Oh, yeah, and speaking of life
Mar. 7th, 2011 09:10 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
plutherusI did a bit more research into the meteoroid that may or may not have cyanobacteria fossils in it.
From what I can tell, based on what other scientists, and NASA, are saying:
1. There is considerable disagreement on whether what Dr. Hoover found were actually bacteria fossils, or formations that looked like them and had similar (but not identical) chemical composition.
2. Dr. Hoover seems to be a legitimate and respected researcher. So, while other scientists disagree with his findings, they do not fall under the category of crank, or pseudo-science.
3. The Journal of Cosmology may be a legitimate, though in general not a well-respected, scientific journal.
4. This is NOT the same as the suspected fossils found on the Mars rock in 1996 (wow, was it that long ago??) - that was a different kind of meteor altogether, though the results were similarly inconclusive.
5. Scientists will continue to study and argue about the CI1 carbonaceous meteorites over the next several years, and perhaps some sort of consensus may be reached. Eventually. But what's really needed is to find either more asteroids, or similar fossils or living bacteria by one of our space probes. Fortunately, we've got a couple out searching now, so we may have a "final" answer within just a few years.
So, it could be a while. But, possibly, less than a single decade, let alone plural.
And that will be very, very, very awesome.
From what I can tell, based on what other scientists, and NASA, are saying:
1. There is considerable disagreement on whether what Dr. Hoover found were actually bacteria fossils, or formations that looked like them and had similar (but not identical) chemical composition.
2. Dr. Hoover seems to be a legitimate and respected researcher. So, while other scientists disagree with his findings, they do not fall under the category of crank, or pseudo-science.
3. The Journal of Cosmology may be a legitimate, though in general not a well-respected, scientific journal.
4. This is NOT the same as the suspected fossils found on the Mars rock in 1996 (wow, was it that long ago??) - that was a different kind of meteor altogether, though the results were similarly inconclusive.
5. Scientists will continue to study and argue about the CI1 carbonaceous meteorites over the next several years, and perhaps some sort of consensus may be reached. Eventually. But what's really needed is to find either more asteroids, or similar fossils or living bacteria by one of our space probes. Fortunately, we've got a couple out searching now, so we may have a "final" answer within just a few years.
So, it could be a while. But, possibly, less than a single decade, let alone plural.
And that will be very, very, very awesome.
