Jump to content

Recommended Posts

NASA scientist: Evidence of alien life on meteorite


In what's sure to rekindle the debate over the question of life beyond Earth, a scientist at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center says he has fossil evidence of bacterial life inside of a rare class of meteorites.


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20039658-501465.html




http://i53.tinypic.com/az8bxk.jpg

The evidence seems to hinge on the fact that these formations can't be generated by anything but organic life.


It's one of those issues that will struggle to get an sensible debate around it. For adherents to anthropocentric (human-centred) religion, the discovery undermines every tenet of their narcissistic dogma. All of the assertions regarding a Universe created only as a playpen and moral test for humans, a God that is relentlessly preoccupied with mankind, who sacrifices his son etc., fall around their ears...


Hence religiously-oriented people will deny all of the evidence, will crap on about 'doubt' that doesn't exist, will roll out obscure scientists in unrelated fields that support their views, and as with climate change deniers, are more likely to accuse scientists of being liars and frauds than recognise humanity's insignificance.

Huguenot, surely religious oriented people believe in Alien life, ie Supernatural God, angels, devils and so are more open minded on the subject than most?


In fact I wouldn't be surprised that in a world of multiple universes there is a Pope Huguenot dispensing blessings as we speak

The only 'alien life' that anthropogenic religions believe in, is a God whose whole existence revolves around propelling the trivial pursuits and moral wrangles of mankind to centre stage.


To such vain people, the discovery that alien life was getting on perfectly happily without, for example, the subjugation of women or homosexuals, would come as such a crashing revelation they'd be unlikely to survive it.

Let's hope there isn't any alien life on meteorites for their own sake.


If some scientist squinting down a microscope does discover such lifeforms the EEC will tax them, people like Huguenot will sell them insurance, some idiot will find a way to extend human rights law to them and I'll invent an alien bug spray, marketed to kill 99% of alien lifeforms we haven't even discovered yet.

AS suspected -it appears the evidence is nothing of the sort.


the scientist may well be correct but for the wrong reasons. he may be a nutter.


that doesn't mean that alien life doesn't exist. just that there's no proof yet. a bit like the God question really.

What's your source silverfox?


I suspect that's just the start of the unsubstantiated assertions, obfuscation and denial supported by bogus claims of doubt and personal attacks on the scientists isn't it?


When are you going to wheel out a paediatrician to challenge the cosmologists?

Source is the scientific community as reported in The Times today. no point in me posting link for you as you have to pay to read it.


Anyway, you've only got to look at the picture to see it looks as if the scientist sneezed snot on the sample.

"Anyway, you've only got to look at the picture to see it looks as if the scientist sneezed snot on the sample."


Ha ha, I forgot this, it's YOU. I remember this from the climate change denial thread - you're a better scientist than all these academic types, down to your famous gut feel.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...