It might be life Jim, but not as we know it!

[JaXanim]

This article in today's Yorkshire Post is very interesting and has raised the old theory (started by Fred Hoyle) that life on Earth was 'seeded' from space.

Apparently, a red rain falling over a wide area of india in 2001 was found to contain 'cellular' particles. These are actually able to 'replicate', according to an Indian researcher, after five years studying the substance. The odd thing is there's no evidence of DNA in the 'cells'. Of course, DNA is believed to be the prerequisite of life as we know it.

A sample of the space dust is now being studied in Sheffield (UK) University.

JaX

[JaXanim]

@blobrana

Thanks for the link, it's a very interesting read. The localised distribution of the red rain 'cloud' seems to mitigate against China (or anywhere else on Earth) as the source and a scenario discussed in the paper.

It's a pity the original story seems to have attracted very little attention in the West. Compare this case with the 'fossil microbe' reported by NASA(?) after one of their Mars adventures. The world was in on this the day after the event. But superficially, these Indian 'cells' seem to me as convincing as the 'fossil' yet it's taken five years for the red rain story to surface (publically)over here.

Considering the fundamental importance of any discovery of this nature, I'd have expected NASA to have been all over the region and committing a lot of their vastly superior resources to it.

Could it be that anything not discovered by NASA isn't worth looking at?

Cheers,

JaX

[EDIT: Spelling errors]

[JaXanim]

@blobrana
@PMC

Neither of which answers my question.

JaX

[JaXanim]

@blobrana

My question was about NASA's interest (or lack of) in anything not 'discovered' by them. They were pretty voluble about the Mars 'fossil' when the evidence (other than visual) was virtually non-existant.

I thought insects had DNA/RNA?

Whichever way you try to rationalise it, this phenomenon is difficult to explain. NASA could have cleared it up years ago had they taken any interest.

JaX

[JaXanim]

Just to stir this a little more....

PMC wrote:

Imagine what would have happened if NASA had published the report "Possible Origins Of Life Rain Down in India".  They'd be castigated for not taking sufficient time to research the phenomenon.

I can't imagine NASA publishing such a report without taking sufficient time to research it. That's my point, they haven't
spent any time on it. It was five years ago after all.

Thing is that unexplained stuff happens every day.

Blimey, I must walk around with my eyes shut!. How about lots of good examples to support your argument?

There's much that occurs that we don't understand .....

Not true, not on Earth anyway. Again, I'd want to see many examples to support this argument.

....and scientists are understandably reluctant to make premature announcements - especially in light of the controversy surrounding the Martian meteorite press conference in 1996.

NASA, once bitten twice shy, eh?

Could it be that microbal life can be seeded from space?  Well, Alan Bean brought back components from Surveyor 3 during the Apollo 12 moonwalk that still harboured live bacteria, which had contaminated the unmanned lander prior to it's 1966 launch.  Bean's recovery of parts from the Surveyor craft have proved that bacteria can survive for at least three years in a dry, frozen vacuum and be revived once returned to Earth.

Which tends to give the panspermia idea some support.

In science, the truth it seems is almost always beyond the wildest of theories.

Not sure what that means. Like 'Truth is Stranger than Fiction'? Well this red rain stuff is very strange for sure.

And the story is still running. This article implies there's a growing willingness to look into it by people who aren't/can't be regarded as cranks.

Cheers,

JaX

[JaXanim]

@PMC

I think you misunderstand my comment. I totally agree that unexplained things happen. But they don't happen 'every day'.

If they did, we'd all have seen UFOs of one kind or another. Personally, I've never seen anything remotely UFO-like and nor have most people.

The hairy crab and Jupiter's new red spot are fantastic surprises, but they're not really inexplicaple are they? The oceans will provide a lot more surprises yet, but they will not be inexplicable. I also limited my observations to things that happen here on Earth. There's very little happening here that's inexplicable after a little scientific investigation.

The red stuff is a different thing altogether and in quite a different league from UFO sightings and hairy crabs. The fact that scientists have this stuff in their hands and after five years' study still don't know what it is, is quite extraordinary.

My point was that considering the undoubted facts and reported observations associated with the phenomenon, the fact that the  international journal Astrophysics and Space Science has accepted Godfrey Louis' paper for publication, why hasn't NASA, or a similar agency taken any interest in it?

Cheers,

JaX