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.
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
This is certainly an important discovery.
True but I don't understand the hype from NASA This was posted February 22nd, 2009
Searching for Life on Earth
bytesizebio.net...
Since 1994 it has been known that As(III) is used by some bacteria as an electron acceptor in respiration of some bacteria. Recently, bacteria inhabiting the alkaline shores of Mono Lake, California were found to be using Arsenic(III) as an electron donor in photosynthesis. It is not inconceivable that Arsenic, in some form, may be have been used as a Phosphorous replacement, although the latter, much more fundamental biochemical change, has not been found yet; not even in the Mono Lake bacteria.
[emphasis mine]
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
In the report I heard only the presence of arsenic was found and no verification
of DNA use by electron microscope.
Our data show evidence for arsenate in macromolecules that normally contain phosphate, most notably nucleic acids and proteins.
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
So the discovery NASA announced the other day WAS IN FACT a relatively new discovery -- even though they had suspicions about it for a while.
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
So the discovery NASA announced the other day WAS IN FACT a relatively new discovery -- even though they had suspicions about it for a while.
Technically you are correct... but NASA hype is still overboard Remember the flop with the 'water on mars' form the picture and the flopped "bomb the moon' mission? These guys need new press agents
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is PeopleThis is a fundamentally different kind of organism that MAY show that life on Earth had two separate and independent geneses.
...but again, NASA was very reserved in their announcement, even saying at the time of the announcement that this only "suggests" the possibility of water flowing on Mars. They weren't sure if it was water or fine silt.
There is still ongoing research being done by NASA and others looking for (and finding) signs of water or water ice on Mars:
"Bombing the Moon": One more time, NASA didn't create the hype -- the hype was caused by the internet. NASA did say that the dust kicked up by the centaur rocket crashing into the Moon may be visible from powerful Earth-based telescopes (they were wrong), but they never hyped the event.
The 20-meter wide crater and tenuous dust plume were enough for spectrometers to be able to detect signatures of water in that crater:
reply to post by zorgon
And what about all those MUTATED bacteria they are leaving all over the place? Man that locker room on ISS is NASTY
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
The Moon bombing has old connotations as a certain force beam
was proposed as to have enough effect on landing at the Moon, or
any planet of choice, as to make its presence known to observers.
Yeah, that got nowhere.
I do wonder if such the force beam does exist and tptb are holding back
on NASA and letting them fail to complete.
ED: The force beam followed the missile and completed the job.
Thats a good one. I'd even let HAARP do it, even though I call it
wimpy, if the set up was done right.
edit on 12/4/2010 by TeslaandLyne because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is PeopleThis is a fundamentally different kind of organism that MAY show that life on Earth had two separate and independent geneses.
Which means life as we know it and as we don't know it is probably scattered all over the solar system... So Lets get that robo submarine up to Europe ASAP and see what's swimming around up there
Originally posted by zorgon
No they said it was water... until people on the internet told them the photo was on a hill
Originally posted by zorgon
...Well NASA should get together with ESA seems THEY can find water ice no problem...
"BOMBING THE MOON" isn't hype?
... the Pentagon already told us there was water up there in 1996 100 sq kilometers 50 feet deep of dirty water ice...
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
NASA was careful to only say that it "suggests" water is flowing down that hill.
I may be wrong, but I don't think NASA ever used the word "bombing" -- that was the press who used that word. In NASA releases, I think it was always explained as "crashing a Centaur rocket into the Moon" -- which is exactly what they did.
(and even crashed into the Moon, in a mission similar to LCROSS),
Moon Mineralogy Mapper, and it flew aboard India's "Chandrayaan-1" spacecraft.
"Data from Chandrayaan-1 also suggests that water is still being formed on the Moon"
June 5, 2007: Picture this: A spaceship swoops in from the void, plunging toward a cloudy planet about the size of Earth. A laser beam lances out from the ship; it probes the planet's clouds, striving to reach the hidden surface below. Meanwhile, back on the craft's home world, scientists perch on the edge of their seats waiting to see what happens. Sounds like science fiction? This is real, and it's happening today.
science.nasa.gov...
Moon Fountains When astronauts return to the Moon in the years ahead, they might encounter electrified fountains and other strange things.
Back in 1956, two years before NASA was even created, Hal Clement wrote a short story called "Dust Rag" published in Astounding Science Fiction, about two astronauts descending into a crater on the Moon to investigate a mysterious haze dimming stars near the lunar horizon. After discarding a wild guess that they were seeing traces of a lunar atmosphere--"gases don't behave that way"--they figured it had to be dust somehow suspended above the ground. In a conversation remarkable for its scientific prescience, one of the astronauts explains:
science.nasa.gov...
December 7, 2005: Every lunar morning, when the sun first peeks over the dusty soil of the moon after two weeks of frigid lunar night, a strange storm stirs the surface. The next time you see the moon, trace your finger along the terminator, the dividing line between lunar night and day. That's where the storm is. It's a long and skinny dust storm, stretching all the way from the north pole to the south pole, swirling across the surface, following the terminator as sunrise ceaselessly sweeps around the moon. see captionNever heard of it? Few have. But scientists are increasingly confident that the storm is real.
science.nasa.gov...
reply to post by zorgon
Good ole NASA... GREAT entertainers
The blue color is, of course, false color and probably arose from the color table that Levin and Lyddy used to encode the results of their image analysis algorithm -- it's not the blue color that argues for water, it's the smoothness and the way that the smooth areas fill topographic lows. At least I'm pretty sure that's what they're claiming; unfortunately, I couldn't find a copy of the conference abstract online. I found a list of the papers here, but that's it; apparently the conference proceedings have not yet been published. So all I have to go on to investigate this extraordinary claim -- that Opportunity saw puddles of water on the Martian surface -- is what was written in the New Scientist article. That, and the images from the rover, which are out there for everyone to investigate.
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
Oh, c'mon Zorgon...
I know that you know that I know that you know [whew!] that is simply a false color image, as the article that you posted speculates:
Snottites are colonies of single-celled extremophilic bacteria. They hang from the walls and ceilings of caves and are similar to small stalactites, but have the consistency of "snot", a slang word for mucus. The bacteria derive their energy from chemosynthesis of volcanic sulfur compounds including H2S and warm-water solution dripping down from above, producing sulfuric acid. Because of this, their waste products are highly acidic (approaching pH=0), with similar properties to battery acid.[1]