[meteorite-list] THE ODDS OF LIFE

[Francis Graham]

Dear List,
  The question of life on Mars has sometimes been
approached with the Saganism "Extraordinary claims
require extraordinary evidence", and this has been
used to justify "IF the biomarker can possibly in some
way be produced inorganically, then it is no
biomarker."
  Nonsense. The Copernican Principle states that we
are not special in the Universe, never were. If that
is true, then the claim that life exists/existed on
Mars is NOT an extraordinary claim.  The claim that
life *only exists on Earth* is the extraordinary
claim.
  Biomarkers on Mars, though possibly by some weird
mechanism produced by inorganic processes, must, in
the absence of the demonstration of that inorganic
mechanism, must be held to be evidence of life there.
In other words, the onus should be the other way.
   A recent Icarus article discussed how the
measurement of isotopic composition of the methane on
Mars could further enhance its credibility as a
biomarker: Hari Nair et al "Isotopic Fractionation of
Methane in the Martian Atmosphere"  Icarus 175 (2005)
32-35. 
  If the isotopic fractionation of methane points to a
biogenic source, again, there will be people who say
there might be some unknown inorganic mechanism , or
known hypothetical mechanism, which makes it appear as
if there is biology. These people will using the same
argument as Simplicio in the book that introduced
Copernicus to the people, the Dialogo.
 Lethal as the Martian environment is to most forms of
life as we know it, it was not always that lethal and
life had plenty of time to adapt...the mechanism of
evolution is very robust in that respect. 
 We cannot accept the dictum that we dare not
postulate the existence of life while some sort of
inorganic process for known biomarkers can be
imagined. Recognizing that while there are some things
that look like a duck and really aren't, and that all
science is tentative, the evidence of more Mars
biomarkers must be taken for what they seem to be.

Francis Graham




 

--- MexicoDoug at aol.com wrote:

> Sterling W. wrote:
> 
> >The key has to be that the creation of life was NOT
> a  random
> >process. For every molecule that fits a template,
> millions did  not.
> >That's a selective mechanism, not a random one. If
> you allow a  strong
> >selective effect at every step instead of random
> chance, it's done  in
> >short order, IF there is a preferred pathway.
>  
> Hola Sterling, The answer you seek has been mostly
> written...If you have  the 
> time, I highly recommend picking up a copy of this
> book and meandering  
> through its delightful respect for the
> accomplishments of biology, but at  the same 
> time, its brazen and bold disregard for the
> groupthink in the  field.  The 
> implications are more limited by your imagination
> than the  pages upon which it 
> is written!  
> "The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and
> Selection in Evolution"
> by  Stuart Kauffman
>  
> What is "primitive" life other than a continuous
> process, soap  bubble-like 
> filled micelle of catalysts with linked reactant 
> intermediates?  And is it any 
> wonder at all that such bags of plasm form, 
> considering they are the 
> structures, by definition [of life], with the 
> property of non-equilibrium 
> homeostasis, after countless other reactions, well -
>  react, i.e.,"die".
>  
> We've glorified primitive life to religious
> proportions, yet I think  it is 
> much an overrated miracle.  While you wait for that
> landmark  discovery that 
> life evolved or can be made to evolve more than once
>  (whether it comes from out 
> of this world of from our own Earth right under our 
> noses), an accepting 
> humanity will take it in stride, go to work
> tomorrow, still  elect lousy 
> politicians, and folks like us will need to find new
> topics to stay  happily 
> entertained just over the edge of chaos.
>  
> What surprises me is your take on the significance
> of a  confirmation of a 
> so-far hypothetical confirmation of panspermia. 
> While  you seem fine with the 
> possibility of seeding life throughout the universe,
> you  think it doesn't do 
> much except transfer the "problem" of creation 
> elsewhere.  While this may be 
> true, I believe the sheepdogs have tricked  you into
> drinking from their 
> tainted watering hole.
>  
> Did you know that your own red blood cells lack DNA
> and are anaerobic  
> (utilizing glucose and no oxygen in solution, not
> aerobic (Krebs cycle)  respiration 
> to generate energy)?  Your red cells are alive, 
> right?  Really, finding 
> (viruses), bacteria, yeasts, perhaps fungi and 
> other primitive bags of reactants 
> developing elsewhere with at least RNA won't  solve
> THE QUESTION to forgetful 
> and greedy human satisfaction, as THE  QUESTION has
> become somewhat of a 
> moving target.  It used to be:  What started life on
> Earth?
>  
> Think about human nature - so accepting (as long as
> not under threat by  
> killer alien microbes)  I say we best learn to solve
> the simple harmonic  
> oscillator problem before asking questions of the
> Gods around the Universe and  stick 
> to this original question.  Not that a foray into a 
> generalized THE QUESTION 
> isn't entertaining and informative - it  is. But if
> we take the attitude of 
> minimizing the significance of the  problems and
> true progress which is within 
> our grasp and possibly  during our lifetime, we'll
> just remain an unsatisfied 
> bunch.  Ah, the  destiny of human spirit:(
>  
> Getting back to proving the Andromeda Strain that
> spontaneously appeared in  
> another galaxy ... sure it'll cause a bigger impact
> than Surveyor 3's bacteria 
>  which could have survived on the Moon for a few
> years.  But how much  
> bigger?  Don't hold your breath.  A bag of cytoplasm
> proven to have  been hatched in 
> a far off galaxy will not impress the average person
> on the  street any more 
> than one bug delivered ambiguously on a meteorite.  
> Afterall we've known you 
> can deep freeze yeast and nematodes for years, and
> they  come back to life...
>  
> THE QUESTION will just move to become, ok, we have
> proof of concept once,  
> twice, whatever.  Now where's the extraterrestrial
> beef?  Those bags  of wierd 
> enzymes are one thing, but THE QUESTION will always
> has been, can they  
> organize, intercommunicate and form conscious beings
> with souls?  And the  
> closedminded will say - only on Earth.  The
> visionaries will say - In  the name of 
> Copernicus, get over it!  And some will be burned at
> the stake  by the experts of 
> their day.
>  
> Saludos, Doug
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> 



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com