GHOST PARTICLE: The picture proof that shows aliens ARE out there

Holy crap, who wrote that. Violated just about every rule of journalism, including basic terminology.
Love the subject, but will have to get the details from the white papers.

a reply to: Baddogma

As mentioned, the terminology was atrocious...

Why because it is not written for the science community? It is clearly an article for the average person out there.

There seem to be a lot of scientists jumping on bandwagons lately in the apparent pursuit of celebrity status.

Wickramasinghe has been attempting to promulgate his theories for decades now; but doesn't have anything beyond a fertile imagination to back them up.

Michio Kaku assures us that ET exists - again, with similar persuasiveness.

Even Brian Cox (who comes across as fairly rational and mainstream) said tonight on The One Show that we are "moving closer" to finding life on Mars.

Say WHAT??

Look Brian, if you find life on Mars please do tell us about it; but don't come over all Arthur C. Clarke on us.

I'd be blown away frankly, and not just because of the novelty factor.

Mars and Earth are around the same age - 4.5 bn years.

I'm guessing they've already set their sights lower than a snake's belly and will be looking for some primitive single-cell organism.

If they do, I wanna know why it has apparently avoided evolution.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Char-Lee

This story isn't new and was reported here on ATS last year , it was as unverified then as it is now.
Steven Greer is a doctor so by your logic he is also to be believed.

It is an ongoing study. Speculating on your own studies is not out of bounds in science.
My logic has nothing to do with it, a person who has a career in afield certainly has a voice that should outweigh an unknown mouth on ATS.

“If our findings are true they will forever alter our view of life and particularly evolution on Earth and we will need to rewrite of our biology textbooks.”

www.express.co.uk...

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: Baddogma

As mentioned, the terminology was atrocious...

Why because it is not written for the science community? It is clearly an article for the average person out there.

And it's hideously incorrect, and badly written too.

I noticed in the comments n the article page that several people mentioned that the test which occurred at 27KM isn`t technically considered space because 27KM is inside the earth atmosphere.

whatever that thing is it must not be very abundant since nobody has found one until now, or maybe nobody has been looking for them until now?

a reply to: Char-Lee

Mixing particle physics with micro biology isn't the sign of a decent science journalist... er, well maybe it's the sign of one these days... the 'neutrino' moniker and even calling the wisp a 'ghost particle' gives the impression, at least, of some basic scientific ignorance, or at the least, confusion.

Barring that, the rest is decent enough, I guess... and there was something else that stuck on my ear as being either outright wrong, or not exactly correct... and I'm not even particularly educated in the sciences!

And thank you, Bedlam, for echoing my echo of your original post... I'm too lazy to read that story, again, and heck, the guy it's basically about who sent up the blaloon might be right on ... it's just the article isn't top notch!

a reply to: Char-Lee

You might want to fix that quote , I didn't type that.

I'm fairly certain that mushroom spores (certain types) can survive interstellar space. Be it noted that some spore varieties are coated with some of the most electron dense organic material ever discovered. I wouldn't be surprised if the first organics on Earth were some form of fungus.

a reply to: MystikMushroom
With a name like that, you are clearly bias sir!

originally posted by: gortex
So because they have credentials you're willing to believe what they say unquestioned ?
There is nothing to back up the claim as with their other claims , this is speculation.

I agree, as credentials are a consideration for credibility, but only one among many and by themselves they don't seal the deal. In this case failure to have "the alien" tested to see if it's an Earth organism is a pretty glaring omission, no matter what letters you put after your name.

originally posted by: CJCrawley
I'm guessing they've already set their sights lower than a snake's belly and will be looking for some primitive single-cell organism.

If they do, I wanna know why it has apparently avoided evolution.

If single-celled organisms exist on, or perhaps more likely, under, the surface of Mars, I wouldn't assume they avoided evolution. Some single celled organisms are very evolved, and it if they live in pore spaces in liquid water in underground rocks for example, there's not much space or opportunity to evolve into multicelled creatures which could be too large for such a limited ecosystem.

Here's a single-celled organism with amazing complexity:
A Genetic Jigsaw: Single-Celled Organism Breaks Up Its Genome And Rearranges DNA Pieces

You may think of unicellular organisms as the simpletons of life on Earth, but Oxytricha trifallax is a prime example of just how remarkably complex single life can be. ...

Remarkably, the somatic nucleus was found to contain at least 16,000 tiny chromosomes; human somatic cells contain just 46 (germ cells, which develop into sperm and eggs, contain half). The majority of these chromosomes only contain one gene, but some of the larger chromosomes produce ginormous proteins.

According to Landweber, Oxytricha’s unusual jigsaw genetics is probably one of nature’s early attempts to become more complex while remaining unicellular. Its intricate genome rearranging system showcases the “true diversity of life on our planet,” she said.

I hear again that we need to be looking for lifeforms that are not carbon based.

Maybe I am silly, but why wouldn't we have them right here on Earth? We have other elements available here for life to form from.

My guess is that life exists in many places in the vast universe and that chances are that it is mostly carbon based.

Why does the OP use the word alien and not just life? Typically the term alien is for advance intelligent life, so I'm kind of missing the point here.

The other side of this all is that when the conditions are right life happens. It happened very early in the formation of earth and even though earth killed off most advance life a number of times it springs back every time. This suggests that life is a common chemical reaction like so many others that will happen, not may, under the right conditions.

This seems pretty realistic.

Lets go back to prehistoric times when dinosaurs ruled the Earth... Bam! An asteroid hit the earth wiping out the majority of species on Earth except for sea animals and small mammals. Then right after that mammals started ruling the Earth. Then humans come out of the mix.

Doesn't that seem too perfect. These beasts that would have made this world inhospitable for humans were wiped out then we came into the equation. I think some alien species killed them off then planted their DNA in the smartest animal on Earth, at that time the monkey, then we became into what we are today. Tadaaaa! The End.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Why does the OP use the word alien and not just life? Typically the term alien is for advance intelligent life, so I'm kind of missing the point here.

The other side of this all is that when the conditions are right life happens. It happened very early in the formation of earth and even though earth killed off most advance life a number of times it springs back every time. This suggests that life is a common chemical reaction like so many others that will happen, not may, under the right conditions.

I agree with you finding life at any level would be the breakthrough, and the term Alien should be attributed to intelligent life. However the rules of ATS require me to copy the exact title of the article. it is not my sensationalism , but the papers.

originally posted by: chancellor336
This seems pretty realistic.

Lets go back to prehistoric times when dinosaurs ruled the Earth... Bam! An asteroid hit the earth wiping out the majority of species on Earth except for sea animals and small mammals. Then right after that mammals started ruling the Earth. Then humans come out of the mix.

Doesn't that seem too perfect. These beasts that would have made this world inhospitable for humans were wiped out then we came into the equation. I think some alien species killed them off then planted their DNA in the smartest animal on Earth, at that time the monkey, then we became into what we are today. Tadaaaa! The End.

I know it seems coincidental, but on the vast scale of things, were anything is possible given enough time, the fact the we see these weird happenings only once or twice through out a very long period of history may point to the fact that these are rare but do happen.

Q

originally posted by: chancellor336
This seems pretty realistic.

Lets go back to prehistoric times when dinosaurs ruled the Earth... Bam! An asteroid hit the earth wiping out the majority of species on Earth except for sea animals and small mammals. Then right after that mammals started ruling the Earth. Then humans come out of the mix.

Doesn't that seem too perfect. These beasts that would have made this world inhospitable for humans were wiped out then we came into the equation. I think some alien species killed them off then planted their DNA in the smartest animal on Earth, at that time the monkey, then we became into what we are today. Tadaaaa! The End.

If it is so perfect, why then did it take another 60+ million years for humans to emerge? Also, there were no monkeys 65 MYA. There were primates as early as 85MYA but monkeys were a while off, not appearing for another 30-35MYA with lineages of old world monkeys and apes diverging 25MYA. It's not like primates were a driving force after the extinction of dinosaurs. The most moving factor was large grazing animals, not tiny squirrel and chipmunk sized, arboreal primates.

Now they just need to find a bigger casing.

Perhaps this is what is meant when stories pop up about biological based UFO's.

Just a strange pondering, but this is space, and that little sack is tiny
Maybe we should start looking for bigger ones.

a reply to: butcherguy

The reason for carbon based life is 1. it's vast abundance on earth and what we know so far of the rest of the known universe. 2. Carbon has 4 valence bonds. the requisite energy to form or break these bonds just happens to be at an appropriate level to build not just stable, but reactive molecules. Additionally, the fact that carbon atoms very easily bond with other carbon atoms allows them to build extremely long and complex molecules and polymers.

The most likely candidate for non carbon based life is another 4 valence atom, Silicon. unlike carbon, it doesn't build up in chains but bonds to itself in crystal lattices. Compounds derived from silicon are usually stable but because of the nature of the crystal lattice, it lacks the permeability to create and support life like processes...at least not those that we know of or can imagine as yet. The universe is as we know, rather vast and anything is possible out there so if other atomic structures are able to bond and create a stable molecule then who is to say what could happen under conditions we simply can't fathom or imagine from our earth based bias.

a reply to: Quantum_Squirrel

Well does not say much, that picture is kind of miffy. But as a way to transport the seed of life across the cosmos its likely quite effective, and they did find microbes which live on top of the space station as well, so its bound to happen. Though for them to travel the distances involved on a planetary scale the chances of that are miniscule to none existent. When your looking at the distances involved to our nearest star system neighbor its may take millions of years to even get that far by floating in protective sacks across our galaxy. So to mars ya, it could happen, but farther as in not our milky way, not very likely or at least not anytime within any conceivable timeline not involving millions of years.

Though you could maybe transfer a bunch of said organisms in a ship to whatever location or planet, then basically just open hatch and let them drift into atmosphere. As a way of kick starting panspermia it would be useful and also as a way to bioengineering and terraforming a planet it could be quite effective.

So ya! Space seeds.