 |
| GRA 95229 meteorite. Credits: Arizona Board of Regents |
have recently been published several stories on the study of several meteorites from asteroids which say they have found life. Well well, me be clear: in my opinion, is false. Why? The reasons are several, but everything starts with a malpractice investigation in response to protocols or Geoética and Planetary Protection to analyze rocks from space.
As a precedent, in 1996, the NASA researcher David McKay published in the journal Science he found traces of life in a meteorite of Martian origin. But ultimately, technology dictated that the meteorite was contaminated with biological material from our planet, giving it what is known in Planetary Protection as a false positive.
After 15 years of this press release, last week, Richard Hoover, another NASA scientist, published an article in Journal of Cosmology magazine of dubious scientific rigor, which claims to have found remains fossils in various asteroidal meteorites. PZ Myers, a biologist at the University of Minnesota, has posted on his blog a clear opinion about this magazine, saying it "is a crude and ugly web site that seems to have been absorbed by a wormhole in the 1990 and publishes large amounts of noise without a substantial gap editorial restriction. It noted that the American space agency itself has been decoupled from Hoover study saying in a statement that "NASA can not support a scientific claim unless it has been reviewed by his colleagues and deeply examined by other qualified experts."
Jesús Martínez Frías, Center for Astrobiology (CSIC-INTA), told me that "it is noteworthy that (...) you choose a magazine that is not part of classical scientific circuit." Hoover probably knew in advance that do not publish in prestigious journals due to poor scientific rigor of the analysis. On the other hand, Carlos Briones, also Center for Astrobiology (CSIC-INTA) told me from the beginning because it sounded to obvious contamination. " In addition to Martínez Frías is another very important as "used as biomarkers minerals such as carbonates and magnetite, which in any case could be geomarcadores of biological activity, and it is very strange, as the author, that life grow on an asteroid because, besides not explain how, all models suggest that the most plausible meteorite-in could be life-would be the planet, for life also calls for developing a geologic vitality. "
Hoover's article could sensationalist tinge lithopanspermia theory, and both products shortly rigorous style magazines such as Journal of Cosmology can distort as much research recently published by Sandra Pizzarello et al. in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) which shows a study by the GRA 95229 meteorite fallen in Antarctica that could plague our planet, large amounts of ammonia, may well accelerate the process of creating of life. What is the difference? the PNAS article itself has passed all controls referees to ensure rigorous review of research and also this if you follow the course of lithopanspermia.
If there is a finding that offers compelling presence of fossils of microorganisms in meteorites, any scientific journal would be willing to publish the discovery, moreover, would mark a before and after in the History of Life. But unfortunately, we always find items lacking scientific soundness, fortunately, much of the scientific community is aware and does not hesitate to take action on the matter to refute all of these items that do nothing to tarnish the world than want to do good science.
0 comments:
Post a Comment