Slashdot Mirror


Bacteria Found On ISS May Be Alien In Origin, Says Cosmonaut (independent.co.uk)

Kekke writes: Lots of buzz around this. Russian cosmonaut Anton Shkaplerov took routine samples from the outside of the International Space Station during a spacewalk. These samples were analyzed and found to contain bacteria that must have come from somewhere other than Earth or the ISS itself. "Bacteria that had not been there during the launch of the ISS module were found on the swabs," Mr. Shkaplerov told TASS Russian News Agency. "So they have flown from somewhere in space and settled on the outside hull." He made it clear that "it seems, there is no danger," and that scientists are doing more work to find out what they are. The Independent writes, "Finding bacteria that came from somewhere other than Earth would be one of the biggest breakthroughs in the history of science -- but much more must be done before such a claim is made."

141 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. Wrong conclusion? by rahenri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just because it wasn't there during the launch it doesn't mean it didn't come from Earth.

    1. Re: Wrong conclusion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      It was me, ok? I jerked off on the ISS. Are you happy now???

    2. Re:Wrong conclusion? by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

      Cowling hits a fly or ants crawled in...

      We call software errors, "bug", because of certain hardware errors at the dawn of the computer age....

    3. Re:Wrong conclusion? by The123king · · Score: 1

      Techincal issues in equipment have been known as bugs for many years prior to the famous moth-in-relay incident. https://www.computerworld.com/...

      --
      If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat
    4. Re:Wrong conclusion? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just because it wasn't there during the launch it doesn't mean it didn't come from Earth.

      Just because they thought it wasn't there at launch doesn't mean it wasn't there at launch.

    5. Re:Wrong conclusion? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Low Earth orbit is pretty much part of Earth. Its in our outer atmosphere for a start. Bacteria from the moon (but not from the inside of a camera) would be a big deal.

    6. Re:Wrong conclusion? by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      The proof it's alien is that it is already starting to affect the brain of that cosmonaut.

    7. Re:Wrong conclusion? by Maritz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It will be non-trivially difficult to 'prove' that these bacteria are not from Earth. High standard of evidence to be met. I wish them luck, they'll need it.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    8. Re:Wrong conclusion? by slashrio · · Score: 1

      I wonder how they know what growing medium to use for 'alien bacteria'.
      Also makes me wonder how many alien bacteria they have missed by not using the growing medium that's optimal for them.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    9. Re:Wrong conclusion? by Gilgaron · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are plenty of native bacteria that won't grow in culture, and one reason archaea took so long to elucidate is that it is hard to use PCR on "unknowns." Since we wouldn't have primers for an alien bacterium (and really no reason to expect it to be using DNA or RNA at all, unless panspermia is correct and it has common ancestry with us) we'd mostly have to be lucky that it was able to be cultured. It'll be a while before we can find truly alien microbes with any ease.

    10. Re:Wrong conclusion? by Cyberpunk+Reality · · Score: 1

      The actual statements don't contradict what you're saying. The "ooh, it's extra-terrestrial!" appears to be spin. What the Russians are saying (via translation) appears to be: -these bacteria weren't in ISS at launch -these bacteria somehow got into the exosphere, survived there, and ended up on the ISS. I am not an astrobiologist, but I thought high-altitude bacteria survival was established, or at least expected.

      --
      Rule 35 of the internet: "If it can be hacked, it will be". - Charles Stross
    11. Re: Wrong conclusion? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      That's not how you become a fapstronaut. You're doing it wrong!

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    12. Re:Wrong conclusion? by Xyrus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, the chance of some other life form not using DNA/RNA is very very low. Carbon based organic molecules and amino acids have been found pretty much everywhere we have looked including interstellar gas clouds. They're all over the place. And RNA is about as basic as you can get for consistent replication molecule.

      Now hypothetically any other "sticky" atom could be a basis for organic type chemistry (like silicon) but they are all less likely due to the difficulty of the chemistry. It COULD happen under the right circumstances, but we don't see the silicon equivalent of amino acids on comets or in interstellar gas clouds.

      Back to this story, it is unlikely that these organism are extra-terrestrial. There are any number of ways terrestrial bacteria could have found there way up there. It's a bold and foolish claim that they would be from elsewhere without hard evidence.

      --
      ~X~
    13. Re:Wrong conclusion? by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Given that he jumped to the conclusion based on "There's bacteria there" it might not actually be that hard to prove it to himself.

      I will say though, you're right in a way. Our methods of investigating life are all biased for a very small subset of possible life, even on earth. LB Agar plates grow only a small subset of earth bacteria. Investigations that took sea water and just sequenced the DNA they found in it suggested that an astonishing majority of bacteria on our own planet is totally unstudied. We simply don't know how to grow most earth bacteria enough to study it.

      If this bacteria IS of ET origin, they'll smear it on a plate, it won't grow, and we won't be able to draw any conclusions. If it's of earth origin, odds are good the same thing will happen, and we again won't really know. We'll assume it's earth bacteria because it's pretty obviously earth bacteria, but we won't know.

    14. Re: Wrong conclusion? by Verdatum · · Score: 1

      Well that explains this horrible mess, but how did the bacteria get there???

    15. Re: Wrong conclusion? by Verdatum · · Score: 1

      Whether or not it turned out to be alien, finding silicon lifeforms would be pretty satisfying, yes.

    16. Re:Wrong conclusion? by rgbatduke · · Score: 2

      Why? With genetic analysis almost routine at this point, I would expect that they could at the very least state that the bacterium(s) in question are/are not genetically congruent with known Earth species. If they find an E Coli on the outside of the station, it almost certainly came from Earth. If they find a bacterium with a genetic structure that is distinct from pretty much all known Earth species, it won't prove that it is extraterrestrial, but it would make it a lot less likely. At the very least, explaining how -- and when -- it got there will be more challenging.

      If the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... hypothesis is correct (where this might be evidence supporting the hypothesis, or might not) then this will be only the first of many such observations, as "life" on Earth would have originated in an early population 1 stellar system in this galaxy and would then have been dispersed over billions of years after (say) that early P1 star went nova and/or some other cataclysm dispersed matter with biological travellers attached. We have recently directly observed that not only comets but large cold asteroids are knocking around that sometimes pass through on hyperbolic orbits. One expects a lot more (much) smaller objects are out there that pass through than ones large enough to observe from Earth, and it is by no means implausible that one would fall on early/primordial Earth and land ice cold to seed the planet, IF panspermia is in any sense approximately correct.

      Note well I'm not endorsing it or arguing for it, just presenting it as one not unreasonable hypothesis and noting that that is really what all of this is about. Even if the bacteria is eventually labelled "probably/plausibly extraterrestrial" it doesn't prove panspermia, as it might have come from life originating on Mars, or a Jovian moon, or even a comet -- since we don't have a working model of biogenesis we cannot really exclude any particular possibilities for the origin of life. It could even have come first from the Earth, been blown into escape speed by e.g. a falling asteroid or a volcanic explosion, landed on a young Mars and evolved for a while there, and been blown BACK into space from Mars during an asteroid collision or whatever. Genetic testing ought to significantly favor one or more of the various alternative hypotheses, and if it is a common Earth bacteria, I'd say that this is nothing but probable contamination or some entirely mundane form of low orbit transport as suggested above. But if it is NOT related to an KNOWN Earth bacteria, then things get interesting...

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    17. Re:Wrong conclusion? by HelpTheNewOverlord · · Score: 2

      If bacteria is that common in space, would it not have already fallen into Earth and thus be a KNOWN species? Or if unknown, just not discovered yet?

      It think it pretty hard to believe that one unknown type of bacteria got into the ISS wind shield without also getting into Earth surface.

    18. Re:Wrong conclusion? by slashrio · · Score: 1

      WTF! :)

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    19. Re:Wrong conclusion? by tsa · · Score: 1

      Exactly. If it wasn't already on the ISS when it was launched they could have picked it up in the higher atmosphere. I would be surprised if there weren't any unknown bacteria living there that were specialized in living in the conditions at that height.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    20. Re:Wrong conclusion? by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

      Why? If a space bacterium fell to earth now, how long would it last? Chances are not terrible that it would be eaten almost immediately, or that it would fail to reproduce and eventually oxidize. I mean, you could be right and space bacteria could be falling to the Earth all the time but there isn't anything LIKE a guarantee that we'd see them, as we have a hard enough time finding and classifying the bacteria that we already have -- or separating out ones that might be falling from space all the time from the home-evolved sort.

      Again, I'm not trying to start an argument here -- only to point out that once any sort of genetic sequencing of the bacteria is done (if it CAN be done) then we'll know a lot more than we know now. In the meantime, pretending that we can be certain that it is/isn't an Earthly bacterium is a waste of time, because we can't, and won't be either way until a lot more work is done. Which is pretty much what the top article says as well.

      In the meantime, it might be wise to keep an open mind, without EITHER asserting that it is bound to be of Earthly origin OR certain to be extraterrestrial. The right answer at the moment is "we don't know because we haven't really looked yet in the ways likely to add weight to one side or the other" and theoretical arguments or statistical arguments all rely on Bayesian priors that themselves are a pure crap shoot, such as the prevalence of extraterrestrial life our the completeness of our knowledge of what could happen to extraterrestrial life after it falls into our highly bioactive oxidative environment.

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    21. Re:Wrong conclusion? by drunken_boxer777 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but would ET RNA or DNA use the same bases? There's little reason to believe that is the case.

      But I agree with your post. We know bacteria live in the upper troposphere, if not higher up. I recall reading that Earth might actually be leaving a trail of bacteria as it travels through space. (Wish I could find a reference for that.)

    22. Re:Wrong conclusion? by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      That doesn't have much to do with the specificity of our tests that can find life. Essentially, if it doesn't eat what we eat and doesn't poop what we poop it will be very hard to find.

    23. Re:Wrong conclusion? by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      Exactly, even if based on DNA/RNA the codons wouldn't even necessarily be triplets, let alone correspond to the same amino acid alphabet we use.

    24. Re: Wrong conclusion? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      UTI.

    25. Re: Wrong conclusion? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Just for you, there is probably a page on fapstronauts on oglaf.com (probably in the 8 pages following link. Hint : when it says "not safe for work", it really means "fucking dangerous for work".

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    26. Re:Wrong conclusion? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      really no reason to expect it to be using DNA or RNA at all, unless panspermia is correct and it has common ancestry with us

      There are a significant number of variants in the bucket of hypotheses that has "Panspermia" written on the side, where the transmission of information between stellar systems is at the level of "left handed amino acids are more commonly used than right-handed ones" or "this and thus sugars make better molecular backbones for information transmission then that and the other sugars". That would qualify as "Panspermia" but not dictate that descendent star systems use the same information transmission chemistry as their antecedent.

      None of which makes Panspermia any more credible, or useful, as an hypothesis.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    27. Re:Wrong conclusion? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      I agree that the coding wouldn't necessarily be triplets, but for our selection of amino acids, doublet codons would be too few, while triplet codons gives approximately 100% redundancy, and quadruplet codons would give around 400% redundancy, which seems somewhat excessive.

      There have been suggestions, backed up by genetic arguments too long for this margin [Fermat, 1637], that the first genetic code on Earth was actually a doublet code limited to 15 amino acids (and STOP), which was then extended to a triplet code allowing for a greater variety of amino acids and redundancy in the code to increase resilience against point errors, framing errors etc. I'm not fully convinced by the arguments, and the evidence has probalby been eaten, but it's certainly a coherent argument.

      Aha!

      I found the comment in the ORIGINAL article, which makes the story much more restrained (as I'd expect from an astronaut).

      the cosmonauts took samples with cotton swabs from the stationâ(TM)s external surface. In particular, they took probes from places where the accumulation of fuel wastes were discharged during the enginesâ(TM) operation

      Though it is a hard ask for a bacterium to survive through a rocket flame, there are minor unburned discharges of fuel fluids at start and end of burn which could deliver unincinerated material from Earth to the vicinity of rocket motors. It's still a hard ask for the bacteria to survive and remain viable, but it's one fewer hard ask.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  2. How fast is the ISS going? by Tinsoldier314 · · Score: 5, Funny

    After all this time, the extraterrestrial life that we found ended up being a proverbial bug on the windshield of the ISS?

    1. Re:How fast is the ISS going? by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Funny

      They came to great us and we splattered them. Remember this date. The first strike in the war with the aliens was from us. #ashamedtobehuman #buglivesmatter

    2. Re:How fast is the ISS going? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      They came to greet us and we failed to splatter them. Remember this date. They destroyed us shortly afterwards.

      #Outerlimits #WhateverYouChooseIsWrong

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    3. Re:How fast is the ISS going? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      They came to great us and we splattered them.

      I'm imagining a contingent of space alien politicians pushing for funding their equivalent of NASA by using the slogan "make Earth great again" ...

  3. They have DNA sequencer on board by wisebabo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They have miniature DNA sequencer on board, they can find out if it matches at all with any sequenced earthly strain. (I have one also, it is a MinION by Oxford nanowire technologies. Although not perfect it should be capable of sequencing this).

    If it truly of extraterrestrial origin it should be immediately obvious as it is would have diverged very far from the âoeTree of Lifeâ (thatâ(TM)s assuming there are any similarities at all).

    It, would also be incredibly valuable and not just from a scientific standpoint. Just a single completely novel protein has caused multi-billion dollar biotech revolutions. Here would be an organism with potentially thousands.

    1. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by Ubi_NL · · Score: 2

      If it is non-terrestrial, why would it use DNA, and then specifically the exact 4 nucleotides that we use?

      The only evidence here by the way is: we looked really careful and did not see it then so it must be from space.

      --

      If an experiment works, something has gone wrong.
    2. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's like asking why stars and planets exist outside of our solar system. Nature has order and DNA probably exists everywhere and not just on what you assume is our one-of-a-kind little world.

    3. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Nature has order and DNA probably exists everywhere

      That's just a wild guess on your part. Right now, we have no reason to assume such a thing.

    4. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by Spinlock_1977 · · Score: 1

      Some argue that life on earth came from external sources, such as an asteroid. It also possible such things are not rare - that lots of bits of interstellar crap flying about the universe have little gobs of life clinging to them. If that's the case, then human biology was seeded by such "universal" biology, and we're bound to have some things in common with whatever they scraped off that ISS windshield.

      Btw, how long does that sequencer take to do its stuff?

      --
      - The Kessel run is for nerf herders. I can circumnavigate the entire Central Finite Curve in a lot less than 12 parse
    5. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      But stars range from yellow dwarfs to neutron stars and planets from small balls of rubble to gas giants. The bandwidth of planets is so large, that we have been discussing for decades if Pluto is one at all!

        So while it's likely that life is based on DNA elsewhere in the universe, it may be quite different. Or it may not, because our ACGT-version just works and is therefor widely used.

      --
      bickerdyke
    6. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by dwywit · · Score: 1

      Aren't there large quantities of human waste in orbit? Specifically faecal waste? If some gut flora has managed to survive (unlikely) and mutate (highly likely due to radiation) it could present as "not previously catalogued". Highly unlikely to reproduce, though.

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    7. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by religionofpeas · · Score: 4, Informative

      So while it's likely that life is based on DNA elsewhere in the universe

      We don't have sufficient data to claim that it's likely. We only have a single data point, and very little understanding of the mechanism that led to evolution of DNA.

    8. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's just a wild guess on your part. Right now, we have no reason to assume such a thing.

      DNA consists of commonly available ingredients, can guide its own self-assembly, is stable, and nucleotides form abiotically. No other known material has all of these characteristics. There are retroviruses that use RNA, and protein based prions, but neither of these has evolved beyond being parasites of DNA based life. If another mechanisms was more viable for the basis of life, then why have none displaced DNA on earth, despite 4 billion years of opportunities?

      When we find life elsewhere in the Universe, I think it is very likely it will be DNA based.

    9. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      DNA consists of commonly available ingredients, can guide its own self-assembly

      DNA needs a complex environment to duplicate itself, and that environment needs to be duplicated as well. It is highly unlikely that both a piece of suitable DNA, and that complex environment just happened to form by chance. Life must have started with something simpler, and gradually evolved towards the current DNA based system.

      If another mechanisms was more viable for the basis of life, then why have none displaced DNA on earth, despite 4 billion years of opportunities?

      Because DNA has a head start. Nearly all kinds of biologically active molecules would be interacting with current life forms and get broken down before they got a chance to self-organize.

    10. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by meerling · · Score: 2

      It will have some means of replication, and it's likely it will function like DNA, or even be DNA, but that doesn't mean it will use the same letters/bases.
      Our DNA uses AGCT
      While RNA uses AGCU
      RNA is very similar to DNA and can do the same functions. Apparently some of the processes in our body have things switched between DNA & RNA.
      There can be other bases being used, which would be different letters. We've even synthesized some, and they seemed to have worked and were replicated along with the rest of the DNA successfully. We don't know what they do yet, but that's not a surprise at all.
      It's very reasonable that an alien genetics might have different bases/letters in it's DNA, in which case that would make it almost guaranteed it's not from earth.

      Of course, there's also the Panspermia idea, in which case alien microbes from space could be exactly the same as a microbe on Earth, because it originally came from space, and might even be the first life on this planet. But to give that any real credence, we'd have to find it someplace a lot further away than low earth orbit. After all, if it matches something on Earth, how can we honestly say it didn't come from Earth?

    11. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by wisebabo · · Score: 1

      Oh there are several that immediately come to mind. First is the protein used in PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) it is a DNA polymerase that can withstand very high temperatures (it was found in thermophilic bacteria living in deep sea volcanic vents). That is now extremely widely used in molecular biology and garnered the person who figured it could be used as a DNA copy machine, a Nobel Prize. Another is the protein(s) used in CRISPR-cas9; that allows the precise editing of DNA and was found in bacteria as a defense mechanism against invading viruses. A patent battle between Harvard and MIT's Broad institute and (I think) UC Berkeley was only recently resolved but it didn't stop the discoverer from starting a well funded startup ("Editas"). She's in line to get a Nobel as well.
      There are other proteins that, even while not completely new to science are worth billions (think insulin) as well as their bioengineered equivalent (humulin).
      Anyway, if I could get even a fragment of an alien organism's DNA, there could be miracles to be found (especially one that can survive the hard vacuum and radiation of space!).

    12. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by wisebabo · · Score: 1

      Yeah the MinION is capable of giving close to real time results (you can let it run for a few minutes and see what you've got!).

      If it really is "Alien Life" and does use DNA then the key will be sample prep. Hopefully they've got the ability to do PCR up there, that should amplify the DNA enough for them to get some reliable data.

      Don't think the people/equipment on ISS are capable of doing the relatively new (and difficult?) technique of single cell sequencing. Of course you could (and will be) brining it back to earth but do you really want to do that?

    13. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by wisebabo · · Score: 1

      Oh, I was assuming that they found some DNA in it and that they were still wondering if it was non-terrestrial.

      Obviously, if it was a living organism and managed to live and reproduce without DNA it would be extra-terrestrial. (Only some viruses managed to use RNA instead, some people don't consider them alive). That would make this discovery even more astounding!

      No, if it had DNA it might still be extra-terrestrial. Of course if it used different bases or a different "Code of Life" (codon triplets) or different amino-acids, it would still be (quickly? easily?) detectable as non-terrestrial. I was commenting on the case where it shared all these things with terrestrial life but STILL could be (easily) found of non-terrestrial origin.

    14. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by abies · · Score: 1

      If it is non-terrestrial, why would it use DNA, and then specifically the exact 4 nucleotides that we use?

      For example because previous sample reached Earth few billion years ago and mutated a lot on Earth, while one they found now is either original or yet another mutation from elsewhere.

      Chances of finding life nearby (cosmic scale) is very small - but if we do find it, I think that it has bigger chances of being similar on basic level due to travel through panspermia, rather than appearing from inanimate matter in completely independent fashion.

    15. Re: They have DNA sequencer on board by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Human solid waste is not dumped overboard. It is collected and returned to earth like all the other garbage.

    16. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by arth1 · · Score: 2

      Good luck with the library prep in zero G! I'm intrigued to know how well pipetting works in these conditions!

      Quite well, I should think. Capillary action, Van der Waal forces and surface tension are incredibly much stronger than gravity. There's no problem preparing a microscope slide upside down, and only mildly problematic sideways (due to a problem they won't have on the ISS).

    17. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by Gilgaron · · Score: 2

      Yet there'd be little reason to expect any similarity with the DNA codons to protein translations, even if DNA were to be somewhat inevitable. If we found an alien world teaming with life much like ours here, it would be shocking if we could eat the fruit there, for example.

    18. Re: They have DNA sequencer on board by Mab_Mass · · Score: 1

      Really? What life would that be?

      If you can prove that I think you'll get a Nobel Prize.

      It is called an RNA virus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    19. Re: They have DNA sequencer on board by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      It is called an RNA virus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      RNA based retroviruses use reverse transcriptase enzymes to produce DNA from their RNA genomes, They then use their hosts' transcriptase to replicate it back into RNA. They cannot replicate without using DNA.

      Prions would be a better example of "life without DNA", except they also require a host, and most biologists would not consider them to be "life".

    20. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yet there'd be little reason to expect any similarity with the DNA codons to protein translations

      Yes, they would likely have a different genetic code, and a different set of amino acids. But it is still likely that the fundamentals would be similar: using DNA codons to specify a sequence of amino acids.

      If we found an alien world teaming with life much like ours here, it would be shocking if we could eat the fruit there, for example.

      As long as we can have sex with their women, who cares about the fruit?

    21. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

      I largely agree with what you say here.

      The current DNA system very likely has advantages over alternate systems, on Earth's environment at least. A system with different chirality (direction of coiling) seems quite possible (indeed, it has been difficult to discover any convincing advantage for the chirality we observe on Earth); a DNA with different nucleotide pairing is another possible variation; and "DNA" is actually part of a complex system which can be modified in different ways. For example the coding for additional/alternate amino acids in proteins, or versions of the replication enzymes not found on Earth; or in the epigenetic regulation of gene expression.

      And we have an ancestor system, the RNA coding system, that is part of the DNA system. It is widely believed that an "RNA world" of replication preceded the development of the DNA system (since DNA depended on it), so we know that alternate systems are possible.

      Given all the pieces that the DNA system on Earth has, it is a little challenging to believe that a system that developed independently in a different planetary (?) environment would be identical in every respect.

      OTOH, if life developed on Mars at least, there is good reason to think that Earth's DNA system did not develop independently of that. It looks like meteor bombardment transportation is efficient enough to contaminate Earth with samples Martian biochemistry, including extremophilic organisms. Getting material from Earth to Mars is much harder.

      Genuinely alien biochemistry might be difficult to recognize as life, since our most sensitive tools for detection generally depend on known similarities to Earth biochemistry.

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    22. Re: They have DNA sequencer on board by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If it was found floating in the rarefied atmosphere 250 miles up, it is already on the surface of the planet.

      You can find plenty of stuff floating around Earth right now that wouldn't survive the journey to the surface, and some of it even got here from outer space.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    23. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by Excelcia · · Score: 1

      Because if it is extraterrestrial in origin, and it collected on the hull of the ISS after its (in geological/evolutionary time scales) incredibly brief sojourn in orbit, then the likelihood is almost certain that life on Earth was seeded this way. Which means terrestrial life is using DNA because the seeds use DNA.

      That being said, the likelihood that this is extraterrestrial approaches zero based on:

      1. Whatever the cosmonaut in question said about it "definitely not being there" before launch, there is no way this can be assured. Even if the outside of the module was (successfully) medically sterilized, was the inside of the vehicle it was transported in medically sterilized? Was it loaded in a clean room? Most ISS modules were orbited in a space shuttle - the payload bay of the space shuttle is not perfectly air tight. In fact, there was air venting to and from the payload bay (which was unfiltered) before, and during launch. The Proton-M payload bay (the PLF-BR-13305 and PLF-BR-15255 payload farings) were also not sterilized inside prior to launch.
      2. There have been numerous spacewalks. Were all space suits sterilized before use? How about every tool ever used? How about every replacement part? Space suits use adiabatic cooling, are the (sweaty astronaut-stew of internal suit) gasses which are released from the inside of a space suit filtered for particulates of bacterial spore size?
      3. There have been numerous incidents of internal air venting (for spacewalks and many other reasons) of unfiltered air.
      4. There have been innumerable other satellite launches that have released micro debris and gasses into orbits the ISS crosses

      The fact there are bacterial and/or their spores that have survived on the exterior of the ISS is very interesting, since that itself would tend to support the idea of panspermia. But even a hint this this might have extraterrestrial origins is little more than sensationalism and of such low probability as to be essentially zero.

    24. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by drunken_boxer777 · · Score: 1

      Apparently some of the processes in our body have things switched between DNA & RNA.

      There are viruses that use RNA for their genome, but all human cells use DNA as the genome and RNA for the transcription template, transporting amino acids to the ribosome, and for the ribosome itself. DNA does not do anything that RNA does in human cells.

    25. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      People as narrow minded as you might not classify non-DNA "life" as life even if it were right in front of you.

      If another mechanisms was more viable for the basis of life, then why have none displaced DNA on earth, despite 4 billion years of opportunities?

      Because everywhere is not earth. Everything doesn't work well everywhere.

      When we find life elsewhere in the Universe, I think it is very likely it will be DNA based.

      Earth doesn't have much else you recognize as "life" that is not DNA based, and you are too unimaginative to think of anything else. This does not mean anything about likelihood of life elsewhere. Again - everywhere is not earth.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    26. Re: They have DNA sequencer on board by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Why are all planets round?

      Well right there I have to pull you up, since at least one (Earth) is flat. Although I suppose a disc is round, so I'll let you off.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    27. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Aren't there large quantities of human waste in orbit?

      Yeah, when astronauts want a dump they just open a window and let fly. It's like medieval London.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    28. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by dwywit · · Score: 1
      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    29. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      DNA consists of commonly available ingredients, can guide its own self-assembly, is stable, and nucleotides form abiotically. No other known material has all of these characteristics.

      Odd, I thought that RNA has precisely that list of characteristics, PLUS it also has self-catalytic ability AND the ability to catalyse other biochemical reactions, which DNA doesn't have.

      Quick check - what is the utterly vital (to DNA replication) enzyme called the ribosome composed of, in large part? Oh, it's mostly RNA. And the enzyme made largely of DNA which is essential for RNA replication is ... not known to science at this time.

      There are a lot of very good reasons that many OOL (Origin Of Life) researchers consider a pre-DNA "RNA World" to be a real possibility. But I know of none that consider DNA to have been a material that pre-dates RNA. (There are also people who consider a hypothetical PNA world [Peptide-backboned Nucleic Acid] as a real possibility. And other who think mineral surface symmetry breaking to have provided information storage before the squishy stuff started to get complex enough to get involved. Cutting edge stuff.)

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    30. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      we have been discussing for decades if Pluto is one at all!

      The debate over Pluto(-Charon)'s "planeticity" lasted from the discovery of Eris on Jan 05 2005, through it's publication on Aug 30 that year. The debate ended with the adoption of Resolution 5A of the IAU's 26th General Assembly on 24 August 2006.

      If you want to re-start the debate, become an astronomer, attend the IAU's next General Assembly, and persuade people. Which is exactly what Alan Stern tried last year. He failed ; you'll have to get some serious astronomical chops to have a chance of succeeding where he failed.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  4. Not a likely explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The claims of alien bacteria on the ISS are being met with widespread skepticism.

  5. Mutated bacteria by Ayano · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While in space most likely. The fact that we're even able to classify it bacteria rather than a foreign micro organism is telling.

    --
    I don't read AC
    1. Re:Mutated bacteria by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

      While in space most likely. The fact that we're even able to classify it bacteria rather than a foreign micro organism is telling.

      There is no we.

      While I beleive this find only a matter of time. This is from one Russian cosmonaut without any real cites.

      Anton Shkaplerov Education:
      "Shkaplerov completed Yak-52 flight training at the Sevastopol Aviation Club in 1989. After graduation from Sevastopol High School in 1989, he entered the Kachinsk Air Force Pilot School graduating in 1994 as pilot-engineer. In 1997 he graduated from the N. E. Zukovskiy Air Force Engineering."
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      I find it ironic that it was released by The independent.

  6. Probably terrestrial by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

    It would be cool if these were alien, but I'm willing to bet that these are just terrestrial bacteria.

  7. I tole you! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

    What'd I tell you? I said aliens coming. I tole you and you didn't listen.

    They're our space brothers coming to protect the President from all the haters and libs. Oh, it's happening, now. Bet on it. Check fucking mate.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:I tole you! by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      That's why you don't want a wall...just to let all the aliens in to be on your side. We need a wall now, to protect us from those vacuumbacks, and anchormicrobes!

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  8. ISS orbit is within our atmosphere by RhettLivingston · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The ISS orbit is so low it is within the upper reaches of our atmosphere. That is why it has to be given regular boosts to keep it in orbit. Though super thin, it does encounter enough atmosphere to induce drag.

    Just as we have found unusual organisms in the deepest oceans and even miles down in rock, we should expect to find bacteria at the limits of our atmosphere and even beyond. It should also be expected that they have evolved dramatically, as organisms living off of heat and sulfur deep in our oceans have done.

    There are some out of this world organisms right here at home. I'm not even sure how you could prove extraterrestrial origin. Almost anything you find could just be evidence of a previously undiscovered unique ecosystem 100+ miles up.

    It's sort of neat to imagine the possibility of some life form surfing around on the auroras in the thermosphere.

    1. Re:ISS orbit is within our atmosphere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The simpler explanation is that 1) the guy was wrong and it was there before launch or 2) that an astronaut brought it with them when they walked out on a spacewalk or 3) that one of the dozens and dozens of ships that have docked with the ISS over the past 20 years brought it with them.

    2. Re:ISS orbit is within our atmosphere by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The simpler explanation is that 1) the guy was wrong and it was there before launch or 2) that an astronaut brought it with them when they walked out on a spacewalk

      The Russians are not exactly known for cleanliness in spacecraft, either, not after Mir was eaten by space fungus.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  9. Oh, come on!! by DrTJ · · Score: 5, Informative

    ISS har for 20 years been orbiting - a close distance - around a planet with gazillions bacteria an microbes, and been visited by more than a hundred people, and it was lanuched through the atmosphere containing lots of microscopic life, and as soon as bacteria is found on the outside, it is considered likely to be of alien origin?

    Gimme a break!

    I would be very surprised if we could keep it completely clean from earthly contaimination, even if we are talking about the outside.

    1. Re:Oh, come on!! by meerling · · Score: 1

      And of course since bacteria have an asexual reproduction method, all it ever takes is one...

    2. Re:Oh, come on!! by Cl1mh4224rd · · Score: 2

      ...and it was lanuched through the atmosphere containing lots of microscopic life...

      The parts that make up the ISS were launched as payloads on other vehicles. I don't believe they were ever exposed to the atmosphere during ascent.

      --
      People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
    3. Re:Oh, come on!! by complete+loony · · Score: 2

      Don't forget the space walks. How many times have astronauts put on a suit while inside the station, then touched the outside of the ISS.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
  10. agents Mulder and Scully will investigate this by tech-law-ny · · Score: 2

    They will also learn that the Cigarette Smoking Man does, in fact, smoke on the ISS.

  11. Don't get your hopes up by locater16 · · Score: 2

    What does "not there at launch" mean? The ISS has had multiple modules installed over the course of many years, almost 20 at this point. And bacteria is notoriously hard to kill. Martian probes undergo a thorough sterilization before launch just to avoid contamination of mars by earth bacteria, and between scrubbing and radiation and vacuum and etc. Nasa still isn't sure they've killed all of it. And yes bacteria can survive in space.

    All of this makes it seem fantastically likely that, hey it's just earth bacteria. Stuff can grow almost anywhere.

  12. More Russian Fake News by Harold+Halloway · · Score: 4, Funny

    This 'bacteria' will be analysed and found to be a mixture of borscht and jizz.

  13. Lots of service modules! by evanh · · Score: 1

    I was under the impression that lots of service craft come into contact on a regular basis. It's not hard to imagine organic material taking a ride on most of those. So it's just a question of how easy the contaminant transfer becomes.

  14. Calvin, but no Hobbes. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    I heard about this. Doesn't end well for the ISS crew.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  15. Very much terrestrial. by The123king · · Score: 1

    https://science.slashdot.org/s...

    Is it so much of a stretch to assume that these same high-flying bacteria are the ones caked on the ISS?

    --
    If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat
    1. Re:Very much terrestrial. by The123king · · Score: 1

      The /. article has a broken link: http://www.sciencemag.org/news...

      --
      If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat
  16. Slow news day? by John.Banister · · Score: 1

    So, he said that the bacteria could have come into space from the planet around which the space station orbits, or it could have come to the space station from an extraterrestrial origin. It sure sounds more exciting not to report the first part of what he said. It's like me saying that the CDMA providing my internet could have come from the local tower which I can't see, or it could be hijacked as part of a technologically perfect mitm attack done by a hovering extraterrestrial broadcaster that I also can't see. So, slashdot commenter reports "Space aliens could be hijacking my internet." Another example would be Publisher's Clearinghouse writing "You may already have won!"

  17. Thats nothing ... by quenda · · Score: 1

    Edgar Mitchell saw seven-foot alien monsters walking on the moon. Or something like that.
    Pitiful Russians. USA wins!

  18. Re:pbbbt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Second... (Scruffy)

  19. Re:Perhaps it's just radically mutated Earth bacte by meerling · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's called Panspermia, if it really is non-terrestrial, but odds are very high that it's terrestrial.
    Despite sterilization we have found bacterial colonies many times on our space hardware, and they've always been from Earth.
    Not only does it only take a single bacteria to survive and reach that location, as the article mentioned, there are things that can loft microorganisms to insane altitudes. I have doubts they can go as high as the space station, but there are rockets they can hitch a ride on, and again, it only takes one to start a colony.
    Don't forget that "just because it wasn't there before" only means that it was undetected for some reason, maybe because it was too small.
    And also, even if they don't have a match to a known terrestrial DNA sequence, still doesn't mean it's alien. It could just be that their database isn't complete. Actually we know the database of microbial DNA is not complete, so that's a given.
    Now if it doesn't match anything from Earth, and it's not close enough to be related to any known microbe, and an analysis of it's DNA doesn't show any real matches of any terrestrial DNA sequences at all, then it might be alien. (There are lots of shared sequences among all life on Earth, since they all share common ancestors, it's just some are more closely related than others.)
    If it's DNA uses something other than AGCT or AGCU, then it's almost guaranteed it's non-terrestrial/alien.

  20. Re:Watch out Rubber... by meerling · · Score: 1

    Someone beat you to an Andromeda Strain comment a long time ago on this thread.

  21. Reminds me of the "Phantom" that hauted Germany by grungeman · · Score: 5, Informative

    A few years ago there was a woman in Germany that seemed to have been involved in all kinds of spectacular crimes, mostly murder. Her DNA was found on various crime scenes that seemed totally unrelated, She must have been the most wanted criminal for a while and was called the "Phantom". There was a $400,000 reward put on her head

    Of course it turned out in a slightly different way than police had expected. The DNA that was found was actually from a female factory worker packaging the cotton swabs that were used by German police to collect DNA, so these DNA traces were simply a contamination. Here is the whole story: http://content.time.com/time/w...

    You can expect something similar from the bacteria on the ISS. Everybody of course wants some spectacular news, but unfortunately there are far more mundane ways how the bacteria could have ended up there.

    --

    Signature deleted by lameness filter.
    1. Re:Reminds me of the "Phantom" that hauted Germany by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

      > That's ridiculous. If swabs were sold for this purpose, contamination testing should be part of regular manufacturing QA.

      But, but, but... "teh profits". Firing your QA staff boosts profits. Ask Microsoft.

      --

      I'm not repeating myself
      I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
  22. Travel by yobjob · · Score: 2

    Because bacteria can travel through interstellar space and hit a space station orbiting Earth, but bacteria can't travel a few thousand feet from Earth to a space station.

  23. 250 miles up (Dallas to Houston), 6,200 mile atmos by raymorris · · Score: 5, Informative

    Agreed. Imagine you have an 8 inch volleyball, drenched with syrup. A quarter of an inch away, almost touching the syrup-coated volleyball, there is a coin and you find microscopic traces of syrup on the coin. How do you guess the trace of a syrup got on the coin?

    Most likely, it came from the big ball of syrup right next to the coin. Or maybe somehow syrup came in from outside and got on the coin, without ever making it 1/4 inch further to get in the volleyball. Which seems most plausible?

    That's the scale we're talking about with ISS. Earth is 8,000 miles diameter, 25,000 miles circumference. The atmosphere extends to 6,200 miles up (exosphere). ISS is below the exosphere, in the thermosphere. ISS is only 250 from the surface - nearly touching the ground.

    As someone else hinted, IIS is also travelling 18,000 miles per hour. At that altitude, there are roughly 4,000,000,000 air molecules per cubic meter*. Meaning ISS is colliding with billions of air molecules per second. It would be surprising if they didn't get a bug on the windshield.

    * Yeah I used imperial and metric in the same post. Get over it.

  24. Re:Perhaps it's just radically mutated Earth bacte by umafuckit · · Score: 1

    If it's DNA uses something other than AGCT or AGCU, then it's almost guaranteed it's non-terrestrial/alien.

    Or if doesn't use DNA, or if the *entire* genome is different to anything we've ever seen before, etc.

  25. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by scdeimos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    More likely it came from one of the dozens of space vehicles to have docked with the ISS over the years.

  26. NASA or a private party could settle this by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    The next time a long-range sample return mission like the recently launched OSIRIS-REx is sent up, it could include a surface collection system to trap dust it encounters enroute. If panspermia is hiding in this stuff, revealing it in dust collected far from Earth's atmosphere would be much better proof, especially if the findings correlate with analysis of the returned sample itself. OSIRIS-REx will sample the surface of an asteroid, so whatever it finds will have been sitting out there for eons. That ship has sailed, but there will be other sample return probes.

    It would not be that difficult for a private party to send up a special-purpose Earth-orbital mission to spend a year or two well outside the atmosphere exposing a collection surface, then return. OR...trap and return an old, dead geosynchronous satellite.

  27. the collision would have vapourised them by Jerry+Atrick · · Score: 2

    Hard to believe any bacteria could survive the collision velocities involved with an orbiting object, whether they floated in from space or up from the atmosphere. They were there when it launched.

    1. Re:the collision would have vapourised them by Jerry+Atrick · · Score: 1

      ...or carried from Earth on the surface of something floating near the ISS. Like a spacesuit or docked capsule...

    2. Re:the collision would have vapourised them by swilver · · Score: 2

      That's not hard to believe at all. Bacteria have almost no mass, getting hit by an object going very fast would only result in a tiny amount of energy being released as a result of the collision, certainly not enough to kill the bacteria.

    3. Re:the collision would have vapourised them by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Why? We know of bacteria that lives in methane environments, at extreme cold, extreme heat, extremely acidic environments. We know of things extremely hard and extremely soft, and combine all that with bacteria being extremely small and thus having extremely low inertia the question of whether or not an extremeophile can survive hitting a windscreen isn't anywhere near as interesting as how it got there in the first place.

    4. Re:the collision would have vapourised them by CheeseyDJ · · Score: 1
      I agree, and it reminds me of this quote, from the essay "On Being the Right Size" by J. B. S. Haldane:

      You can drop a mouse down a thousand-yard mine shaft; and, on arriving at the bottom, it gets a slight shock and walks away. A rat is killed, a man is broken, a horse splashes.

    5. Re:the collision would have vapourised them by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that they would be completely desiccated making them much lighter and stronger

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    6. Re:the collision would have vapourised them by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      You can drop a mouse down a thousand-yard mine shaft; and, on arriving at the bottom, it gets a slight shock and walks away.

      Terminal velocity depends on drag and mass. Mouse has lots of drag, low mass. This is why Galileo dropped feathers and bowling balls.

      Now, try that experiment in a thousand-yard vacuum and the mouse will not walk away when it hits bottom, I tell you. I don't care you you are, that there's funny.

    7. Re:the collision would have vapourised them by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Mass, and hence energy picked up in the fall, varies with the cube of the length. Tissue strength varies with the square. If you're going to be dropped a long way, being small is a good idea.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  28. Re:Perhaps it's just radically mutated Earth bacte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The bacteria is not alien, it comes from north Korean missile launches.
    Now you may argue that there is little difference between alien and north Korean, but north Korea is still on Earth.

  29. I for one by tuxisthefuture · · Score: 1

    I for one, welcome out new bacterial overlords.

  30. Obligatory by burtosis · · Score: 1

    I'm not saying it's aliens, but...

  31. Re: Sample return probeS by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

    >That ship has sailed, but there will be other sample return probes.

    Isn't it kind of awesome to live in an era where you can say that, with confidence, we're going to bring back more stuff from space to have a look at it?

    I still want my O'Neill cylinder and Orion drive, though.

  32. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  33. Re:Perhaps it's just radically mutated Earth bacte by shortscruffydave · · Score: 2

    The sort of mutation that you might expect to find in an environment with tons of radiation flying around?

  34. Must say it by bothorsen · · Score: 1

    I for one hail our new bacteria overlords

  35. Deeply flawed reasoning by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Bacteria that had not been there during the launch of the ISS module were found on the swabs,

    Umm, how would they possibly know that the bacteria was not there? It's not as if they have some means of sterilizing on the launch pad and It's not hard to show how a previously unknown bacteria could have been missed. Not to mention that there is such a thing as mutations, particularly in a high radiation environment.

    So they have flown from somewhere in space and settled on the outside hull.

    Unless they have some means to conclusively rule out all sources of terrestrial contamination (and they do not) then this is the same sort of idiotic thinking that makes people think a UFO = alien visitors when they are forgetting what the U in UFO stands for.

  36. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by prefec2 · · Score: 1

    They cannot be illegal aliens, as they have not yet migrated to any country. The ISS is in a sense exterritorial.

  37. Re:Perhaps it's just radically mutated Earth bacte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Hehe, Panspermia. Reminds me of this college party gotten out of hand...

  38. Re:Cue Arbitrary Andromeda Strain References by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 1

    Let's go back to the rock and see it at 440. Hey I welcome any news stories that remind me of fun books.

  39. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by Not-a-Neg · · Score: 1

    ...or it came from the Earth following a large ejection of material when the Moon and any number of large meteors slammed into the Earth.

    --
    -==- Buy a Mac and leave me alone!
  40. Uh-oh by HangingChad · · Score: 1

    Ripley, we've lost contact with the colony on the ISS.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  41. 601 by cstacy · · Score: 1

    601 - Fake News Overflow

  42. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    "They cannot be illegal aliens, as they have not yet migrated to any country. The ISS is in a sense exterritorial."

    The article states, that a cosmonaut said it, so the illegal alien bacterium must come from the American 'sector' of the ISS.

  43. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    Hell, living cells originating from a spark of life on the surface of the ISS is more likely than "they came from outer space." There's at least likely to be organic molecules of terrestrial origin on the surface of the ISS that COULD organize into cells. That seems plausible. "Microbes being projected across the solar system to land on the ISS where they grew on nothing" does not.

    Still much much much less likely than regular old earth microbes of course, but if you're going to come up with a second guess, "it's aliens" is still nowhere close.

  44. It's from the Cylons by ThatNakedGuy · · Score: 1

    "There are those who believe that life here began out there, far across the universe, with tribes of humans who may have been the forefathers of the Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans, that they may have been the architects of the Great Pyramids, or the lost civilizations of Lemuria or Atlantis.
    Some believe that there may yet be brothers of man who even now fight to survive - somewhere beyond the heavens!"

  45. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

    And, while interesting, it's also basically unprovable. We can't prove that the bacteria didn't come from Earth, at best we can prove that we've never seen that bacteria on Earth. We also can't prove it did come from Earth, at best we can prove that it exists on Earth.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  46. Andromeda Strain? by Darth+Technoid · · Score: 1

    Pretty please don't bring a sample home.

  47. It Makes A Lousy Movie by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    Half baked movies about 300 lb. cockroaches from space taking over Earth can make a decent low budget horror movie. But bacteria from space taking us out just isn't worthy of being in a low budget flick.

  48. Mutant by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

    My money is on it's just an earth bacteria that's undergone some mutations while in space.

    Would definitely be exciting if it's really not from earth. Would definitely have to study it extensively.

  49. Re:Perhaps it's just radically mutated Earth bacte by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
    north Korea is still on Earth.

    Maybe today, but how long will that last?

    --
    Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  50. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 1

    What about the suits they wear when doing an EVA? Bacteria gets transferred to the suit during handling and then attaches to the ISS during a spacewalk.

  51. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

    APK, you are a lying, ignorant, willfully dishonest, no-class, spamming, racist, moronic cunt with nothing to offer anyone. Again, I have zero time for someone as worthless as you. Stop wasting your own obviously worthless time by trying to stalk me around the site you dumb sack of shit.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  52. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by Pikoro · · Score: 1

    Hey NYCL, it's ok. APK's a bot. He told me himself. Well, his bot did.

    https://slashdot.org/comments.... - proof ;)

    --
    "Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
  53. ISS people-waste... by martinfb · · Score: 1

    I seem to remember something about a pee-sicle happening in the past up there.
    Which implies that human waste is ejected from the ISS into space.

    I know that when I pee out of my moving car, it gets all over the car!
    I never checked the bacteria there, yet there does sometimes seem some strange crap on my car that is NOT from my pee!

    Yet, on a serious note, whether from earth-based human activity or not, it does seem that life from elsewhere in the universe should not be a surprise.

    --


    Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
  54. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    That's really flattering that you're thinking about me for hours, but really, fuck off. You're a lying racist no-class no-talent cunt. You have nothing to offer me except wasted time.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  55. You will not catch a cold... by gaaah · · Score: 1

    ...from this bacteria, but rather you will catch a cyan, named so because the snot you produce will be the color cyan.

  56. Re:Where are your manners amicusNYCL? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    You're an idiot. Having class has nothing to do with calling you a cunt, class is either something you have or you don't. You do not have it, as you make clear at every available opportunity. You have never had it, and you never will. Me calling you a cunt has nothing to do with that. I'm only calling you a cunt because you're a cunt.

    And honesty has fuck-all to do with a login name, you emotionally-stunted logic-challenged moron. You have never once won an argument with me, and you never will, because you take lying to the extreme. You have no idea what it even means to be truthful, you make up your own fantasy and then act like it's reality. Look at your post, "eating my words", no man that's your fantasy. You just like to act like your delusions are truth. That's why you post acting like people other than yourself for no apparent reason but then insist those are actually other people. I've even seen you thank yourself. It's pathetic fantasy. You build a fantasy world and then you act like it's real. You make claims about other people without knowing the first thing about them and whether or not those claims could possibly be true, but you don't give a shit because you have no fucking clue what it means to be honest or have integrity so you make up whatever shit you want to make up and then try to convince other people and yourself that these things are true. In other words, you lie to everyone, and you even know you do it. You know you're a lying sack of shit but you have so little self-worth that even though you know you're lying you still do it anyway. That's why no one can ever believe anything you say or claim, because you will obviously lie about any and everything if it makes you feel better about your own sad little life. It must feel like shit to know that after you die you're going to leave no legacy and the only people who will be at your funeral are those with some sort of familial obligation instead of people who genuinely cared about you and want to mourn, but man you need to find a more constructive way to deal with that than going online and spouting off lie after lie after lie. Maybe if you didn't lie all the fucking time you'd be able to hold together a decent relationship. Maybe another human being would be able to stand you. It's a stretch, but it's possible. Unfortunately though I think you are completely without any redeeming qualities whatsoever. If you have ever demonstrated even a single redeeming quality it hasn't been apparent.

    And look at that, I'm already way over my weekly quota of time spent dealing with a pathetic emotionally-retarded socially-inept no-class willfully-ignorant integrity-lacking lying spamming racist cunt. Looks like you'll have to fuck off again, you stupid, stupid person. My own fantasy of one day causing you to actually examine your own behavior and realize why everyone hates you continues to elude me, as you more and more appear to be completely incapable of anything approaching logical rational thought. In conclusion, go fuck yourself, because you're the only person who ever would.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  57. Re: "Man that guy had the utmost confidence" by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    I have no idea what that non-sequitor about Marino is supposed to imply. You are not exactly the Dan Marino of programmers. Or of anything, with the possible exception of lying. APK, you are the Dan Marino of lying.

    Per your 'FoAmInG-@-tHe-MoUtH" reply

    This is what I mean when I talk about the fantasy world you live in. I don't think you have ever once correctly attributed any sort of emotion to me, everything you say about me is 100% made up in your head. In other words, pure fantasy. It's probably projection that you think I'm in any way angry or upset when I write things like that.

    For me they are, concrete verifiable undeniable REALITY

    What, a few people saying your program doesn't suck? OK, quick reality check. Your program makes HTTP requests, sorts and filters text, and writes to a file. This is not exactly rocket surgery. But, for some reason it's what you're so proud of, it's literally your life's work. It is at best a year 2 or 3 computer science project, and I mean that literally. "Make a program to download data, sort and filter it, and write it to a file". In my second year we had a project to do a GUI to visualize the entire OSI stack. It's not like you're doing anything groundbreaking. That's something you assign a beginning programmer to teach them about HTTP requests or file I/O. This is like the programmer of Notepad talking all this shit about how his program doesn't have any major bugs. And this program that you're so proud of? 10 major versions.

    You wish you were me.

    I'm happy, with my own house and car, plenty of friends, six figure job, retirement and investment accounts, beautiful wife, fulfilling job leading a team as CTO designing and implementing a program used by hundreds of thousands to millions of people. No, I do not want to trade that to be a pathetic emotionally-retarded socially-inept no-class willfully-ignorant integrity-lacking lying spamming racist cunt. If I did, I could, it's not hard to be you. I just have to develop an awful personality, regress emotionally back to middle school age, lie my ass off, and produce a basic program over 10 versions. I could have all that, there's just no reason to take such a far step backwards in life.

    have "StRaNgE" delusions

    Literally everything I've said about myself is true, I don't have any reason to lie to you, my life is already fulfilling, there's no reason to make anything up. I know that's foreign to you, which is why you've accused me of living in a fantasy. You know what the irony is about that? Haha, what am I saying, you're completely clueless. I'll tell you. The idea that I live in a fantasy is itself a fantasy created by you. Irony!

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  58. Re:No, but I do have that ability... apk by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    in you projecting all of YOUR FAULTS onto me

    I knew that if I brought up something like projection you would immediately accuse me of it. It's the Donald Trump school of debate. Your Pavlovian response has become far too easy to anticipate.

    It's always a pleasure to make you EAT YOUR WORDS

    How would you know, fantasy boy, I've literally never felt like I've ever lost any argument to you? It's just your fantasy world man. I'm glad that you've managed to at least obtain some measure of respect, even if it's a complete lie and fabrication you tell yourself. Just imagine how good life would be if you didn't have to pretend that people liked and respected you.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  59. Re:Additionally this will be good for a laugh by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    PROVE everything you say about yourself

    It's amazing, truly. You're like a low-functioning Down syndrome puppy. All of the emotional maturity and attention span of a puppy, combined with the logic and reasoning skills of a low-functioning Down patient. It's almost adorable that you're still asking about stuff like that, as if all of my responses to that request have either never happened or just gone right over your head. It would be adorable if it wasn't so pathetic, anyway. I'm sure in your fantasy world I've just avoided that request instead of constantly giving the same answer, or you've some how "caught" me, or "won" something. Even though it's pathetic to see the insanity-level repetition that goes on in your head, I admit that it is amusing from time to time.

    Anyway, thanks for the laugh.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  60. Re:Keep projecting & RUNNING "Forrest", lol... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    Thanks for HELPING ME easily PROVE you're ALL "hotair blowhard bs"

    You don't understand what proof means. Lack of proof is not proof of a lack. There's really no reason to try to teach logical fallacies to you though, you wouldn't understand. My consistent response to your demands for proof, and your continued demands, show that you are incapable of understanding basic logic.

    Keep being so "classy" tossing those names

    OK. APK, you're a pathetic emotionally-retarded socially-inept no-class willfully-ignorant integrity-lacking lying spamming racist cunt. And, I want you to know something else. I really mean that. From the heart, big guy.

    Enjoy your fantasy day, I have shit to do.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  61. Re:Bullshit: You lack proof of your words by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    P.S.=> ... & you do have to "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" w/ YOUR TAIL BETWEEN YOUR LEGS as you EAT YOUR WORDS vs. me here too (lol) https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... [slashdot.org] - you're DYING of MALNUTRITION amicusNYCL (but then, cartoon character FAKE NAMES for obviously FAKE LIVES (see above, lol) don't have to eat & YET YOU DO hahahaha (eating your words)) - EATING YOUR WORDS != GOOD nutrition BOY, RoTfLmAo @ U... apk

    It's really impossible for me to express the specific thing I feel when I read your fantasy fan-fic like that. It's a strange mix of emotions. There's some mild amusement, but also a certain amount of disgust, and obviously pity. It's a weird mix. It feels like two people looking at the same thing but one of the people is on a very high dose of hallucinogens and you realize that, while you're looking at the same thing, you're really not experiencing the same thing at all.

    Have a good night cunt.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  62. Re:Who lacks class? You do blowhard! apk by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    I can't even finish reading all this bullshit. I think I cracked your code though. All the random bold and capital letters is where your fantasies are strongest, and you're trying to convince you and others that it's real. I think that's why you do that. I can't even make it through that comment though, sorry, I've read the same bullshit from you over and over and over, there's just nothing new from you any more. Your comments are all "I know you are, but what am I?" where you accuse me of the things which I point out are true about you, interjected with random fantasy bullshit from you with no basis in reality.

    Whatever, it's gotten really old. You're a lying cunt, you will always be a lying cunt, and that's about all there is. There is not really any point at all trying to have a discussion with a lying cunt who is incapable of basic logic. Like I've said before, it's like trying to play chess with a pigeon. There you go, shitting all over the board and strutting around like you've won. It's just stupid. It's like trying to watch someone with a physical disability go through an obstacle course. You kind of admire them for trying to do what everyone knows they can't do, but really it's just kind of boring to watch.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  63. Re:Users liking & using my ware != fantasy by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    ANYONE HERE LIKE & USE YOUR WARE amicusNYCL?

    Are you asking if any of our customers' users have Slashdot accounts? I wouldn't know, I don't think anyone has created "Slashdot Username" as one of their demographic fields, but I guess I could check. Why the hell is that even relevant? We've got around ~75 or so installations set up, the largest has around 350,000 users and there are a handful of small businesses which only have a few hundred or thousand users, most of the others are medium-size corporate, government, or military clients. We're around a million to million and a half users worldwide in total. I would imagine that several of them do have Slashdot accounts.

    Does the likes of Malwarebytes both HOST & RECOMMEND IT as they do mine??

    Why the fuck would they? Malwarebytes and my software do not have any overlap. There is no reason why that company in particular would recommend it, in fact I don't see any place on their website where they list software recommendations. I'm not involved in the marketing aspect of it, but if I search for the name of the application I see several articles written about it. The only review aggregate I see shows an average of 4 out of 5 stars. If I search for your application reviews I don't see any at all. That's ok though, don't feel bad about it, let's create a fantasy where everyone loves your absurdly basic piece of software and they respect you personally too. But speaking of hosting, we don't allow anyone else to host our software unless they're signing contracts, but I did notice something a little strange. Why doesn't your shit-hot application have its own website? It's not relevant enough to need its own website, huh?

    I mean, are you setting these "standards" for me just based on things you think apply to you? OK, I can do that. APK, every single one of the 100+ government departments of the state of Arizona uses my software, how many AZ government departments use yours? Oooh, none of them do? Well fuckin' gee whiz, I guess that's proof that I'm better than you right?! APK logic right there.

    Instead of calling me names HAVE SOME CLASS & be polite

    And why exactly would I be polite to such a lying cunt? You don't deserve to be treated with respect, you have to earn it. You have no idea how to do that. Go back to the things you decided to try to claim about my wife and then tell me I should be polite to you, you lying racist idiot cunt.

    You can claim whatever you want to, the only fact that matters with regard to you is that you lie All. The. Fucking. Time. You lie as if lying were the way to get people to respect you. You lie as if lying were the way to create a meaningful interpersonal relationship in your life. You lie because you lack the basic humanity to know how to deal with other people and interact in decent society. You lie because you're a piece of shit with no redeeming qualities, who is jealous of anyone and everyone who can manage to live a successful happy life where you've failed so spectacularly.

    Sorry if I didn't respond to anything else you wrote, the bullshit that spills out onto your browser is starting to look like actual bullshit and I'm having problems reading more than a few words in.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  64. Re:You can't prove anything you say by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    Yet you can't prove anything you say

    Of course I can, it's easily verifiable. Like I said, everything I've claimed about myself is true. Sorry that you don't want to accept that, sorry that you can't handle that anyone else's life isn't as shitty as yours.

    Talk's cheap man... it boils down to THAT.

    It is for you, yeah, because your word holds absolutely zero value. That's a self-inflicted wound though, I never made you lie your ass off. That's on you.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  65. Re:/.ers quotes' value proves my words by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    Not sure what the point of posting that set of quotes again is. You think I haven't seen that before? How many dozens of times have you posted that? You think that changes my opinion of you in any way? What's the fuckin' point, man? It's a fact that you lie your ass off, about anything and everything. Posting a bunch of non-sequitor quotes from other uses doesn't change that fact in any way. As far as the substance of those quotes, they read like "when I want to eat something that requires a spoon, I find that a spoon works well. It works exactly like a spoon." A bunch of glowing reviews for your text sorting program there, not that they have anything to do with anything we were talking about. Not that it matters though, this entire discussion, like everything else you touch, is fucking stupid.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black