Organic Materials Essential for Life on Earth are Found for the First time on the Surface of an Asteroid

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It’s unbelievigable ! It’s incredibabble! It’s astoundulating!

Yet scientists are excited and surprised.

So... oh just maybe ... you two dummies don't know what you're talking about?

ding : looks like you found a buddy on your level

 

[BackAgain]

Yet scientists are excited and surprised.

So... oh just maybe ... you two dummies don't know what you're talking about?

ding : looks like you found a buddy on your level

Come on Farty. You can do better. Some scientists are excited. Good. Nothing wrong with that.

But you are the one who doesn’t know what you’re talking about. Some pretty basic elements of the universe (needed for life as we know it on Earth) being found on asteroids is arguably of assistance in helping to figure out how life took hold on Earth. I’m pleased about that.

But we already know that Earth formed (as a planet) by a bunch of space rocks slamming into other space rocks over a long time. I believe we already knew that many of the Earth’s elements HAD to have arrived in such a fashion.

Hell. Even you ought to understand that much. So, I guess you can get all excited. But I’m not seeing it as a major revelation.

 

[abu afak]

Come on Farty. You can do better. Some scientists are excited. Good. Nothing wrong with that.

But you are the one who doesn’t know what you’re talking about. Some pretty basic elements of the universe (needed for life as we know it on Earth) being found on asteroids is arguably of assistance in helping to figure out how life took hold on Earth. I’m pleased about that.

But we already know that Earth formed (as a planet) by a bunch of space rocks slamming into other space rocks over a long time. I believe we already knew that many of the Earth’s elements HAD to have arrived in such a fashion.

Hell. Even you ought to understand that much. So, I guess you can get all excited. But I’m not seeing it as a major revelation.

We are not talking about mere elements, we are talking about what may be their natural tendencies over time without the help of Earth's atmosphere to form necessary precursor molecules of life. (as opposed to a creation event.)

""Examples of organic compounds are carbohydrates, lipids, proteins and nucleic acids. Since they are comprised of carbon-based compounds they are broken down into smaller, simpler compounds through decomposition when they die. Living organisms also excrete or secrete material that is considered an organic material.""

Organic matter

Definition noun Any of the carbon-based compounds found in nature Supplement Organic matter pertains to any of the carbon-based compounds that abound in nature. Living things are described as organic since they are composed of

www.biologyonline.com

`

 

[BackAgain]

We are not talking about mere elements, we are talking about what may be their natural tendencies over time without the help of Earth's atmosphere to form necessary precursor molecules of life. (as opposed to a creation event.)

""Examples of organic compounds are carbohydrates, lipids, proteins and nucleic acids. Since they are comprised of carbon-based compounds they are broken down into smaller, simpler compounds through decomposition when they die. Living organisms also excrete or secrete material that is considered an organic material.""

Organic matter

Definition noun Any of the carbon-based compounds found in nature Supplement Organic matter pertains to any of the carbon-based compounds that abound in nature. Living things are described as organic since they are composed of

www.biologyonline.com

`

Does any of this mean (to you) that life on Earth would have been able to form without our atmosphere?

In other words, is it a scientifically sound belief or scientific theory that “precursors” to life can somehow generate a basic form of life absent a suitable atmosphere?

 

[abu afak]

Does any of this mean (to you) that life on Earth would have been able to form without our atmosphere?

In other words, is it a scientifically sound belief or scientific theory that “precursors” to life can somehow generate a basic form of life absent a suitable atmosphere?

Baffled.
Do you think this is the only planet with an atmosphere?
Some without much of a hospitable one, may even have microbe life below the surface with more moderate conditions. They may be relatively 'common' in what looks like a mostly barren universe.

Life might not have been possible here were we not bombarded with materials (including comets with water).
Clearly there's lots of suitable material out there.

We just launched/placed James Webb Telescope which will give us a better idea how common atmosphere's are.
There are I believe already a trillion or so in the 'Goldilocks'/Temperate zone.
We await getting our arms around how many have atmospheres. Hopefully soon.
`

 

[BackAgain]

Baffled.
Do you think this is the only planet with an atmosphere?
Some without much of a hospitable one, may even have microbe life below the surface with more moderate conditions. They may be relatively 'common' in what looks like a mostly barren universe.

Life might not have been possible here were we not bombarded with materials (including comets with water).
Clearly there's lots of suitable material out there.

We just launched/placed James Webb Telescope which will give us a better idea how common atmosphere's are.
There are I believe already a trillion or so in the 'Goldilocks'/Temperate zone.
We await getting our arms around atmospheres. Hopefully soon.
`

I never said, suggested or implied that I thought only our planet has life. Not sure where you got that from.

I am a big fan of the Webb telescope and all of these scientific examinations of space. I’d love to find out that there is solid evidence of life elsewhere.

 

[james bond]

MARCH 4, 2021
Organic materials essential for life on Earth are found for the first time on the surface of an asteroid
by Royal Holloway, University of London

​

New research from Royal Holloway, has found water and organic matter on the surface of an asteroid sample returned from the inner Solar System. This is the first time that organic materials, which could have provided chemical precursors for the origin of life on Earth, have been found on an asteroid.​

​

The single grain sample was returned to Earth from asteroid Itokawa by JAXA's first Hayabusa mission in 2010. The sample shows that water and organic matter that originate from the asteroid itself have EVOLVED chemically through time.​

​

The research paper suggests that Itokawa has been constantly EVOLVING over billions of years by incorporating water and organic materials from foreign extra-terrestrial material, just like the Earth. In the past, the asteroid will have gone through extreme heating, dehydration and shattering due to catastrophic impact. However, despite this, the asteroid came back together from the shattered fragments and rehydrated itself with water that was delivered via the in fall of dust or carbon-rich meteorites.​

​

This study shows that S-type asteroids, where most of Earth's meteorites come from, such as Itokawa, contain the raw ingredients of life. The analysis of this asteroid changes traditional views on the origin of life on Earth...​

​

​

Organic materials essential for life on Earth are found for the first time on the surface of an asteroid

New research from Royal Holloway, has found water and organic matter on the surface of an asteroid sample returned from the inner Solar System. This is the first time that organic materials, which could have provided chemical precursors for the origin of life on Earth, have been found on an...

phys.org

​

​

`​

Finally, an article of interest. That said, there is no known mechanism by which the building blocks could assemble themselves into a meaningful code containing instructions and the machinery to manufacture living things. At least, we now know why the atheist scientists trust rocks from space more than Earth rocks.

 

[abu afak]

Finally, an article of interest. That said, there is no known mechanism by which the building blocks could assemble themselves into a meaningful code containing instructions and the machinery to manufacture living things. At least, we now know why the atheist scientists trust rocks from space more than Earth rocks.

There is no known other method than natural by which the building blocks could be assembled. The only reason we know possible sequences is Science. Therefore the evidence/science-minded (who told us what the building blocks are) say we don't know how life started yet. Though at least they have some solid non-supernatural ideas. No one mentioned religion/atheism until you did. You also have an overwhelmingly Religious sig.

 

[james bond]

There is no known other method than natural by which the building blocks could be assembled. The only reason we know possible sequences is Science. Therefore the evidence/science-minded (who told us what the building blocks are) say we don't know how life started yet. Though at least they have some solid non-supernatural ideas. No one mentioned religion/atheism until you did. You also have an overwhelmingly Religious sig.

>>There is no known other method than natural by which the building blocks could be assembled. <<

Lol, I have to say you are the STUPIDEST mofo here. Just what have I been talking about here you dipshit? You are such a disgusting POS with your atheism and beastiality perversions. Maybe atheism is a perversion of science just like there is no observable and testable evidence for macroevolution, but people still fall for it. This is why I came to the conclusion that atheists need to die to know evolution wasn't science and they were wrong about creation. Evolution has made you hypocrites of science.

The scientific proof I have against your claims is the swan neck flask experiment by Louis Pasteur. He helped save the children and us with pasteurization. It proves the creationists use science and that it backs up their religion. The atheist scientists haven't saved anyone which follows their atheism.

 

[abu afak]

>>There is no known other method than natural by which the building blocks could be assembled. <<

Lol, I have to say you are the STUPIDEST mofo here. Just what have I been talking about here you dipshit? You are such a disgusting POS with your atheism and beastiality perversions. Maybe atheism is a perversion of science just like there is no observable and testable evidence for macroevolution, but people still fall for it. This is why I came to the conclusion that atheists need to die to know evolution wasn't science and they were wrong about creation. Evolution has made you hypocrites of science.

The scientific proof I have against your claims is the swan neck flask experiment by Louis Pasteur. He helped save the children and us with pasteurization. It proves the creationists use science and that it backs up their religion. The atheist scientists haven't saved anyone which follows their atheism.

No only is that NOT true - like every sentence you write - it's against the rules you have now broken Multiple times.

• No Accusations of other members relating to bestiality or pedophilia.

Your whole post, In fact thousands of them, are OFF topic religious rants as well as lies.

You are/remain a Lunatic suggesting Scientific American be moved to the religion section while you Quote Scripture and invoke God in Half you Wacky Cult posts here!

Ergo.. You need to be confined to the religion section here, and more broadly confined, even when not here.

`

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Does any of this mean (to you) that life on Earth would have been able to form without our atmosphere?

Just what do you think the atmosphere was like, when life formed?

Volcanic gasses and no oxygen.

So saying life would not form on a planet without an atmosphere like earth's is a pretty meaningless statement.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

So proof that other planets have the basics needed for life---asteroriods/meteorites are also known to carry basic life bacteria around---ergo life would certainly exist on other planets since only these basic elements, time, and energy are needed to create life and with "seeding" needing less to start life on a planet.

Life then would certainly BE OUT THERE. Hopefully it isn't as dumb and destructive as humans.

An infinite amount of time could pass and NOTHING would come from organic material unless the Creator creates life

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

An infinite amount of time could pass and NOTHING would come from organic material unless the Creator creates life

Shaman Death Angel has spoken!

 

[BackAgain]

Just what do you think the atmosphere was like, when life formed?

Volcanic gasses and no oxygen.

So saying life would not form on a planet without an atmosphere like earth's is a pretty meaningless statement.

You moron. You think life started here before oxygen? It is impossible to fathom just what an imbecile you are, Farty.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You think life started here before oxygen?

Before our atmosphere contained any appreciable oxygen?

That's right. It did. In fact, it was life that oxygenated the atmosphere.

Sounds like you aren't educated enough to be commenting and need to go read up before commenting again.

Do yourself a favor or and go do that.

 

[BackAgain]

Before our atmosphere contained any appreciable oxygen?

That's right. It did. It was life that oxygenated the atmosphere.

Sounds like you aren't educated enough to be commenting and need to go read up before commenting again.

Do yourself a favor or and go do that.

You’re high.

Let me give you a lesson so simple even a complete retard like you has a chance of grasping it. Oxygen is needed for water. Life started in water therefore absent oxygen there would be no life on Earth.

Get a pal to help you. You’re not up to it on your own.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You’re high.

Let me give you a lesson so simple even a complete retard like you has a chance of grasping it. Oxygen is needed for water. Life started in water therefore absent oxygen there would be no line on Earth.

Get a pal to help you. You’re not up to it on your own.

Oops, you forgot we were talking about the atmosphere. I figured you were just ignorant and stupid, not that you have short term memory problems. I stand corrected.

Sorry to hear.

So, I better refresh your memory:

The atmosphere when life formed was nothing like today's atmosphere,so it would be pretty stupid to demand an earth like atmosphere as a condition for the formation of life. Like that one fool implied earlier. Wait, that was you.

 

[james bond]

No only is that NOT true - like every sentence you write - it's against the rules you have now broken Multiple times.

• No Accusations of other members relating to bestiality or pedophilia.

Your whole post, In fact thousands of them, are OFF topic religious rants as well as lies.

You are/remain a Lunatic suggesting Scientific American be moved to the religion section while you Quote Scripture and invoke God in Half you Wacky Cult posts here!

Ergo.. You need to be confined to the religion section here, and more broadly confined, even when not here.

`

>>Your whole post, In fact thousands of them, are OFF topic religious rants as well as lies.<<

No, they're not. I'm not the one who started non-science posts like you. I am forced off topic and off forum by the atheists who use their evolution to prop up their atheist religion while ignoring the evidence that backs creation. The bottom line and reality is there is no evidence and test for macroevolution. Furthermore, science experiments such as the swan neck flask by Louis Pasteur destroys the origins for evolution. If evo can't get off the ground, then it's not an explanation for why the universe, Earth and everything in it is here. IOW, creation wins but you can't figure this out nor admit you are WRONG. Moreover, I found that Richard Dawkins admitted that evolution is destroyed if humans lived with dinosaurs. We have evidence for this, but not the fossil evidence yet. Footpirnts together, yes. Prehistoric artwork together, yes. You need to stop acting like a crybaby and take it like a man when this happens.

As for natural selection, the Bible tells us that God created it and science backs it up. This is the foundation for creation science. If science backs up the evidence for the supernatural such as global flood, history of first humans, history or early humans, history of humans after the global flood and so on, then it is real science. Where is the evolution history after Judy the ape-human? I've asked for it several times now. I think I won right there as nothing is forthcoming. It really is hypocritical to ask for evidence for the supernatural and when I provide, you ignore it. I just assume that you lost the argument and have no response.

My complaint to you is that all you do is complain like above, call those who oppose you names and start threads that do not have to do with science in the science forum. You are the biggest atheist hypocrite here. Furthermore, you get too emo and quickly get on the border of being banned in no time.

As for the beastiality, it was pointed out by conservapedia and Scientific American blog articles. I linked those. You're the one who claimed SA was a valid science magazine or blog while you ignore the creationist articles and blogs. Now, we know that SA seems to okay beastiality as atheists have a natural interest towards it for some eww-type reason. I'm the one who takes care to back up my claims with science links or links that goes against a magazine you opine about as valid science. Where are your links that review SA per your claim?

I'm the one who has to keep pointing out the creationist websites are not religious websites as science backs up the Bible. If science didn't back up the Bible like science doesn't back up macroevolution, then I wouldn't be arguing for creation science. What gets me is you think you and the atheists have real science when nothing backs it up; I'm the one who has to keep pointing out it's creation science vs. atheist science or science that is backed up vs. science that is not (another word for lies).

 

[BackAgain]

Oops, you forgot we were talking about the atmosphere. I figured you were just ignorant and stupid, not that you have short term memory problems. I stand corrected.

Sorry to hear.

So, I better refresh your memory:

The atmosphere when life formed was nothing like today's atmosphere,so it would be pretty stupid to demand an earth like atmosphere as a condition for the formation of life. Like that one fool implied earlier. Wait, that was you.

Oops. You forgot that you introduced “atmospheric” oxygen after I discussed just oxygen. You can lie. But the record of the conversation lives on despite your dishonesty, Farty.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

any of this mean (to you) that life on Earth would have been able to form without our atmosphere?

Oops. You forgot that you introduced “atmospheric” oxygen after I discussed just oxygen

Hmm, sorry liar. The quote above actually still appears on this page.

I quoted it in my response to it.

You just really don't care if everyone can see what a liar you are, do you?