Joined: Oct. 2009
|Quote (dvunkannon @ June 21 2012,18:40)|
|It is a pity that UD is flogging the Adam & Eve book right now, because there is some terrific science out there to be talked about.|
The cover of New Scientist asks a provocative OOL question, Is Life Inevitable or Chance? The article inside by Nick Lane is good. If you know his work on mitochondria, a lot of it will be a rehash. He's written some good pop sci books on this subject.
His basic position, and the article's conclusion, is that bacterial life is almost inevitable anywhere you can rub H2, CO2, H2O and rocks together. However, the jump to eukaryotes with internal mitochondria is probably rare to a once-in-the-universe event.
That means we should still be able to detect life by its effect on the atmosphere of planets...
Another recent article on bacteria living in ocean bottom muds with very slow metabolisms. Buried 86 million years ago and still alive???
I would tend to agree that the chemistry supports the development of life (for some value of life).
I'm wondering if there is another, equally effective method for generating energy for a multi-celled organism...
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.