NASA Astrobiologist claims conclusive proof of alien life.

[Denny]

Apparently there are some dense fucking peole in here.

The number of galaxies x the number of stars x the number of planets - planets not in the habitable zone must = other forms of life. I'm not saying (or saying) that there are other forms of intelligent life like us or even similar to us, but the odds of there NOT being life besides us is almost impossible. Unless you adhere STRICTLY to the Bible you must at least acknowledge the possibility. But most of us are aware that the Bible is well...what is the word I am looking for....oh yeah The King said it (a version at least)...it is open to interpretation.

Even strictly adhering to the Bible word-for-word, it does not rule out the possiblity.

[The King]

Even strictly adhering to the Bible word-for-word, it does not rule out the possiblity.

Agreed. Many of those who state otherwise have apparently never actually read, or much less understood, the Bible for themselves.

[GhostTX]

Makes you wonder where that meteorite came from.

[slow06]

or not?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110307/ts_alt_afp/usspacebiologyastrobiologynasa_20110307213642

NASA says 'no support' for claim of alien microbes
AFP

*
o
Share
o
retweet
o Email
o Print

NASA says 'no support' for claim of alien microbes AFP/File – A meteor streaks across the sky against a field of stars during a meteorite shower in 2010. Top NASA …

* Raw Video: Crews say goodbye aboard ISS Play Video Space Video:Raw Video: Crews say goodbye aboard ISS AP
* NASA Rocket Plummets into Ocean Play Video Space Video:NASA Rocket Plummets into Ocean FOX News
* NASA launch failure Play Video Space Video:NASA launch failure CBC.ca

by Kerry Sheridan Kerry Sheridan – Mon Mar 7, 4:32 pm ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Top NASA scientists said Monday there was no scientific evidence to support a colleague's claim that fossils of alien microbes born in outer space had been found in meteorites on Earth.

The US space agency formally distanced itself from the paper by NASA scientist Richard Hoover, whose findings were published Friday in the peer-reviewed Journal of Cosmology, which is available free online.

"That is a claim that Mr Hoover has been making for some years," said Carl Pilcher, director of NASA's Astrobiology Institute.

"I am not aware of any support from other meteorite researchers for this rather extraordinary claim that this evidence of microbes was present in the meteorite before the meteorite arrived on Earth and and was not the result of contamination after the meteorite arrived on Earth," he told AFP.

"The simplest explanation is that there are microbes in the meteorites; they are Earth microbes. In other words, they are contamination."

Pilcher said the meteorites that Hoover studied fell to Earth 100 to 200 years ago and have been heavily handled by humans, "so you would expect to find microbes in these meteorites."

Paul Hertz, chief scientist of NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington, also issued a statement saying NASA did not support Hoover's findings.

"While we value the free exchange of ideas, data and information as part of scientific and technical inquiry, NASA cannot stand behind or support a scientific claim unless it has been peer-reviewed or thoroughly examined by other qualified experts," Hertz said.

"NASA also was unaware of the recent submission of the paper to the Journal of Cosmology or of the paper's subsequent publication."

He noted that the paper did not complete the peer-review process after being submitted in 2007 to the International Journal of Astrobiology.

According to the study, Hoover sliced open fragments of several types of carbonaceous chondrite meteorites, which can contain relatively high levels of water and organic materials, and looked inside with a powerful microscope, Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM).

He found bacteria-like creatures, calling them "indigenous fossils" that originated beyond Earth and were not introduced here after the meteorites landed.

Hoover "concludes these fossilized bacteria are not Earthly contaminants but are the fossilized remains of living organisms which lived in the parent bodies of these meteors, e.g. comets, moons and other astral bodies," said the study.

"The implications are that life is everywhere, and that life on Earth may have come from other planets."

The journal's editor-in-chief, Rudy Schild of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, hailed Hoover as a "highly respected scientist and astrobiologist with a prestigious record of accomplishment at NASA."

The publication invited experts to weigh in on Hoover's claim, and both sceptics and supporters began publishing their commentaries on the journal's website Monday.

"While the evidence clearly indicates that the meteorites was eons ago populated with bacterial life, whether the meteorites are of actual extra-terrestrial origin might debatable," wrote Patrick Godon of Villanova University in Pennsylvania.

Michael Engel of the University of Oklahoma wrote: "Given the importance of this finding, it is essential to continue to seek new criteria more robust than visual similarity to clarify the origin(s) of these remarkable structures."

The journal did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Pilcher described Hoover as a "NASA employee" who works in a solar physics branch of a NASA lab in the southeastern state of Alabama.

"He clearly does some very interesting microscopy. The actual measurements on these meteorites are very nice measurements, but I am not aware of any other qualification that Mr Hoover has in analysis of meteorites or in astrobiology," Pilcher said.

A NASA-funded study in December suggested that a previously unknown form of bacterium, found deep in a California lake, could thrive on arsenic, adding a new element to what scientists have long considered the six building blocks of life.

That study drew hefty criticism, particularly after NASA touted the announcement as evidence of extraterrestrial life. Scientists are currently attempting to replicate those findings.

[stevo]

Heh. The Men in Black have already covered it up.

Stevo

[Sgt Beavis]

NASAwatch.com and a Q&A with NASA's PAO on the matter. They pretty much threw this dude under the bus..

http://nasawatch.com/archives/2011/03/update-on-richa.html

Keith's 7:00 pm EST update: The following response from Dwayne Brown NASA SMD PAO was received by NASA Watch in quick response to questions asked this afternoon:

"1. How long has he worked at NASA, and at Marshall? Answer: 45 years, he started in February 28, 1966

2. Which division does he work for now? Answer: Hoover works in the Space Science Office at Marshall Space Flight Center

3. What is his title? Answer: NASA Scientist. He does not have a Ph.D.

4. Who funds him? Answer: Richard Hoover's salary is funded out of the Marshall Space Science Office and the Center Management and Operations budget. While the funding was not based on a proposal, the Marshall folks tell me they need more time to research funding specifics. Current management was not in place at the time. NASA's Astrobiology Program provided NO support for this work.

5. Did Hoover fill out NASA Standard Form 1676 or get internal review or permission at NASA MSFC to publish this paper? Answer: No. A SF-1676 was not submitted before submission of the paper to the Journal of Cosmology. Submission of a SF-1676 is standard. The SF-1676 on file is for a revised version of the 2007 article that was submitted to the International Journal of Astrobiology. The SF-1676 was approved by Marshall's science management chain for re-submission of the revised article to the International Journal of Astrobiology. Hoover took the advice from a colleague in the astrobiology field to submit the paper to the Journal of Cosmology. No SF-1676 was submitted to or approved by MSFC management for submission of the revised article to the Journal of Cosmology. NASA policies state that papers on topics of this magnitude should be published in scientific journals that conduct rigorous peer review prior to publication. "