Real Science Radio on Apparent Biological Material in Space

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
RSR on Apparent Biological Material in Space

This is the show from Friday October 17th, 2015

Summary:

* Partial Confirmation of a 2014 RSR Prediction: As reported at rsr.org/creationist-predictions, "By 2020 (just to put a date on it), powerful and less disputed evidence of biological matter scattered in the solar system will be added to the currently existing apparent evidence." The apparent evidence that biological material exists in space includes:

* light coming from space carries the signature of having passed through cellulose dust, as reported in Nature by Fred Hoyle (theory of stellar nucleosynthesis), Chandra Wickramasinghe, et al.
* left-handed amino acids in meteorites recovered on Earth (including "excesses of left-handed aspartic and glutamic acids, two amino acids that are common in terrestrial life")
* apparent bacterial remnants in meteorites and even dormant bacteria



* a diatom collected in the lower stratosphere during the annual Perseid meteor shower by a microbiology professor at the University of Sheffield
* as reported in the journal Nature apparent long-chained organic material observed in space
* diatoms reported in Sri Lanka meteorites with isotope test results "suggestive" [per NASA] of meteoritic material
* and the latest, the media reported that Russian cosmonauts collected sea plankton from the outside of the International Space Station.

Toward a confirmation of our prediction of more evidence discovered of biological matter scattered through the solar system, this ISS finding was reported six months after we published our prediction. For more information, see Terry Hurlbut's Sea plankton in Earth Orbit? Consider also our RSR recommendations. The chief of the Russian ISS orbital mission appears to indicate that this finding is repeatable, so of course 1) NASA should attempt to repeat it. Also, the Russians should 2) carbon date the existing specimens. And 3) check them for any sequenceable molecular content. And 4), as with all biological material apparently recovered from space, if Carbon-14 dated, this plankton will in fact contain 14c, indicating that it cannot be a million years old, and must have a *maximum* age of less than 50,000 years!

Where there is smoke there is fire. Just like the scientific community was in denial over dinosaur soft tissue, so too, both the creation and evolution communities seem to be in denial over repeated observations of biological material in space. These persistent and diverse indications of biological matter in space provide yet more corroboration that the fountains of the great deep ejected debris from the global flood into space.

* Hydroplate Theory Explanation: If Walt Brown's Hydroplate Theory is correct, then the fountains of the great deep launched great quantities of crustal rock, surface and subterranean water and rock, and other surface debris into space. Corroboration could then include findings of biological material in meteorite showers, spectral analysis indicating biochemicals in space, and biological structures in meteorites. The above list indicates that such findings have occurred. See below for some details, and also, see our 2014 Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory video!

* Possibly Related Bicep2 Dust: There's enough dust in space to have badly embarrassed the 2014 Bicep2 team that wrongly claimed discovery of gravity waves, which was widely and wrongly proclaimed as the smoking gun of the hypothetical big bang inflation period. Could it be that the dust that was misinterpreted as gravity waves is not interstellar nor intergalactic but merely a local phenomena within our own solar system? If so, it may be possible for what looked like "waves" to be triangulated, which of course is just one way to theoretically validate this testable RSR hypothesis.

* From a Respected Journal: Fred Hoyle et al. reported in the journal Nature that "The presence of interstellar polysaccharides [carbohydrates, etc.] has been deduced by comparing infrared spectra... with model calculations based on transmittance data for cellulose. We show here that the transmittance properties of cotton cellulose gives a good agreement to the observed emission..."

* From a Disrespected Journal: The Journal of Cosmology, disrespected because it publishes reports of apparent biological material in outer space and advocates the Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe claim that life came from space, is, nonetheless, a peer-reviewed journal.

In 2011 the Journal of Cosmology published a 2011 paper by retired NASA scientist Richard Hooverhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Cosmology#cite_note-14, Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites. NASA distanced itself from Hoover's findings,[17] reporting that the paper had been previously submitted in 2007 to International Journal of Astrobiology which did not accept it for review.[18] (That is, they wouldn't even look at it.)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Cosmology#cite_note-19



The 2012 Sri Lanka fireball resulted in the recovery of what appear to be meteorites containing objects that appear characteristic of "microalgae known as diatoms." A 2013 paper by professors at the University of California San Diego, School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Cardiff University, the University of Buckingham, the Medical Research Institute of Colombo, Sri Lanka, etc. at Cornell's arxiv.com was published by the Journal of Cosmology and follows up on an earlier paper at the University of Buckingham website. The team headed by astronomer, mathematician and one-time Cambridge University fellow, Chandra Wickramasinghe found that their specimens differed from Earth's crustal rock and so concluded, “that the oxygen isotope data show [our samples] are unequivocally meteorites.” Real Science Radio has sparred with the Discovery's bad astronomer Phil Plait who, while dismissive of this find and all the data on this page (and our List of Evidence Against the Big Bang) nonetheless reports: "I talked to planetary scientist Barbara Cohen, who studies meteorites at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. She told me the data in the paper is 'suggestive'" that the samples are actual meteorites.



The March 2013 issue
of Journal of Cosmology published, Isolation of a Diatom Frustule Fragment from the Lower Stratosphere (22-27Km) - Evidence for a Cosmic Origin. While discounting the paper's claim, Ian O'Neill at Discovery.com nonetheless accurately reported, "Milton Wainwright, a professor at the Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology at the University of Sheffield, and his team who flew a high-altitude balloon 17 miles over Chester in northwest England during the Perseid meteor shower on July 31. The balloon was carrying a sample capture system that opened for a few minutes and grabbed any aerosols floating around in the stratosphere." * From the International Space Station: In August 2014 ITAR-TASS reported that Russian cosmonauts collected sea plankton from the outside of the International Space Station.

* Add'l Information: See Walt Brown's creationscience.com site and please email Bob@RealScienceRadio.com with corrections or additional evidence. Thanks!

HTP%20case.png


Today's Resource: Please check out our 2014 science video...

The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory
Blu-ray, 2-DVD Set or HD Download

Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart presents the scientific evidence for Dr. Walt Brown’s model of the global flood, along with the relevant biblical material. Enyart also discusses Brown's opponents and contrasts both the vapor canopy and catastrophic plate tectonics with the hydroplate theory.

DVD Vol. 1
1. Walt Brown, Creation Leaders, and Scripture
2. Hydroplate Theory & Scientific Evidence

DVD Vol. 2
3. Hydroplates vs. Plate Tectonics
Bonus: Origin of Earth's Radioactivity

The Blu-ray disc contains all parts on one disc. And for now, save $10 with our special introductory pricing which discounts the $50 retail price to $39.99!
 
I'll never get over how Enyart can consistently come up with list of scientific evidences and arguments that nobody else can--and in ways even dummies like me can understand.

This was yet another GREAT show and extremely interesting. I posted a tread a few weeks back stating that it's very likely the current European Rosetta spacecraft due to intercept comet 67P early next month will find evidence of microbial life. They will land several probes which contain an array of instruments able to detect microbes as well as chemicals produced by living organisms.

One of the links Enyart provides says:

The implication of this assumption is obvious, if there is no mechanism by which the diatom fragment shown here could be elevated from Earth to the stratosphere then, when it was sampled, it must have arrived from above the stratosphere and have been incoming to Earth.
There have been a number of investigations showing that viable bacteria and fungi exist in both the lower (Griffin, 2004, 2008, Smith et al, 2010) and the upper stratosphere over the altitude range 20km-60km….
we argue for its incidence from space, with a probable origin in the watery environment of a comet.

I made my prediction about microbes likely being found on a comet on other sites and many creationists have, to put it kindly, said I'm nuts. The entrenched theories of groups like ICS about plate tectonics and the rejection of Walt Brown's theories is very strong (and very sad that not only are they acting stubborn like evolutionist but also subscribing to a theory that, once again, tries to incorporate a bankrupt theory (plate tectonics) into a Flood model). If anyone want to understand this 1,000 times better than I could explain it I highly recommend watching "The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory."
 

alwight

New member
I made my prediction about microbes likely being found on a comet on other sites and many creationists have, to put it kindly, said I'm nuts. The entrenched theories of groups like ICS about plate tectonics and the rejection of Walt Brown's theories is very strong (and very sad that not only are they acting stubborn like evolutionist but also subscribing to a theory that, once again, tries to incorporate a bankrupt theory (plate tectonics) into a Flood model).
"bankrupt theory" is what creationist say when they can't actually falsify or even discredit a scientific theory they don't like.:plain:
 
"bankrupt theory" is what creationist say when they can't actually falsify or even discredit a scientific theory they don't like.:plain:

And "bankrupt people" think fish grew legs, the universe created itself out of nothing and even when they admit that genes are programmed they deny there was a Programmer.

BTW, I'd be curious to find out what both evolutionists and those creationists who poo-poo Walt Brown have to say if microbes are found on comets.
 
Last edited:

alwight

New member
And "bankrupt people" think fish grew legs, the universe created itself out of nothing and even when they admit that genes are programmed they deny there was a Programmer.
Some of us don't claim to know about supposed supernatural deities/events (which created DNA rather than it evolving), for which no testable evidence exists, but when the modern day evidence of fish that inhabit water margins that actually do have leg-like appendages is denied, then that rather takes the biscuit. :AMR:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mudskipper
 

6days

New member
Some of us don't claim to know about supposed supernatural deities/events (which created DNA rather than it evolving), for which no testable evidence exists, but when the modern day evidence of fish that inhabit water margins that actually do have leg-like appendages is denied, then that rather takes the biscuit. :AMR:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mudskipper
I dont know of anyone denying that mudskippers have leg like appendages. But Biblical creationists deny mudkipper legs originate from stardust, because they appear to be created.
http://creation.com/mudskipper
 
Some of us don't claim to know about supposed supernatural deities/events (which created DNA rather than it evolving), for which no testable evidence exists, but when the modern day evidence of fish that inhabit water margins that actually do have leg-like appendages is denied, then that rather takes the biscuit. :AMR:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mudskipper

No, some of you refuse to consider the other side and come up with the most foolish things imaginable.

Also, do you have any other explanation other than the one given by scientists mentioned above (i.e. microbes come from comets) as to why there is so much evidence for microbial evidences found in or from space?

Anybody else?
 

alwight

New member
No, some of you refuse to consider the other side and come up with the most foolish things imaginable.
How fortunate we are then that you are here to put things into a better perspective for us. ;)

Also, do you have any other explanation other than the one given by scientists mentioned above (i.e. microbes come from comets) as to why there is so much evidence for microbial evidences found in or from space?

Anybody else?
Firstly the mere presence of microbes on a comet if true doesn't necessarily mean that they had to have originated on Earth.

Some say that life once inhabited Mars before here on Earth.
If any fossils are ever found in material from space which are thought to match life on Earth, is that actually a real problem for science? :think:
Might be interesting if so.
But perhaps rather than get all excited and have another "Great Disappointment" we should simply wait and see before jumping to any creationist type conclusions.

However given that a meteorite has been found on Earth, thought to have been knocked of Mars by an impact, then why not a small bit of Earth coming back to Earth? Impossible? :think:
Rather less impossible than the "Hydroplate Theory" perhaps?
 
How fortunate we are then that you are here to put things into a better perspective for us. ;)


Firstly the mere presence of microbes on a comet if true doesn't necessarily mean that they had to have originated on Earth.

Some say that life once inhabited Mars before here on Earth.
If any fossils are ever found in material from space which are thought to match life on Earth, is that actually a real problem for science? :think:
Might be interesting if so.
But perhaps rather than get all excited and have another "Great Disappointment" we should simply wait and see before jumping to any creationist type conclusions.

However given that a meteorite has been found on Earth, thought to have been knocked of Mars by an impact, then why not a small bit of Earth coming back to Earth? Impossible? :think:
Rather less impossible than the "Hydroplate Theory" perhaps?

It's impossible for me to put things in a better prospective for you. You'll have to find that on your own.

Of course the presence of fossils in the Mars rocks is questioned even by many secular scientists. The meteorite found in Canada show much stronger evidence and is not believe to have come from Mars. But whether there has ever been life on Mars has nothing to do with the belief that some scientists NOW suggest about microbes originating from comets. You're completely right on your point about how we'll have to wait for more research and information before any solid claims can be made about creationist claims (or about secular claims for that matter). I would think, however, that if they do find signs of microbial life on that comet next month the headlines will SCREAM out the "fact" that we now "know" life can originate anywhere and very easily.
 

alwight

New member
I dont know of anyone denying that mudskippers have leg like appendages. But Biblical creationists deny mudkipper legs originate from stardust, because they appear to be created.
http://creation.com/mudskipper
But OUG ridiculed the idea of legs on a fish.
It's always amazing to me how life can easily adapt to almost any nook and cranny and even to new ones or food supplies as they come along.
 

Bob Enyart

Deceased
Staff member
Administrator
bad legs before good wings... and extremophiles who lived to tell about it

bad legs before good wings... and extremophiles who lived to tell about it

But OUC ridiculed the idea of legs on a fish.
It's always amazing to me how life can easily adapt to almost any nook and cranny...
Hi alwight. If I could suggest a clarification, as with the creation article linked to by 6days, Russ didn't say anything in denial of mudskippers, but of organisms evolving appendages (like for land dwellers, they'd get bad legs long before they got good wings).

It's always amazing to me how life can easily adapt to almost any nook and cranny...
Living organisms have amazing adaptability built right into their genetic codes (and their glyco codes, and other codes). Environmental changes provide opportunity to express such existing variability. (For example, just like vital organs being... well... vital, the large number of very different kinds of extremophiles wouldn't be known to be extremophiles unless their biological codes could express existing abilities to survive in such heat/cold/acid/anaerobic/etc extremes.) Sometimes folks describe natural selection in a backward way, almost as though the dark underwater cave were somehow creating adaptation, whereas of course the cave isn't doing anything. Rather, the organism is expressing its ability to adapt, typically through already existing survivability traits (including often by rapidly "mutating" nucleotides that are pre-programmed to undergo rapid point "mutations" for adaptation purposes). So yes, we find life in every nook and cranny, but of course that isn't evidence of non-directed evolution. (See also, http://rsr.org/dobz.)
 

alwight

New member
Hi alwight. If I could suggest a clarification, as with the creation article linked to by 6days, Russ didn't say anything in denial of mudskippers, but of organisms evolving appendages (like for land dwellers, they'd get bad legs long before they got good wings).


Living organisms have amazing adaptability built right into their genetic codes (and their glyco codes, and other codes). Environmental changes provide opportunity to express such existing variability. (For example, just like vital organs being... well... vital, the large number of very different kinds of extremophiles wouldn't be known to be extremophiles unless their biological codes could express existing abilities to survive in such heat/cold/acid/anaerobic/etc extremes.) Sometimes folks describe natural selection in a backward way, almost as though the dark underwater cave were somehow creating adaptation, whereas of course the cave isn't doing anything. Rather, the organism is expressing its ability to adapt, typically through already existing survivability traits (including often by rapidly "mutating" nucleotides that are pre-programmed to undergo rapid point "mutations" for adaptation purposes). So yes, we find life in every nook and cranny, but of course that isn't evidence of non-directed evolution. (See also, http://rsr.org/dobz.)
Thanks Bob, I have no problem with a subtly directed evolution nor 6days' article particularly which seemed reasonably fair minded, but I do tend to make more noise about complex life simply appearing miraculously. :)
:cheers:
 

gcthomas

New member
... but of organisms evolving appendages (like for land dwellers, they'd get bad legs long before they got good wings).

Do you mean 'bad legs' like these, on the maniraptorans?

dromaeosaurus.jpg


I guess you're right. Bad legs seem to be part of the fossil record for the group of dinosaurs believed to be bird ancestors.
 
Top