
What exactly is life? by Beeftopia · 2017-02-20 04:47 · Score: 1

If an atomic/molecular/yet-unguessed-at structure can be held in stasis for 10K-to-50K years, and then (re) animated, what exactly is life?
The two most basic indicators of life are a) replication of itself and b) information gathering via DNA or some other mechanism.
The common result of life is an overall increase in entropy, although it decreases for subsystems.
But what exactly is it? When can we make it in the lab from scratch?
1. Re:What exactly is life? by Gilgaron · 2017-02-20 04:59 · Score: 1
  
  These aren't anything that weird, just bacteria and archaea. Encased in the crystals, their spores were preserved from the exterior environment. Underground, minimal radiation to poke holes in their DNA while they were dormant. You're still probably looking at multiple log reductions in viability.
2. Re:What exactly is life? by syntotic · 2017-02-21 08:27 · Score: 1
  
  It is an energy endodynamic, once started it does not exhaust but is transmitted from entity to entity in a continuous. Call it the Spark of Life, I do. So to start life we have to set the framework for it then start the energetic process and its transmission. It is by sustaining the process from entity into next entity that Entropy is defeated, and it also accounts for Evolution as a mechanism to defeat Entropy, though by no means the only one. One laboratory that I know of is already on the path, though probably they will have to be more creative (sic) to achieve it...
2nd origin of life means we're surely not alone by michaelcole · 2017-02-20 04:56 · Score: 1

Is life on Earth a one-off? If we look at our survey of planets with life (1 planet Earth) and find life started *twice*, then that certainly means life started in other parts of the universe (N+1). Which would be an amazing discovery.

Also, does every post need to be related with Donald Trump? Can you take your abusive relationship somewhere else?
I just that they treat is like... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 04:56 · Score: 0

an airborne transmitted combination of the flu and Ebola until proven otherwise.
No problem by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2017-02-20 05:32 · Score: 4, Funny

Reviving a 10,000 year old microorganism? I see nothing that could possibly go wrong with this.

--
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Cool! by Greyfox · 2017-02-20 06:13 · Score: 1

That's awesome! I'm pretty sure an episode of X Files started that way. I forget exactly how that one turned out, I think the microbes end up being very nice to everyone and at the end they buy Scully and Mulder milkshakes!

--
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I've already seen this show. by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 06:14 · Score: 0

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3498622/
Doesn't end well...
Making a Movie about this...kinda by sycodon · 2017-02-20 06:47 · Score: 1

Life
As you would expect, it doesn't end well.

--
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Re:All this talk about exobiology the noo by Hognoxious · 2017-02-20 10:26 · Score: 2

56% less than what? If it's the terrestrial average I don't see the point. Scotland gets considerably less than that and there's life there. Not sentient life, but life nonetheless.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Re:All this talk about exobiology the noo by Nutria · 2017-02-20 10:36 · Score: 1

The issue isn't whether or not life exists in Scotland, but whether or not terrestrial biogenesis could have originate in such an environment.

--
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
not the Obama I know by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 13:11 · Score: 0

"elections have consequences" -- Obama, very much NOT building consensus
1. Re:not the Obama I know by Dog-Cow · 2017-02-20 18:41 · Score: 1
  
  That's Obama after 8 years of getting screwed by vindictive Republic-shits who went on record as saying they would obstruct Obama at every turn.
House guest by Neuronwelder · 2017-02-20 15:14 · Score: 1

If this organism gets loose will I have to find a substitute for my gypsum walls in my house?
1. Re:House guest by SeriousTube · 2017-02-20 17:53 · Score: 1
  
  They adore gypsum. The crystals in the cave are identical to gypsum except they have an electron rotated in their molecular structure which prevents the microbe from destroying them.
Re:All this talk about exobiology the noo by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-22 10:23 · Score: 0

It is a pretty dramatic assumption to think sunlight was involved in the original biogenesis. It takes pretty complicated biology to do photosynthesis.
Re:All this talk about exobiology the noo by RockDoctor · 2017-03-01 12:36 · Score: 1

However, many models for terrestrial abiogenesis have it occurring in hydrothermal circulating systems and only using chemotrophic processes, not photosynthetic processes. Photosynthesis seems to be hundreds of millions of years, or maybe a billion years later.

--
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"