Scientists are again saying that life here began out there...

[137th Gebirg]

A not-to-subtle BSG reference, but I guess there's new evidence, based on various mineral compositions (specifically Molybdenum), that lend additional credence to life coming from Mars on a rock:

http://news.sky.com/story/1134431/life-on-earth-started-on-mars-say-scientists

 

[JohnChod]

Gives new meaning to, "What rock did you crawl out from under?"

 

[CorporalCaptain]

That's pretty flimsy evidence for such a bold claim.

 

[R. Star]

Nice theory. I'll file this one in the unproven category though.

 

[137th Gebirg]

IIRC, the claim isn't exactly new. There have been theories and other tenuous evidence over the years (at least 20 years to my recollection) that have pretty much re-hashed the same message of a Mars-based origin of Earth life. From what I can tell, this is just the latest piece that supports the existing claim. Certainly not a "slam dunk" proof, by any stretch, but interesting nonetheless.

 

[JarodRussell]

Still no explanation for the creation of life. If it didn't originate on Earth, it originated elsewhere. It still had to originate somehow.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

IIRC, the claim isn't exactly new. There have been theories and other tenuous evidence over the years (at least 20 years to my recollection) that have pretty much re-hashed the same message of a Mars-based origin of Earth life. From what I can tell, this is just the latest piece that supports the existing claim. Certainly not a "slam dunk" proof, by any stretch, but interesting nonetheless.

Right.

And while the new evidence might indeed increase the likelihood that life in our solar system began on Mars, what Professor Benner says here, quoted from the OP article, is ridiculous:

"It's yet another piece of evidence which makes it more likely life came to Earth on a Martian meteorite, rather than starting on this planet."

 

[137th Gebirg]

Yeah, but to be fair, he did only call it "evidence". If he had said "proof", then yes, that would be patently idiotic.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

To be fair, the guy just wants some headlines.

 

[gturner]

Agreed. Molybdenum ores are common and moly is abundant in the ocean. He claims that the oxide wouldn't have been available on Earth because our surface didn't have much oxygen early in our history. Well, that's because all the oxygen was tied up in minerals like molybdenum oxides.

 

[137th Gebirg]

To be fair, the guy just wants some headlines.

Well, yeah, it's like NASA's little trick of prepping for a major press event, spooling everyone up, with cameras and world-wide coverage, only to find out they discovered a new kind of dust particle somewhere. These research groups are so strapped for cash, they need to drum up interest somehow. If it means injecting a little hyperbole into the mix just to get people to notice, they'll likely do it. This particular case appears no different. A minor discovery, yes, with potential implications for bigger discoveries, but certainly not mind-bogglingly huge. Just a baby-step.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Any news that starts with "scientists say" like we are some kind of monolithic block is most likely to be bullshit, or at least heavily sensationalized.

 

[gturner]

I preferred the discovery that Mars is rich in perchlorates, which while very toxic to humans, are used in many solid rocket motors. The high concentration of perchlorates in Martian soil, around a half percent in some cases, indicates that life probably originated on Mars, built fairly crude rocket with SRB's, and then flew to Earth. The relative abundance of perchlorates on Mars and Earth (a rare pretty rare compound here, but common there) makes sense if the big boosters were used on Mars while only small braking rockets were used to land the tiny little Martian capsules on our planet.

I think I'll schedule a press conference.

 

[137th Gebirg]

 

[scotpens]

The relative abundance of perchlorates on Mars and Earth (a rare pretty rare compound here, but common there) makes sense if the big boosters were used on Mars while only small braking rockets were used to land the tiny little Martian capsules on our planet.

That brings to mind a story I read many years ago.

Link

 

[Crazy Eddie]

The relative abundance of perchlorates on Mars and Earth (a rare pretty rare compound here, but common there) makes sense if the big boosters were used on Mars while only small braking rockets were used to land the tiny little Martian capsules on our planet.

That brings to mind a story I read many years ago.

Link

Dumb plot twist is dumb.

 

[Argus Skyhawk]

Well, yeah, it's like NASA's little trick of prepping for a major press event, spooling everyone up, with cameras and world-wide coverage, only to find out they discovered a new kind of dust particle somewhere.

NASA is so desperate for a big breakthrough to announce and yet conspiracy theorists keep insisting NASA is hiding evidence of Martian civilizations and such. Yeesh. Like they wouldn't be trumpeting such discoveries all over the place.

 

[Gov Kodos]

The idea does nothing to answer what the origins of life are. Moving the origin point is like the turtles supporting the flat Earth.

 

[scotpens]

Moving the origin point is like the turtles supporting the flat Earth.

I thought it was four elephants on the back of a giant turtle. The turtle is balanced on top of a cobra. Nobody knows what the hell holds the cobra up.