|
NASA depiction of the "Stardust"
spacecraft
Courtesy NASA/JPL
|
5) Life from a comet?
Another reader wrote in, asking for commentary on the recent
announcement of "life's buildling blocks" found in a comet:
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=852142
The gist of the article regards samples from the
stardust
project, a man-made satellite which flew through, and collected
samples from the tail of a comet. Well wouldn't you know it, but
the samples contained an amino acid called glycine, which is one of the
building blocks of life!
Fascinating to be sure - but proof that life on earth came from outer
space? Hardly!
Where'd it come from?
First of all, where do we find glycine in the universe?
Earth. This is why the report was delayed so long - the
scientists wanted to be sure it wasn't contamination. Fair
enough. So in analysing the glycine, they examined its carbon
12/13 ratio, and concluded that it came from outer space.
This is a huge assumption in and of itself, as it does not (and cannot)
take into account the possibility that C12/13 ratios can be produced
here on earth that match the ratio they measured.
For a fun read, check out Dr. Walter T. Brown's explanation of the
origin of comets
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/Comets.html
And the origin of Asteroids and Meteorites:
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/Asteroids.html
In short, the glycine may, in fact, be very good evidence that the
comet came from earth.
How much did you say...?
Furthermore, please notice the language in the article:
"The discovery of
glycine in a comet supports the idea that the fundamental building
blocks of life are prevalent in space, and strengthens the argument
that life in the universe may be common rather than rare,"
and
"Our discovery supports
the theory that some of life's ingredients formed in space and were
delivered to Earth long ago by meteorite and comet impacts," she said.
Wait a minute - the article starts off by stating that the glycine was
found in
trace
amounts.
In other words, there was barely any! Then suddenly,
'barely any'
translated into
"life in the universe
may be common." Oh really?
Secondly, this can hardly be called
life!
Glycine is only
one of dozens of
amino acids, of which
a minimum of 20
are needed for life! So they found
trace
amounts of
one of the twenty
required amino
acids, and suddenly, life came to earth from comets?
This is not unlike finding a bolt in the tail of a comet, and
concluding that cars were delivered to earth by comets - and no, that
analogy is not that much of a stretch. Some might argue that cars
do not reproduce, and therefore the analogy doesn't apply.
Actually, amino acids don't reproduce, neither do proteins (which are
made up of amino acids) and those are all needed to form a living cell,
which can be called
life.
And the complexity of a living cell is infinitely more complex than a
car,
which cannot reproduce.
Interestingly,
living
bacteria have been found in a
freshly landed meteorite! So why such a hubub over a mere
amino acid when we have actually found living bacteria in meteorites?
(see
endnote
#67 in Walt Brown's excellent book, "In the Beginning," the entire
book being available on line at
http://creationscience.com )
This probably has more to do with obtaining funding than science -
though in no way do I wish to discount this discovery.
This discovery, while fascinating and important, has nothing to do with
the origin of life in outer space.
In fact, it's all good evidence that
comets, meteorites and asteroids came from earth.