Nasa Says "No Support" for Claim Of Alien Microbes

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Top NASA scientists said Monday there was no scientific evidence to support a colleague's claim that fossils of alien microbes born in outer space had been found in meteorites on Earth. The US space agency formally distanced itself from the paper by NASA scientist Richard Hoover, whose findings were published Friday in the peer-reviewed Journal of Cosmology, which is available free online. "That is a claim that Mr Hoover has been making for some years," said Carl Pilcher, director of NASA's Astrobiology Institute.

www.yahoo.com

Well that was quick....


In the article, a senior NASA scientist goes on to state that the microbes are indeed terrestrial in origin.

He claims that the fact that the meteor struck the earth means that the microbes are in fact 'contamination' from the earth itself.

If this is the case, why are we looking for life on meteors at all?...After all, i'm pretty sure every meteor in our possession has struck the earth.

Maybe there are a few that were caught with a cosmic butterfly net before the moment of impact or even the moment of entry, but i'm not aware of such a butterfly net. Dosn't mean it dosn't exist.

Another thing that bothers me is, the senior scientist claims that Mr. Richard Hoover has been making these 'meteor microbe' claims for years. Has he been asked to keep quiet? And why?

To save NASA the embarrassment of one of its own scientists taking the crazy train?

Or to hide something from the rest of us?

thoughts please.

No Nasa scientist is gona blow his career just like that by making some bogus claim. I wouldn't think.

Deebo

now only if someone at nasa would disclose planet x lol
even if they done the same we would have the truth, btw
i bet this retraction is going to make the disclosure people
mad lol

reply to post by OneEleven


earth life probably arose from a meteorite, so microbes on a meteorite would probably seem as though they came from earth.

First thing I thought was how does a rock that smashes into earth not get contaminated?

Well guess I'm not the only one.

Still interested to hear the lack of nitrogen explained though.

reply to post by OneEleven

He claims that the fact that the meteor struck the earth means that the microbes are in fact 'contamination' from the earth itself.

What? I'm no expert, but one would think it not too hard to tell the difference between contamination from Earth and alien microbe fossils that were on or inside a meteor.

I think this is hilarious. For the love of humanity. When is the government and it's associates gonna quit catering to religion and the idiots of the world.

If I was running things I woulda done warned everyone that we are now making cosmic noise. And could attract alien attention at any time. Anyone who throwed religion in my face or said it wasn't possible would be thrown into loonie bins.

But I guess that's why I'm not running things. I'm not a liar.

I eagerly await NASA's evidence to qualify this hasty "debunk".

reply to post by Vicarious10000

I think this is hilarious. For the love of humanity. When is the government and it's associates gonna quit catering to religion and the idiots of the world.

I suppose when they are no longer the majority. Majority rules, therefore stupid rules.

Paul Hertz, chief scientist of NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington, also issued a statement saying NASA did not support Hoover's findings.

"While we value the free exchange of ideas, data and information as part of scientific and technical inquiry, NASA cannot stand behind or support a scientific claim unless it has been peer-reviewed or thoroughly examined by other qualified experts," Hertz said.

Hold on... I thought the paper was being peer-reviewed as we speak, by 100 scientists no less? As far as I can tell Hoover is being completely transparent with his evidence and conclusions, opening the work up for any 'qualified expert' to analyze.

Meh. I guess this is being swept under the rug, as per usual.

reply to post by OneEleven


It could be that he has tried to have his research published for years, but reviewers at journals like Nature and Science found his evidence lacking and turned down his article, which is why he had to start submitting it to less than reputable journals such as the Journal of Cosmology. One would think that if he had what he actually claimed to have he would go directly to the more highly esteemed journals, instead of one whose integrity is questionable. From my own experience, it can take journals a long time to review an article once, and in many cases a second round is required after the requested revisions are made. Therefore, he could easily have submitted this article to numerous journals over the years, but all of them found it lacking scientific credibility.

"That is a claim that Mr Hoover has been making for some years," said Carl Pilcher

So is Pilcher calling Mr. Hoover insane? Because really, why else would he be repeatedly making such a claim?

NASA management is always refuting things their employees say.. You would think all you need to get a job there is a high school diploma from the way they distance themselves quite often from some employees' findings or conclusions, who by the way, didn't get hired because they are whackos or something..

NASA has a pretty serious hiring processs, and yet quite a lot of people that worked there seem to end up spilling the beans about something that requires the management to resort to obsfucation and damage control, even public ridicule of the employee.. Even to the extent of doing the same thing with famous astronauts..

Based on this pattern that NASA has, and what they do, it makes me think that they are more concerned about current politics of an issue, rather than scientific discovery... But I think everyone already knew that long ago..

samo samo, coming from NASA, as usual..I wonder if they have set a world's record for contradicting every scientific discovery attempt or achievment their employees make?.. Regardless of the veracity of any of those discoveries, it still makes them look incredibly stupid..

Originally posted by Kargun
First thing I thought was how does a rock that smashes into earth not get contaminated?

Well guess I'm not the only one.

Still interested to hear the lack of nitrogen explained though.

The fossils were found inside the meteors, not on the outside. And even if they were contaminated, why do some of the fossils look unlike anything our scientists have ever seen?

reply to post by OneEleven


Now that we know NASA are abunch of hypocrites can we put them to bed on being a basis for proof on any discussion?

Obviously they don't know what the h*ll their talking about. So from now on when someone says well NASA says this or that. I'm gonna say yeah well their about as contradictory as the bible is.

You believe NASA? I take it you believe the government to then?

Originally posted by GullibleUnderlord
now only if someone at nasa would disclose planet x lol

They already did... since Pluto was Planet IX, then Eris (bigger than Pluto) would be Planet X. Has a moon too.



Where you been hiding?

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Meh. I guess this is being swept under the rug, as per usual.

No worries... now you know why I was less than enthusiastic at Never A Straight Answer's news release. Well won't say I told ya so...

oh wait...

Originally posted by Vicarious10000
I think this is hilarious.

Laughed too at just the thread title. If they're going to carry on debunking we'll just stop listening to them and believe whoever we want. NASA will just fade as any type of authority if they look like idiots with this, it's got too big and too many people are working things out. Personally they just seem like a US government mouthpiece to me already half the time.

Maybe they still think it's the days of only black and white tv and radio, where an 'announcement' actually changes things, even if it's just born of fear. Times have changed.

I wonder what U.S. Space Command makes of all this. What a farce. I'll find my own answers, thanks, NASA.

Pilcher seems to be saying that microbes can fossilize in 100-200 years within a meteorite or that human handling can infuse a meteorite with fossilized microbes. 'K.