It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Believing them to be a possible new form of life, Kajander named the particles "nanobacteria," published a paper outlining his findings and spurred one of the biggest controversies in modern microbiology.
At the heart of the debate is the question of whether nanobacteria could actually be a new form of life. To this day, critics argue that a particle just 20 to 200 nanometres in diameter can't possibly harbour the components necessary to sustain life. The particles are also incredibly resistant to heat and other methods that would normally kill bacteria, which makes some scientists wonder if they might be an unusual form of crystal rather than organisms.
In 1998, Kajander tried to prove the sceptics wrong by turning up what he believed to be an example of nanobacteria's ribosomal RNA, something that only organisms have. But the claim was squashed two years later by a National Institutes of Health study, which found that the RNA was actually a remnant from a bacteria that often contaminates lab equipment.
NANO tech in nature, well....THAT would not surprise me one iota.
Originally posted by sardion2000
SpittinCobra, I know all that already. I am just speculating that the underlying cause may be because of Nanobacteria. I have no evidance to back that one up though.
This thread is purely speculative in nature.
Originally posted by SpittinCobra
Originally posted by sardion2000
SpittinCobra, I know all that already. I am just speculating that the underlying cause may be because of Nanobacteria. I have no evidance to back that one up though.
This thread is purely speculative in nature.
Hay I was just adding to the thread, no need to be snippy.