Originally Posted by SilentWalker

The title says nothing about aliens, or extraterrestrials, or life on other planets, or any location for that matter.

Who found it? NASA.
New? Yup!
Oh, and would you look at that. IT'S ALIVE!

NASA...finds...new... life.
Nothing misleading about that.

I didn't say it's misleading because it's not true. I said it's misleading because some people don't know what life means and so they're gonna think NASA found an alien.

either way
it's pretty cool

Originally Posted by SilentWalker

Discovered in the poisonous Mono Lake, California, this bacteria is made of arsenic,

via [Gizmodo] via [NOS]

lol Gizmodo

Link to actual article:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/ea...cience.1197258

Basically they found that the bacterium might use Arsenic instead of Phosphorous in molecules that use phosphate (meaning they might use arsenate instead) - but only when phosphorous as a medium was unavailable. There isn't really evidence to suggest that the bacterium is "made of arsenic" (lol).

Originally Posted by dhyong

lol Gizmodo

Link to actual article:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/ea...cience.1197258

Basically they found that the bacterium might use Arsenic instead of Phosphorous in molecules that use phosphate (meaning they might use arsenate instead) - but only when phosphorous as a medium was unavailable. There isn't really evidence to suggest that the bacterium is "made of arsenic" (lol).

Oh boy, do you even read?

Firstly, I posted this BEFORE that article officially published. Why? Because it was a leak. The Gizmodo article was based on the Dutch site that announced the leak (which I also provided).

After the NASA press conference, I updated the thread with all official information straight from NASA's website, which links to that publication. I'm unable to edit the original post for some reason.

And no one said that the bacteria was made of arsenic.

Originally Posted by SilentWalker

Oh boy, do you even read?

Firstly, I posted this BEFORE that article officially published. Why? Because it was a leak. The Gizmodo article was based on the Dutch site that announced the leak (which I also provided).

After the NASA press conference, I updated the thread with all official information straight from NASA's website, which links to that publication. I'm unable to edit the original post for some reason.

And no one said that the bacteria was made of arsenic.

You seem mad. The Gizmodo article said that the bacteria was made of arsenic.

Originally Posted by dhyong

You seem mad. The Gizmodo article said that the bacteria was made of arsenic.

At their conference today, NASA scientist Felisa Wolfe Simon will announce that they have found a bacteria whose DNA is completely alien to what we know today. Instead of using phosphorus, the bacteria uses arsenic. All life on Earth is made of six components: carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus and sulfur. Every being, from the smallest amoeba to the largest whale, share the same life stream. Our DNA blocks are all the same.

But not this one. This one is completely different. Discovered in the poisonous Mono Lake, California, this bacteria is made of arsenic, something that was thought to be completely impossible.

Don't quote out of context. Giz stated the the technicalities of 'being made of arsenic' before making that general statement. Next time a bio prof says that we're made of carbon, why don't you bring your point up?

Originally Posted by SilentWalker

At their conference today, NASA scientist Felisa Wolfe Simon will announce that they have found a bacteria whose DNA is completely alien to what we know today. Instead of using phosphorus, the bacteria uses arsenic. All life on Earth is made of six components: carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus and sulfur. Every being, from the smallest amoeba to the largest whale, share the same life stream. Our DNA blocks are all the same.

But not this one. This one is completely different. Discovered in the poisonous Mono Lake, California, this bacteria is made of arsenic, something that was thought to be completely impossible.

Don't quote out of context. Giz stated the the technicalities of 'being made of arsenic' before making that general statement. Next time a bio prof says that we're made of carbon, why don't you bring your point up?

Why would a bio prof ever say we are made of carbon?

And you should really read the published article. Saying that the bacterium is 'made of arsenic' even with the aforementioned technicalities is inaccurate.

Guys, it's not THAT big of a deal, imo. Its not like it's this thing:



For all you non-cool non-Trek fans here, that is a silicon-based life form (and Kirk, facing the only female he doesn't bang halfway through). Si instead of C for everything. Imagine - a world where orgo was as useless as we all know it is!

Now, something like THAT would be news.

Nobody seems to be considering the possibility that the bacteria might've been there for a very long time (among others). In my opinion, it brings up some very interesting questions...and not just about the validity of the research, rather its implicatios.

Guess everyone's getting caught up in the excitement and not stopping to consider alternative theories. (I'm refering to the 'authorities' of course, not the posters on this site)

Originally Posted by britb

Guys, it's not THAT big of a deal, imo. Its not like it's this thing:



For all you non-cool non-Trek fans here, that is a silicon-based life form (and Kirk, facing the only female he doesn't bang halfway through). Si instead of C for everything. Imagine - a world where orgo was as useless as we all know it is!

Now, something like THAT would be news.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJn9Wqm2Ryk