Parts of earliest genetic material came from the stars

http://esciencenews.com/articles/2008/06/13/scientists.confirm.parts.earliest.genetic.material.may.have.come.stars

by FiReaNG3L • 18 years ago

11 19 18 years ago

Mystalic• 18 years ago

It's always disheartening that these types of stories don't make major news networks. The fact that our DNA may in fact be extraterrestrial is small beans compared to Britney Spears's 42nd mental breakdown.

FiReaNG3L2• 18 years ago

I agree - if you want to help get this on Reddit and Digg, feel free :)

http://www.reddit.com/info/6n9fl/comments

http://digg.com/space/Confirmed_Earliest_genetic_material_ca...

drawkbox5• 18 years ago

Of course, we are all built from the same explosions that made the cosmos. In fact i have some pretty crazy theories that neutrinos cause all Universal beings to expand (or the container to expand) but I think this is the main reason people love explosions and fireworks. They either signal change AND/OR life being created. Whether you are scientific or religious, you have to believe in multiple dimensions and particles or elements beyond Earth is what makes up the human and the planet we reside on.

The HLC is hoping to find more about this. The same elements that started the big bang, morphed and advanced into us. Amazing what else they can build with lots of time.

hugh3• 18 years ago

i have some pretty crazy theories that neutrinos cause all Universal beings to expand

No you don't. That's not coherent enough to be a theory, not even a crazy one. It's just some big words you managed to put together, one after the other, without any apparent understanding of what any of them means.

drawkbox5• 18 years ago

Well I tried to spill too much in one thread. You have no idea what you are saying because you are judging by one thread. I have studied neutrinos intently and I hope the LHC will reveal more about them as a building block. But go ahead be a hater, I can use you for fuel. btw if those are big words I am sorry.

drawkbox5• 18 years ago

Here's the MTV version of what I am talking about. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6uKZWnJLCM and keep on hating rather than debating because the fallacy works!

ajross2• 18 years ago

Ahem: "Scientists confirm that PARTS OF earliest genetic material came from the stars." You took an already over-sensationalized article title and editted out even the tiny hint of rationality it had left . Shame on you.

From later in the article: "The materials they have found include the molecules uracil and xanthine". This isn't DNA, it's like finding a clay pit and announcing "Our house came from under the earth!".

Sigh...

[EDIT: I see the article title has been fixed to better reflect the source. Many thanks.]

__• 18 years ago

It's worse than that. "Scientists confirm that parts of earliest genetic material may have come from the stars".

hugh3• 18 years ago

It really should be "Scientists confirm that simple molecules identical to those which were part of the earliest genetic material can be found on space rocks". Which is only slightly interesting.

It's well known that these sorts of simple hydrocarbons aren't that hard to form -- they would have been forming very frequently on primordial Earth. There is absolutely no reason to suppose that the fact that the occasional uracil molecule also fell out of the sky on a rock would have any effect on the development of life.

tc7• 18 years ago

Even better... "Scientists confirm that parts of earliest genetic material may have come from the stars."

Headlines are awesome. Give it a few more levels of indirection (esciencenews <- hacker news <- bob's blog <- talk around the watercooler) and babies will be dropping from the sky to populate the earth.

FiReaNG3L2• 18 years ago

I may have been a little over excited on this one, but its still very significant. This is complex organic molecules, direct precursors of DNA components, found in a meteorite. You can downplay this all you want but this is no clay pit vs house :) Sorry again for the sensationalized title; I think I've been exposed too much to Digg, will do better next time.

Retric• 18 years ago

One of the hardest things to understand about evolution is how quickly organisms change their environment. Before self replicating life forms showed up on earth there was probably a thick soup of complex organic molecules in the land, sea, and air. However, once the most basic of life forms showed up they would quickly consume the abundant resources out there. So while a tiny fraction of early DNA might use components from meteorites there is little reason to think they played a significant role in the evolution of life on earth.

ajross2• 18 years ago

Truthfully, no, it's not all that significant. Here are the relevant wikipedia entries on those molecules:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uracil http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xanthine

These are simple molecules. Many organic molecules (including some more complicated than this) have been found in space, either in meteorites or spectrally. This are significant only because they're chemically related to what life ultimately ended up using here on earth (or at least Uracil is, being an RNA pair base -- I have no idea what the Xanthine connection is, honestly).

Really, this isn't all that surprising.

newton• 18 years ago

No one can stop us now, because we are all made of stars. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qdb4NyHdFfE

aswanson• 18 years ago

Every element with an atomic number greater than 1 comes from the stars: http://aether.lbl.gov/www/tour/elements/stellar/stellar_a.ht...

Parts of earliest genetic material came from the stars

Related Stories