Dynaverse.net
Dynaverse.net => Hawkeye's Roost => Topic started by: stoneyface on November 30, 2010, 03:03:18 pm
-
hold onto your seats...
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/nov/HQ_M10-167_Astrobiology.html (http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/nov/HQ_M10-167_Astrobiology.html)
"WASHINGTON -- NASA will hold a news conference at 2 p.m. EST on Thursday, Dec. 2, to discuss an astrobiology finding that will impact the search for evidence of extraterrestrial life. Astrobiology is the study of the origin, evolution, distribution and future of life in the universe. "
ominous, no? life on titan? mars bacteria? who knows and we have to wait to find out. i, for one, am very excited!
my guess would be that since the one person is from the u.s. geological survey that they have found fossils on mars
-
Oh [bleep] they've found me.
-
my guess would be that since the one person is from the u.s. geological survey that they have found fossils on mars
That would be outstanding!
-
The planned participants and their specialties::
Participating in the press conference will be:
* Mary Voytek, director, Astrobiology Program, NASA Headquarters, Washington
* Felisa Wolfe-Simon, NASA astrobiology research fellow, U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, Calif.
* Pamela Conrad, astrobiologist, NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.
* Steven Benner, distinguished fellow, Foundation for Applied Molecular Evolution, Gainesville, Fla.
* James Elser, professor, Arizona State University, Tempe
The results will also be published in a paper in the journal Science at 2 p.m. Thursday, according to NASA officials.
-
tomorrow is the big day!
-
One of the Giz commentors claims to have already read the paper and it is not THAT (life). It will be interesting to see what they are up to though.
edit: update - it appears that it is life, but on earth. Albeit strange and new - uses As in its DNA in place of P. (Arsenic is directly below Phosphorous in the periodic table - so it makes sense)
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/01/nasa-astrobiology-press-c_n_790444.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/01/nasa-astrobiology-press-c_n_790444.html)
go team arsenic!
-
NASA-Funded Research Discovers Life Built With Toxic Chemical (http://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/astrobiology_toxic_chemical.html)
Given the details, this is not at all surprising to me. (odd video they released with the story...)
To be honest, I'm disappointed in the quality of the journalism - NASA press release materials on this story. Being reared on the likes of Jay Ingram, David Suzuki and even Bob MacDonald, I expect better. I keep saying this, maybe it is time to start doing it. (writing better stories myself) I tend to see stuff we discuss here on Daily Planet a few days later. Jay's days are numbered... and I do like Ziya. :coolsmiley:
-
interesting development. i am a little disappointed it is not alien life based but oh well.
you can check out the nasa site for more details http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html (http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html)
and a link i found to a gizmodo article where i guess they correctly guessed at least part of the new discovery http://gizmodo.com/5704158/nasa-finds-new-life (http://gizmodo.com/5704158/nasa-finds-new-life)
i would add bonk that they had to make the video "dumbed down" for the average (stupid) american... "science is hard 'girly giggle' "
-
And the disappointment keeps on growing...
Scientists poke holes in NASA’s arsenic-eating microbe discovery (http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20101208/sc_yblog_thelookout/scientists-poking-holes-in-nasas-arsenic-eating-microbe-discovery)
I hate linking Yahoo cuz they are usually pretty poorly written, but some interesting links on this one...
-
Yeah - WTF!?!! - I thought NASA and Science journal were supposed to vette this crap thoroughly before it got all hyped up to the press...
Way to drop the ball science dudes!
Bummerz...
:(
-
personally, i just consider this another level of "peer review" and people must realize that any major science announcement of discovery is immediately attacked with mistrust. it is human nature.
-
Ah... those one word title journals are not to be trusted I tell you.
Nature, Science...
If it is not the journal of an official professional association or a single study or does not have a history greater than 80 years. I am not interested. Fluff. Not science.
"Peer review" for Nature is meaningless. Peer review for The Analyst or The Journal of Chromatography has meaning.
"Nature"? "Science"? Topics are little too broad there for peer review anywhere near useful.
Also, Medicine is not science. I very strongly dislike how the media presents medicine as science. It is art.
Maybe I really do need to get into science journalism and tell people how it really is.
-
I would disagree Bonk. Medicine is science. From medicine interactions in the body, to the exploration of disease. The work is science, the application by Doctors can border on art tho, as it alot of times has to go by hunches and feeling when you don't have full tests, or what tests to ask for (but the tests are science, the learning of the human body for surgeons is science, the study of disease is science)
-
Only in recent years has the actual science come far enough to start approaching the partial understanding of human function to the point where one can perform meaningful and useful scientific experiments. (And it is still a very, very long way off...) There has to be a basis of understanding to work from. (Not "what happens when I poke this?")
They still think (or want us to believe) that there can be a cure for cancer. Nope. Sorry. Not going to happen. Cancer is a side effect of the machine that cannot be avoided. Avoid cancer and you avoid life. (pure gut instinct, but I am confident that future science - not medicine - will confirm this). The untold billions... pissed away. Look at the tissues that cancer occurs in. That should tell them something, but they just don't get it. It is not about science in medicine, it is about profit.
I guess what gets me is the sensationalist headlines that read "Scientists do such and such or so and so", when there is no pure science involved. Researchers performing medical statistical studies (often horrifically flawed) are presented as "Scientists". I find that offensive.
As you will note that public interpretation and acceptance of science depends on what the media tells them to think.
Maybe we need a new word for real science. Sort of like how impact has come to mean effect and nothing physical at all. Science has come to mean something it did not. We need a new word for pure science, so the public has a half chance of understanding the difference.
I will concede that some medicine is science, but it is the exception and not the rule in my experience.
Health Canada is a classic example.
-
It is not about science in medicine, it is about profit
The "Tobacco research effect". Those who fund the research demand specific results if you want more funding. Corrupt "scientists" give the dictated result for more money for more "research".
-
Yes tobacco "research". Exactly. Health Canada is one of the worst offenders.
I am sorely tempted to send a resume to Imperial Tobacco and show them how to shut down Health Canada's self serving propaganda once and for all.
Medical doctors have no place making regulations that require scientific knowledge. They have no idea. Added glycol... did not think it through. They are not chemists, pure and simple. They are not qualified. Period.