1. The Origins of Life

Rhawn Joseph, Ph.D.

Author of: Life on Earth, Came From Other Planets The recent discoveries reported by Richard Hoover (2011), coupled with a wealth of data from genetics, microbiology, and astrobiology detailed in the edited text, "The Biological Big Bang," (Wickramasinghe 2011), leads to two conclusions: We are not alone, and, life on Earth came from other planets. 1) There is evidence of biological activity in this planet's oldest rocks (O'Neil et al. 2008; Nemchin et al. 2008), which means life was present on Earth from the very beginning. 2) Two separate teams of scientists have determined, based on a genomic analysis, that DNA-based life has a genetic ancestry leading backwards in time over 10 billion years (Joseph, Wickramasinghe, Wainwright 2011; Sharov 2009), which is twice the age of Earth. 3) Dozens of studies have proven conclusively that microbes can survive the ejection from and crash landing onto a planet surface and a journey through space (Burchell et al. 2004; Burchella et al. 2001; Horneck et al. 1994, 1995, 2001; Mastrapaa et al. 2001; Nicholson et al. 2000). 4) Richard Hoover (2011) has presented evidence of ancient bacterial microfossils resembling cyanobacteria, in 3 separate meteorites; the remains of organisms which dwelled on astral parent bodies which may have included moons, comets, and planets older than Earth. By contrast, although brilliant theories abound (Russell 2011) there is absolutely no evidence life began on Earth. In fact, there is considerable evidence life could have never begun on this planet (Joseph & Schild 2010). Earth is not the center of the biological universe. Consider, by analogy, a life-less desert island; and then one day, a blade of grass, or a bacteria, emerges on the surface. We wouldn't conclude that some god had come down and created life on this island. Nor would we believe these life forms emerged from an organic soup. We'd conclude this life must have washed to shore, or fell from the sky. Earth, too, is an island, swirling in an ocean of space, and life has been washing to shore, and falling from the sky, since the creation. Cosmic collisions are commonplace, not only between meteors and planets, but entire galaxies, and life has been repeatedly tossed into the abyss...only to land on other planets. Certainly the mounting evidence demonstrating life came from other worlds will be rejected by those who believe Earth is a very special, precious little planet, with magical life-generating powers, as described in Genesis, chapter 1 of the Bible. And of course these conclusions will be disputed by the "torches and pitchforks" crowd who come lumbering forth grunting in fear, condemning and seeking to destroy what they don't understand. Yet, howl as they might, the fact remains, those who advocate an Earthly biogenesis have no evidence, only theories which make the same claims as the Jewish and Christian religion, as detailed in the Five Books of Moses, the Biblical story of Genesis where life springs from the Earth: 11. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind... 20. And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life... 24. And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind...and it was so. This religious fantasy, as retold in the Biblical Five Books of Moses, and where life magically emerges from the Earth, is in fact, the official position of NASA, and at Science and Nature magazine, whose chief scientist, publisher and editor (in that order) ascribe to this religious faith. They just edit out the word "god." This isn't science. Its religion masquerading as science. It thus becomes a choice between evidence-based science (life came from other planets) vs the Jewish-Christian religion (life came from Earth) as advocated by the religious extremists at NASA headquarters, and Science and Nature magazine who wish to force the rest of us to accept their religious beliefs. The fact is, there is nothing special about Earth, this solar system, or this galaxy; they are but grains of sand in a sea of infinite night. And if Earth and this galaxy were destroyed tomorrow, their absence would go unnoticed in the vastness of a cosmos where spiral galaxies and Earth-like planets are as common as star light. But what of the possibility of contamination? "Contamination" is how life began on Earth. Moreover, some of the microfossils discovered by Hoover, were completely alien, unlike anything on this planet. Therefore, these particular species must have adapted to life on a planet completely unlike Earth. The discovery of Cyanobacteria is of particular importance. Let us be clear. Hoover found more than "complex filaments." He found the remnants of cynobacteria mats which can take up to 6 months to form. And they were discovered in a meteor older than Earth. It is Cyanobacteria which helped create the oxygen atmosphere of this planet. Cyanobacteria also secrete calcium when creating their mats, and this calcium made it possible for shells, bones, and the skeletal system to evolve. Cyanobacteria are a hardy species, and can live in extreme environments. Therefore, if Cyanobacteria are deposited on Earth-like planets, it can be assumed they would also biologically engineer these alien worlds, providing them with an oxygen atmosphere and flooding the environment with calcium, thereby making it possible for life to evolve into intelligent species, similar to or completely different from, and possibly more intelligent than woman and man. Most scientists will agree that life on this planet evolved from single celled microbes. Therefore, we can conclude, since life was present on this planet from the beginning, that living creatures fell to Earth encased in stellar debris which pounded the Earth for 700 millions years after the creation. And these "seeds" contained the DNA which led to the metamorphosis of all life, including humans (Joseph 2010; Wickramasinghe 2011). Similar events must have taken place on innumerable planets. And what if these bacterial "seeds of life" fell upon planets unlike our own? If they could take root and flourish, they might evolve into creatures completely unlike those of Earth. This might account for the truly "alien" microbes discovered by Hoover (2011). The implications are profound. It can be assumed that life is everywhere and has a cosmic ancestry which extends backwards in time, interminably into the long ago, and that intelligent life has evolved on countless Earth-like planets (Joseph 2010). And we can predict that life must have continued to evolve on innumerable worlds which are much older than Earth, surpassing and evolving beyond the humans of Earth before our planet was even formed. Great extra-terrestrial technologically advanced civilizations likely ring the cosmos, including on planets billions of years older than our own. There is no evidence life began on Earth. Life was present on this planet from the very beginning. Life on Earth has a cosmic ancestry. The preponderance of evidence demonstrates life on Earth, came from other planets. Our ancient ancestors journeyed here, from the stars. References Burchella, M. J., Manna, J., Bunch, A. W., Brandob, P. F. B. (2001). Survivability of bacteria in hypervelocity impact, Icarus. 154, 545-547. Burchell, J. R. Mann, J., Bunch, A. W. (2004). Survival of bacteria and spores under extreme shock pressures, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 352, 1273-1278. Nemchin, A. A., Whitehouse, M.J., Menneken, M., Geisler, T., Pidgeon, R.T., Wilde, S. A. (2008). A light carbon reservoir recorded in zircon-hosted diamond from the Jack Hills. Nature 454, 92-95. O'Neil, J., Carlson, R. W., Francis, E., Stevenson, R. K. (2008). Neodymium-142 Evidence for Hadean Mafic Crust Science 321, 1828 - 1831. Horneck, G., Becker, H., Reitz, G. (1994). Long-term survival of bacterial spores in space. Advances in Space Research, Volume 14, 41-45. Horneck, G., Eschweiler, U., Reitz, G., Wehner, J., Willimek, R., Strauch, G (1995). Biological responses to space: results of the experiment Exobiological Unit of ERA on EURECA I. Advances in Space Research 16, 105-118. Horneck, G., et al., (2001). Bacterial spores survive simulated meteorite impact Icarus 149, 285. Joseph, R. (2010). Life on Earth, Came From Other Planets. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge. Joseph R. Schild, R. (2010). Biological Cosmology and the Origins of Life in the Universe. Journal of Cosmology, 5, 1040-1090. Joseph, R., Wickramasinghe, N. C., Wainwright, M. (2011). Genetics Indicates an extra-terrestrial origin for life, Under Review. Mastrapaa, R.M.E., Glanzbergb, H ., Headc, J.N., Melosha, H.J, Nicholsonb, W.L. (2001). Survival of bacteria exposed to extreme acceleration: implications for panspermia, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 189, 30 1-8. Nicholson, W. L., Munakata, N., Horneck, G., Melosh, H. J., Setlow, P. (2000). Resistance of Bacillus Endospores to Extreme Terrestrial and Extraterrestrial Environments, Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews 64, 548-572. Russell, M. (2011). Origins, Abiogenesis, and the Search for Life. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge. Sharov, A.A. (2009). Exponential Increase of Genetic Complexity Supports Extra-Terrestrial Origin of Life. Journal of Cosmology, 1, 63-65. Wickramasinghe, C. (2011). The Biological Big Bang: Panspermia and the Origins of Life. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge.



2. The Search for Extraterrestrial Life

Michael H. Engel, Ph.D.,

School of Geology & Geophysics, 100 East Boyd St.. The University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019 USA About once every decade a scientific discovery is reported that elicits passionate debate concerning the possible existence of extraterrestrial life, past or present. Nagy et al. (1961) reported the occurrence of biogenic hydrocarbons in the Orgueil meteorite and then subsequently went on to describe possible relict microstructures that looked similar to microbial life forms on Earth (e.g. Nagy et al., 1963). Levin and Straat (1976) reported the results of experiments performed during the Viking Mission to Mars that could be interpreted as possible evidence for extant microbial life. Engel and Nagy (1982) reported the occurrence of non-racemic amino acids in the Murchison meteorite (L-enantiomer excess) that could be interpreted as possible evidence for past extraterrestrial life. McKay et al. (1996) reported possible evidence for fossil microbial life in the Martian meteorite ALH84001. The report by Richard Hoover (2011) concerning the occurrence of fossil cyanobacteria in the Ivuna and Orgueil meteorites will be met with excitement by some and reservation by others. There are legitimate reasons to initially be skeptical of these findings, not the least of which being the antiquity of these observed falls (Orgueil, 1864; Ivuna, 1938) and the methods of sample collection and storage available at those times. Also, there have been several reports that apparent microbial structures in ancient, Precambrian rocks on Earth may be artifacts rather than actual fossils (e.g. Brasier et al., 2002), thus underscoring the challenges of documenting ancient life on Earth, no less elsewhere in the solar system. It will be necessary for independent experts in microbiology to determine whether the photomicrographs of microfossils in meteorites published by Hoover (2011) are sufficiently similar in morphology to modern analogs to likely be the remains of extraterrestrial cyanobacteria. Given the importance of this finding, it is essential to continue to seek new criteria more robust than visual similarity to clarify the origin(s) of these remarkable structures. Bartholomew Nagy (1975) noted that whilst some microstructures in carbonaceous meteorites were obvious contaminants, it was going to be a formidable task to establish the origins of the multitude of structures that appeared to be indigenous to the Orgueil meteorite. In his recent publication, Hoover (2011) provides new and important information concerning the compositions of the microstructures in CI1 meteorites. He reports that the microbial structures are permineralized with minerals rich in magnesium and sulfur. This is consistent with the mineral composition of the Orgueil meteorite, which, in addition to a clay matrix includes, for example, breunnerite and magnesium sulfate (Nagy, 1975). Also, as Hoover points out, contamination of these meteorites by living cyanobacteria would presumably have required that these stones be immersed in liquid water that is essential for cyanobacterial growth. He also correctly notes that if these stones had been in water, this would have caused their disintegration via dissolution of the water soluble salts that act as the cement for the meteorite matrix. Further evidence for the indigeneity of these microstructures is provided by FESEM images showing the light element compositions of the filaments. In particular, the C/N and C/S values for the filaments are distinct from those of living organisms. Similarly the nitrogen abundances of the meteorite filaments are far lower than what is observed for cyanobacteria. This might indicate that much of the original nitrogen in the organic matter that comprised these structures had been lost by, for example, the deamination of amino acids. However, it is interesting to note that bulk extracts of the Orgueil meteorite contain low concentrations of amino acids, eight of which are common protein amino acids on Earth (Engel, 1980). The fact that the remaining twelve protein amino acids that are common to all organisms on Earth are not found in Orgueil (Engel, 1980), lends further support to Hoover's contention that these stones have not experienced much in the way of recent microbial contamination. The search for extraterrestrial life is one of the fundamental quests of all mankind. Given the enormity of the galaxies that comprise our universe, we remain convinced of the certainty that life exists elsewhere. The paradox is that when faced with the actual possibility of evidence for extraterrestrial life, we quite often feel more compelled to ignore it or refute it rather than embrace it. Perhaps this has something to do with our inherent fear of the unknown. With respect to these new findings, I encourage people to keep an open mind when forming an opinion as to the significance of this work. References Brasier, M.D., Green, O.R., Jephcoat, A.P., Kleppe, A.K., van Kranendonk, M.J., Lindsay, J.F., Steele, A. and Grassineau, N.V. (2002) Questioning the evidence for Earth's oldest fossils. Nature 247, 76-81. Engel, M.H. (1980) Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Arizona. Engel, M.H. and Nagy, B. (1982) Distribution and enantiomeric composition of amino acids in the Murchison meteorite. Nature 296, 837-840. Hoover, R.B. (2011) Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites: Implications to Life on Comets, Europa, and Enceladus. Journal of Cosmology 13, In Press. Levin, G. V. and Straat, P.A. (1976) Viking labeled release biology experiment: Interim results. Science 194, 1322-1329. McKay, D.S., Gibson, E.K., Thomas-Keprta, K.L., Vali, H., Romanek, C.S., Clemett, S.J., Chillier, X.D.F., Maedling, C.R. and Zare, R.N. (1996) Search for past life on Mars: Possible relic biogenic activity in Martian meteorite ALH84001. Science 273, 924-930. Nagy, B. (1975) Carbonaceous Meteorites. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co., NY. .Nagy, B., Fredriksson, K., Urey, H.C., Claus, G., Anderson, C.A. and Percy, J. (1963) Electron probe microanalysis of organized elements in the Orgueil meteorite. Nature 198, 121-125. Nagy, B., Meinschein, W.G. and Hennessy, D.J. (1961) Mass spectroscopic analysis of the Orgueil meteorite: evidence for biogenic hydrocarbons. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 93, 25-35.



3. Fear of the Unknown: Do You Believe in Extraterrestrial Life? Definitely Maybe!

Cody Youngbull, Ph.D.,

Assistant Professor Research, Arizona State University, Biodesign Institute, Center for Biosignatures Discovery Automation, AZ Richard Hoover's recent JOC report of meteorite microfossils has sparked broad interest and excited public discourse (Hoover 2011). The story has gone viral with major media news sources and internet blogs all carrying reports of this story. And so too the experts, for whom this information is not new, who have been monitoring the accounts of fossils in these same meteorites since 1961 have something to get excited about (Claus & Nagy, 1961). This is because, while the elemental and mineral composition data remains identical to prior accepted reports, the morphological data far exceeds anything yet shown on the subject. Unless you doubt Hoover's integrity or the instruments and methods he used, then the amino-acid set, isotopic ratios, and elemental signatures imply you must rule out the idea that this evidence of ancient microbial life in space is nothing more than standard biological contamination. All that would remain for the critic is to argue for a non-biological origin of the microscopic structures. Hoover posits that the structures he shows are reminiscent of cyanobacteria, and he provides examples of similar morphologies in living organisms. But the variety and complexity of chemical interactions over the unknown, potentially 4 billion year history of these meteorites leaves room for an as yet unidentified inorganic process which could have created them. For example, just last month in the journal Nature, similar filamentous structures have been explained by non-biological processes (Marshall et al., 2011). There is a meta-message in Hoover's work that applies to all observation which is that both the giving and receiving of information is inherently filtered through a subjective lens. Take the following simplistic but useful analogy: you are driving through farm country and your travel companion points out the window exclaiming, "Pig!" In this context only a glance would be necessary to convince you of the veracity of the statement. Now take that same situation but on an airplane and your quick glance out the window would not, and arguably should not, be sufficient to convince you. In the case of Hoover's report, he has taken much more than a simple glance. He builds upon the work of people who have spent decades scrutinizing and analyzing these same five meteorites. Pouring over observations, making reports and addressing peer identified weaknesses, this recent data really represents a culmination of arguments and best results of a much larger effort made by many excellent scientists. Beyond the smoking gun of finding a living extraterrestrial, these observations are, by degree, as good as it will ever get for the astrobiology community. Information filters go beyond the intrinsic contextual filter as demonstrated by the flying pig. One can identify many other hackles that this paper raises. First and foremost is the polarizing topic itself, call this a personal belief filter. I mean, come on, alien fossils?! It falls on the same square as perpetual motion, evolution and climate change. Most people are ensconced in a specific camp and will instantly dismiss any reports counter to their own preconceptions. Another filter is the method of its communication; call this the venue filter. In this case the venue being the online journal. Given the quality of Hoover's work, perhaps the high impact journals that should carry a story like this see themselves as simply too big to fail to risk a potential loss of credibility? Or is it that they do not give second chances? Online peer review is a wonderful contribution to science because it allows for wild ideas to be shared where otherwise they would be forced to exposition in a flood of conference proceedings. If there were no room for wild ideas and peer reviews were always critically skeptical we would never have made it this far as a society. Then there is the filter of the conflicting interest or the credibility given the funding source. NASA scientists have significant reason to find signs of life in space. And yet, the name NASA carries a weight of believability in its name and history. Besides, who better to study the phenomena than the very people whom our tax dollars pay to study it? Not to be overlooked is the filter of fear - the fear to be thought a heretic by reporting the information. The stigma of studying something that has arguably never existed is well carried by people who call themselves astrobiologists. There is a fine line between the fear and pleasure of the spot light but should you ever get the chance to hear Hoover personally speak on this subject, you would sense his genuine motivation for the truth inside these mysterious type CI1 carbonaceous meteorites. Based on similar past claims of the past 50 years, what will likely follow is that healthily skeptical experts will dream up reasonable mechanisms for these formations. Regardless, let us recognize Hoover's brave devotion to such a powder keg of an observation. At a time when NASA is in decline and the last shuttle mission is about to launch, experts in the field should think carefully about how their blog post opinions of this data effects the future of space exploration and science education in this country. So the next time someone asks you if you believe in the purported evidence for alien life, you'd now be wise to take joy in saying, "Definitely maybe!" References Claus, G; Nagy, B A (1961). Microbiological examination of some carbonaceous chondrites Nature, 192 (480): 594-&. Hoover, R.B. (2011), Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites: Implications to Life on Comets, Europa, and Enceladus. Journal of Cosmology, 13. Marshall, C. P., Emry, J. R. & Olcott Marshall, A. (2011). Nature Geosci. advance online publication doi:10.1038/NGEO1084.



4. Why Couldn't Life Evolve Independently, On Earth?

Harrison H. Schmitt, Ph.D.

College of Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Former United States Senator, Apollo 17 Astronaut, 12th and last man to set foot on the Moon. I will let others more expert than I comment on Hoover's evidence of life forms in CI1 meteorites. I only wonder why many do not seem to want life to have originated independently on Earth? It is the one place we know best and have the best evidence that conditions existed prior to about 3.5 billion years for complex molecules and then replicating life forms to have formed. Water, carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous, impact and/or lightning energy, clay and/or sulfide templates, and time were available from about 4.5 billion years ago. We just have to figure out how it all happened.



5. A Critical Analysis: Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CII Carbonaceous Meteorites

M.A. Line, Ph.D.,

Honorary Research Associate, School of Agricultural Science, University of Tasmania As Carl Sagan said, an extraordinary claim demands extraordinary evidence. I believe the extraordinary evidence is in this paper, but it could be better presented. However, instead of focusing on the strength of this paper, which are many, I think it is more important to take a look at possible weaknesses. For example, the abstract includes information which I believe is not supported by the Figures (of branched filaments, akinetes or hormogonia, in meteoritic material). I know for a fact the author has much better photographs than the ones given in this paper and do not understand why they were not included. Perhaps they would have made the paper even longer, when it is already of excessive length? I also believe the Hoover should have included mention of the reported excesses of L- over D-enantiomers of alanine, aspartic acid and glutamic acid in the Ivuna meteorite (Table 1V) in his summation. I cannot agree with the contention that there is a ‘tuft of fine fibrils' visible at the left terminus of the image in Figure 1d; perhaps these have not reproduced-well in the photograph before me. In the absence of this tuft, Figure (1d) is the least-convincing component of the paper; a sceptic might wonder how long it would take to find such a structure as that shown within the background detritus seen in this figure. The relatively low abundance of N and P in some of the fossils (both in meteorites and terrestrial material) (Figure 6a) is easily explained; these elements are generally in relatively low abundance and therefore in high demand by other microorganisms. Following the death of sheathed biota their cytoplasm is rapidly devoured by smaller bacteria leaving a highly-N/P-depleted skeleton. Unfortunately the low N/P content of the filaments or sheaths reported in the study do not convinced me that these sheaths are the remains of life-forms that existed before Earth-contact (as claimed in the Results and Conclusion), because if they represent contaminants, then they too would have suffered N/P-depletion following their death. The continuing presence of N in mammoth and mummified hair do not provide a counter argument, they simply show that the environments in which these hairs existed were not conducive to microbial mineralization. I believe too much attention is also given to cell-similarity of images of meteoritic forms with those of terrestrial origin. For example, the form shown in Figure 1a is likened with that of T. velox, yet the latter bacterium is found in mesophilic low-salinity habitats, whereas the aqueous habitat of comets or meteorites is almost certainly psychrophilic and probably highly saline. A more subtle reason to ignore cell-similarities lies in the evolutionary histories of the biota. The habitats of biota that either survive or proliferate in comets or meteorites are going to be highly restricted relative to the plethora of habitats found on Earth. Even if we accept the more radical of panspermia hypotheses (e.g. Wickramasinghe, 2011; Wickramasinghe et al., 2003) that the Earth receives a constant rain of living biota of extraterrestrial origin, such biota would be uncompetitive in terrestrial habitats because of the principle of competitive-exclusion; terrestrial biota are highly evolved to survive in the habitats that they live in. There is constant competition in all habitats for sources of energy and nutrients, new-comers to the block should therefore perish. As a result, the evolutionary distance between extant terrestrial biota and those found in meteorites can be expected to be large. A couple of points that arise from this investigation, are the implications of the discovery of cyanobacteria in meteoritic material of extra-terrestrial origin. Firstly it raises the possibility of a deep (longer than the time available on Earth) evolutionary history for aerobic metabolism, a contention that is strongly supported by recent phylogenetic studies. Secondly, since cyanobacteria comprise just a branch of the Domain Bacteria, their existence in meteoritic material means that the three domains of life (Bacteria, Archaea and Eukaryota) evolved and separated prior to their colonization of Earth (e.g. Joseph 2010; Wickramasinghe, 2011). It would also mean that life on Earth did not originate from a single cell; representatives of all three domains must have arrived from space. References Joseph, R. (2010). Life on Earth, Came From Other Planets. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge. Wickramasinghe, C. (2011). The Biological Big Bang: Panspermia and the Origins of Life. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge. Wickramasinghe, N.C., Wainwright, M., Narlikar, J.V., Rajaratnam, P., Harris, M.J., Lloyd, D. (2003), Progress toward the vindication of panspermia. Astrophys. Space Sci., 283, pp. 403-413.



6. Life from Outer Space

B.G. Sidharth, Ph.D.,

International Institute for Applicable Mathematics & Information Sciences Hyderabad (India) & Udine (Italy), B.M. Birla Science Centre, Adarsh Nagar, Hyderabad - 500 063, India Recently Richard Hoover (2011) has examined CI1 carbonaceous meteorites to conclude that there are large complex laments embedded in freshly frac- tured internal parts of the meteorite. Moreover the detailed morphological characteristic and chemical composition of the meteoritic laments are in- consistent with known material. Hoover concludes that the laments in the CI1 carbonaceous meteorites are not terrestrial contaminates but rather are extraterrestrial in origin and have been brought down to the earth. All this is very suggestive though perhaps not conclusive, as yet keeping in mind the experience with the ALH 84001 meteorite of the 1990s. This me- teorite seemed to have been ejected from the Planet Mars a few billion years ago and after a long and circuitous journey fell to Earth and remained buried in the Antarctic region for a few thousand years. Dr. David Mckay and others claimed that there were distinct traces of fossilized micro life. While this is a possibil- ity, the general consensus has been that they are inanimate mineral features. However, whereas McKay and colleagues (1996) identified "nano-bacteria" as fossilized life, and which appears to have turned out to be naturally occurring crystalized structures, Hoover has discovered cyaobacteria and alien species which have never been been seen on Earth. Clearly, the latter are not of terrestrial origin. These findings raise questions about the origins of life on Earth. Could life have arisen independently on numerous planets, including Earth? Certain the consensus view is life formed on this planet following the fortuitous mixture of various chemicals, some of which may have fallen from space (Russell 2011; Sidharth 2009, 2010). If true, then the same might apply to other Earth-like planets. A minority view which has been championed by Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe (see Wickramasinghe 2011), and Joseph (2010), is that life is pervasive throughout the cosmos and was transported here in extra-terrestrial material including comets. However, as I have tried to stress, both views may be correct. Life may be deposited on planets which already were swarming with life (Joseph 2010; Wickramasinghe 2011). The same could be said of the chemical necessary for life. They may fall upon living planets, or on worlds which simply lack the necessary ingredients, thereby kick starting life (Sidharth 2010). To give an example, in a laboratory synthesis us- ing Uray-Miller type experiments, equal quaantities of righthanded and left- handed amino acids are produced whereas in life process on Earth it is the lefthanded amino acids that predominate (Sidharth, 2009). This is exactly what is observed in the meteorite samples that have been examined. Interestingly such an asymmetry is needed for all important photo chemical processes like photo- synthesis to take place. Such processes cannot take place with a symmetry between lefthanded and righthanded amino acids or racemic molecules as they are called. The importance of all this is that life would be more wide spread in the universe than if it had originated entirely on the Earth. What can we conclude from all this? We are not alone. Life may be everywhere. References Hoover, R. (2011). Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites, Journal of Cosmology, 13. Joseph, R. (2010). Life on Earth, Came From Other Planets. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge. McKay, D. S., Gibson Jr., E. K., Thomas-Keprta, K.L., Vali, H., Romanek, C. S., Clemett, S. J., Chillier, X.D. F., Maechling, C. R., Zare, R. N. (1996_. Search for Past Life on Mars: Possible Relic Biogenic Activity in Martian Meteorite ALH84001. Science 273 (5277): 924-930. Sidharth, B.G. (2009). In defence of Abiogenesis in Journal of Cosmology 1, 73-75. Sidharth, B.G. (2010). Chirality and the Cosmic Origin of Life New Ad- vances in Physics, 4, 1-9. Wickramasinghe, C. (2011). The Biological Big Bang: Panspermia and the Origins of Life. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge.



7. Adjusting the Moral Compass for Navigating in a Living Universe

Saara Reiman

School of Social and Moral philosophy, University of Helsinki Possibility of existence of past or even present microbial life forms in meteorites and other small astral bodies poses important challenges for our understanding of the ethics of space exploration. Hoover's research suggests that complex filaments found embedded in CI1 carbonaceous meteorites represent the remains of indigenous microfossils of cyanobacteria and other prokaryotes associated with modern and fossil prokaryotic mats. He concludes that the detection of evidence of viable microbial life in ancient ice (Abyzov et al., 1998, 2005; Hoover and Pikuta, 2010) and the presence of microfossils of filamentous cyanobacteria and other trichomic prokaryotes in the CI1 carbonaceous meteorites has direct implications to possible life on comets and icy moons of Jupiter with liquid water oceans (e.g. Europa, Ganymede or Callisto) and Saturn's moon Enceladus. Already in 1967 Lynn White Jr. asserted that what we do collectively depends on what we collectively think; and the corollary to this, that to change what we collectively do depends on changing what we collectively think (White 1967). J. Baird Callicott finishes the thought by saying that if we are to change what we do to the environment, we must begin by changing what we think about the environment (Callicott 2000). According to Aldo Leopold, we abuse the land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. But when we see the land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect. In his opinion, this is the only way land can survive the impact of mechanized man. (Leopold 1948). Stephen Quilley has interpreted Leopold's Land Ethics to mean that ethics is a surface manifestation of deeper internal changes in intellectual emphasis, loyalties, affections and convictions (Leopold 1948, Quilley 2009). Sometimes, as we study it, the nature itself can prompt such a change. Hoover's article discusses nature, but his research should also influence the ethics of space exploration. It now seems that we should change the way we think about asteroids, comets and other small objects and, consequently, how we conduct our space-related activities. A confirmed discovery of life that has evolved outside Earth is a big step, but it is still just a beginning. After that, the next big task is to learn more about life in the universe. How common is life? How diverse is it? How complex? In what sort of environmental conditions can life survive? These are big questions, and therefore the preservation of potential extraterrestrial life must be given a high priority even in activities where the primary goal is not directly related to studying extraterrestrial life. As humanity gains better ability to explore space, it should also prepare to make great discoveries by accident and as a byproduct of other space-related activities. On the other hand, as we learn more about life, our ability to search for it from space will also improve. Hoover's research, as well as Dr. Wolfe-Simon's (Wolfe-Simon et al. 2010) recent research on bacterium GFAJ-1 capable of utilizing arsenic in its biochemistry, indicate that our understanding on what life is capable of surviving, is undergoing great changes. Therefore, we have to conclude that our ability to make educated assumptions of where life can and can not survive for extended periods of time, and where we might find traces of extinct life, is still limited. At this time, any activity based on assumptions instead of empirical studies is a gamble that has a potential to severely damage one of our most important scientific interests. Instead, there is a possibility that instead of a source of natural resources and a laboratory, space is in fact more like Leopoldian land: a community of a kind, containing many homes for many kinds of life. In order to avoid causing irreparable damage, we should utilize the ALARP principle and adopt research policies that take into account the possibility of discovering life from even unexpected places (Reiman 2010). I believe than an international binding agreement should be made, that prior to any activity that has the potential of destroying life potentially present on asteroids or other astral bodies, it must be scientifically studied and it must be concluded that the body in question does not contain life or scientifically valuable traces of it. Now is the time to exercise intellectual humility and adjust space policy to reflect that attitude. An intellectually humble attitude is not assuming that unless specifically proven otherwise, space and small objects in it are lifeless. Instead, we should base our understanding on growing scientific knowledge and search for signs of life from bodies that interest us prior to engaging in potentially destructive activities. While our knowledge is still far from complete, this approach demonstrates our commitment to learn and to act upon knowledge rather than most convenient assumptions. According to Tom Colwell, environment should not be considered an object but rather a complex consisting of space-time and thing-person connections, for which the concept of relation does not properly convey the ecological sense in which humans are implicated in the complex (Colwell 1987). This attitude suits well to considering space environments that are essentially unknown and may harbor unknown forms of life and could be interpreted to refine the Leopoldian idea of space as a land. Hoover's research identifies a wide variety of celestial bodies as potential havens for life: carbonaceus meteorites, asteroids, comets and even icy lunar environments. Small astral bodies seem to be much more than rocks and dirty snowballs floating in space with no more value than the value of the raw materials they contain. Even if life forms discovered in bodies such as comets and asteroids turn out to be relatively uninteresting microbial fossiles, their discovery has the potential to improve our knowledge on questions such as how common life is in near space, where and in what kind of environments has it originated, how resilient it is, how common and how serious are evolutionary challenges that life forms have encountered. Besides scientific value that extraterrestrial microbes represent, we should also value fragility of life and space environments (Williamson 2006). Taking this fragility as one of the starting points for ethics of space exploration gives humanity an opportunity to exercise its best qualities: sustainability, careful consideration and compassion. Fragility also serves as a mirror that tells us what kind of people we really are. Are we the kind of noble and peaceful explorers that science fiction so eagerly portrays us to be? Or are we just a race of dreamers who can dream up beautiful worlds but in reality ends up building a world where greed justifies everything and the only rights that are respected are the rights of the strongest? As we gain technological ability to extend our influence into the space, do we also gain wisdom to exercise it to the greatest good or are we only capable of thinking our limited short term interests? We have a choice in these matters. In the past, humanity's space exploration has already seen scientific experiments that had the potential to cause great harm for life, had any life forms been present on the study sites (Reiman 2010). As we learn more about the nature, not only our scientific knowledge should improve, but this improvement should evolve into an understanding and affect the way scientific research is conducted in the future. According to Geoffrey Frasz, Aldo Leopold, one of the most influential figures in environmental ethics and originator of land ethics discussed above, is seen as a hero not because he had the right ideas from the beginning of his career, but because he reformed his life and thinking when he adopted policies guided by environmental and ecological insights that he eventually came to love (Frasz 1993). We should strive to follow his example. References Abyzov, S.S., Mitskevich, I.N., Poglazova, M.N., Barkov, M.N., Lipenkov, V.Ya., Bobin, N.E., Koudryashov, B.B., Pashkevich, V.M., 1998: Antarctic ice sheet as a model in search of Life on other planets. Advances in Space Research, 22, 363-368. Abyzov, S. S., Gerasimenko, L. M., Hoover, R. B., Mitskevich, I. N., Mulyukin, A. L., Poglazova, M. N., Rozanov, A. Yu., 2005: Microbial Methodology in Astrobiology. SPIE, 5906, 0A 1-17. Callicott, J. Baird 2000: Introduction to Ethics. http://fore.research.yale.edu/disciplines/ethics/index.html. Page accessed on 3 Mar 2011. Colwell, Tom 1987: Ethics of Being Part of the Nature Environmantal Ethics vol.9, Summer 1987. p. 99-113. Frasz, Geoffrey 1993: Environmental Virtue Ethics: A New Direction for Environmental Ethics. Environmental Ethics vol.15, p.259-274. Hoover, R. B. and Pikuta, E. V. 2010: Psychrophilic and Psychrotolerant Microbial Extremophiles. In: Polar Microbiology: The Ecology, Biodiversity and Bioremediation Potential of Microorganisms in Extremely Cold Environments. (Asim K Bej, Jackie Aislabie, and Ronald M Atlas, Eds.) pp. 115-151. Hoover, Richard B. 2011: Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites: Implications to Life on Comets, Europa, and Enceladus Journal of Cosmology, 2011, Vol 13, In Press. Leopold, Aldo 1949: A Sand County Almanac and Sketches from Here and There. Oxford University Press. Quilley, Stephen 2009: The Land Ethic as an Ecological Civilizing Process: Aldo Leopold, Norbert Elias and Environmental Philosophy. Environmental Ethics, vol. 31, p.115-134. Reiman, Saara 2010: On Sustainable Exploration of Space and Extraterrestrial Life. Journal of Cosmology Vol.12 p. 3894-3903. White, Lynn Jr 1967: The Roots of Our Ecological Crisis. Science, 155, 1203-1207. Williamson, Mark 2006: Space: The Fragile Frontier. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Virginia. Wolfe-Simon Felisa et al 2010.: A Bacterium That Can Grow Using Arsenic Instead of Phosphorus. Science DOI 10.1126/science.1197258



8. Can a Meteorite Falling on Earth Originate from Earth?

Patrick Godon, Ph.D.,

Astronomy & Astrophysics, Villanova University, Villanova, PA Hoover (2011) presents firm evidence of fossils of bacteria embedded inside the bulk of CI1 Carbonaceous meteorites, based both on the physical appearance (studied with electronic microscope technology) and composition of the samples (using spectroscopy). While the evidence clearly indicates that the meteorite at one time was populated with bacterial life, could this meteorite be part of an object that earlier separated from Earth due a massive impact? In other words: is this meteorite really of extra-terrestrial origin? The text of Hoover indicates some striking similarities between the meteorites and Earth material as follows: “The CI1 carbonaceous chondrites are the most primitive of all known meteorites in terms of solar elemental abundances and the highest content of volatiles. Carbonaceous chondrites are a major clan of chondritic meteorites that contain water, several weight % Carbon, Mg/Si ratios at near solar values, and oxygen isotope compositions that plot below the terrestrial fractionation line. The CI1 meteorites are distinguished from other carbonaceous chondrites by a complete absence of chondrules and refractory inclusions (destroyed by aqueous alteration on the parent body) and by their high degree (~20%) of indigenous water of hydration. The aqueous alteration took place on the parent bodies of the CI1 meteorites at low temperature (<50 C) and produced hydrated phyllosilicates similar to terrestrial clays, carbonates and oxides magnetite Fe3O4 and limonite Fe 2 O 3 . nH 2 O. Sparsely distributed throughout the black rock matrix are fragments and crystals of olivine, pyroxene and elemental iron, presolar diamonds and graphite and insoluble organic matter similar to kerogen." The CI1 carbonaceous chondrites are extremely rare. Although over 35,000 meteorites have been recovered there are only nine CI1 meteorites known on Earth. The particulates of the CI1 meteorites are cemented together by water soluble evaporite minerals such as epsomite (MgSO 4 .7H 2 O) and gypsum (CaSO 4 . 2 H 2 O). These stones disintegrate immediately after they are exposed to liquid water, and disaggregate into tiny particles as the water soluble salts that cement the insoluble mineral grains together in the rock matrix dissolve. A number of biominerals and organic chemicals (that are interpreted as biomarkers when found in Earth rocks) have been detected in CI1 carbonaceous meteorite. These include weak biomarkers including some that are produced in nature by biological processes but can also be fomed by catalyzed chemical reactions. However, the CI1 meteorites also contain a host of strong biomarkers for which there are no known abiotic production mechanisms. It is not clear when life first appeared on Earth, though it has been speculated that it could have occurred before the late heavy bombardment, as soon as the Earth had time to cool down from the early heavy bombardment (Joseph 2010; Wickramasinghe 2011). If indeed life appeared on Earth more than 4 billion years ago, the late heavy bombardment as well as other later catastrophic collisions (like the one that might have wiped the dinosaurs 65 million years ago) have certainly ejected some earthly material back into space. These objects of terrestrial origins contained primitive life forms which may or may not have died as the catastrophic events took place. These terrestrial objects are expected to have many similarities with terrestrial material at the time of the original impacts. There should be only a small fraction of these terrestrial objects forming small bodies, either directly or by having merged with extra-terrestrial objects, and an even smaller fraction would have kept their original physical state. From that small fraction of terrestrial objects in orbit in our Solar System (possibly in the vicinity of Earth’s orbit or closer to the Sun) some might eventually find their way back to Earth in the form of meteorites and I suggest that meteorites presenting evidence of bacterial fossils as well as striking similarities with Earth’s material might just be such objects. If correct, then these objects are not less important than if they were of extra-terrestrial origin, as they present fossils of bacteria from Earth dating back to when some of these impacts took place. Any meteorite presenting even the slightest evidence of bacterial fossils will have to be scrutinized not only for terrestrial contamination after it fell on Earth, but also one would have to unambiguously prove that the meteorite did not originate from Earth in the first place. References Hoover, R.B. (2011), Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites: Implications to Life on Comets, Europa, and Enceladus. Journal of Cosmology, 13. Joseph, R. (2010). Life on Earth, Came From Other Planets. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge. Wickramasinghe, C. (2011). The Biological Big Bang: Panspermia and the Origins of Life. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge.



9. Life in CI1 Carbonaceous Chondrites?

Martin D. Brasier, Ph.D.,

Dept of Earth Sciences, Parks Road, Oxford, UK These meteoritic 'microfossils' provoke fascinating questions about the lines of reasoning and evidence needed to confirm whether very ancient candidate structures are biologically credible, or whether they are better explained by abiogenic processes and contamination. Such a debate has been going on since the time of Darwin and recently re-emerged when the 3.46 Ga Apex ‘microfossils’ were questioned (Brasier et al. 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006). Microfossils from the early Earth and beyond require criteria. These include evidence for a habitable context; biology-like morphology; and biology-like processing. Ancient filamentous structures should not be accepted as biological until possibilities of their non-biological origin, or contaminant origin, have been examined. Candidate biologic signals should always be placeable within a well-defined history. In terms of biology-like morphology, they should not form part of a continuum with other non-biological structures. They should ideally show distributions consistent with biological behaviour rather than with self-organizing structures (see Brasier et al. 2005, 2006). In terms of processing, more than a single metabolic tier should ideally be demonstrated, as with evidence from extracellular polymeric substances, organominerals or isotopic fractionations. Finally, the material should be available for scientific loan, for scientifically repeated tests and public scrutiny. And, of course, the null hypothesis of an abiogenic origin from several sources should be falsified. How do the structures illustrated by Hoover (2011) from CI1 carbonaceous meteorites meet with these criteria? 1. In terms of context, a history of genesis for this rock, and for a confident placement of those structures within that storyline, has yet to be provided. This is now an essential step for early life work in the Earth Sciences. 2. In terms of syngenicity, these samples have been sitting around in laboratories for between 205 and 73 years. It is well known that microbial contaminants can penetrate deep into such rocks, even during storage. The null hypothesis, therefore, is that many of these objects (e.g., Hoover 2011, figs 1, 3) may be prokaryotic contaminants. 3. In terms of technique, multiple techniques are essential. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) of fractures is notorious for making contaminants look integral to any given rock. EDS is poor at the best of times for detecting carbon and nitrogen. It is seldom employed in early life studies, where it has now been surpassed by Raman, TEM and NanoSIMS (e.g. Brasier et al. 2002, Wacey et al. 2008a). 4. In terms of geochemical techniques, my understanding is that quantitative analyses require an instrument has been calibrated with a set of standards, for a specific working distance and for a flat surface, as for example on polished rock. Different setups (beam current, working distance etc) on different SEM machines should be avoided. 5. In terms of nitrogen, different organic materials will lose nitrogen at different rates depending on the organism and its context. Nitrogen cannot be measured accurately with EDS, and the comparisons are open to questions about selectivity. 6. In terms of the amino acids said to be present, it can be argued that the values from filaments are being swamped by the bulk values from the carbonaceous chondrites themselves. 7. In terms of morphology, several (for example Hoover 2011, figs 2-5) could be said to resemble abiogenic ambient inclusion trails (AITs), commonly mistaken for cyanobacterial microfossils, including by Hoover and his colleagues (see Zhegallo et al. 2000). Such AITs are formed by the forward projection of minerals under gaseous pressure through a solid or liquid medium Such trails can be recognised by their distinctive infillings with secondary minerals; by longitudinal striations along their edges; by their irregular or polygonal cross sections; by their curved and twisted patterns; and by a tendency for some of them to cross cut or branch; Terminal mineral grains may even mimic 'heterocysts' (see Brasier et al. 2006, McLoughlin et al. 2007; Wacey et al. 2008a, 2008b). Many AITs have a similar composition to those described from the meteorites by Hoover (filaments with margins enriched in carbon and infilled with sulphur and silica rich minerals). Such abiogenic scenarios require rigorous investigation. Figure 1. Molds of ambient inclusion trails (AITs) which provide one of several null hypotheses for filaments reported from the carbonaceous chondrites by Hoover (2011). a, AITs from organic- rich the Doushantuo phosphorites of south China; b, an AIT from organic-rich phosphate of the Soltanieh Formation in Iran. Scale bar =10µm. Note the characteristic longitudinal striations (white arrow) and the ‘heterocyst’ like termination formed by a mineral (black arrow). References Brasier, M.D., Green O.R., Jephcoat, A.P., Kleppe, A.K., Van Kranendonk, M.J., Lindsay, J.F., Steele, A. & Grassineau, N.V. (2002). Questioning the evidence for Earth's oldest fossils. Nature 416, 76-81. Brasier, M., Green, O., Lindsay, J. & Steele, A. (2004). Earth's oldest (c. 3.5Ga) fossils and the 'Early Eden Hypothesis’: questioning the evidence. Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere 34, 257-260. Brasier, M.D., Green, O.R., Lindsay, J.F., McLoughlin, N., .F., Steele, A. & Stoakes, C. (2005). Critical testing of Earth’s oldest putative fossil assemblage from the ~3.5 Ga Apex chert, Chinaman Creek, Western Australia. Precambrian Research 140, 55-102, 22 plates. Brasier, M.D., McLoughlin, N., Green, O. & Wacey, D. (2006). A fresh look at the fossil evidence for early Archaean cellular life. In Cavalier-Smith, T., Brasier, M.D. & Embley, T..M. (Eds) Major Steps in Cell Evolution: Palaeontological, Molecular and Cellular evidence of their Timing and Global Effects. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, volume 361, 887-902. Hoover, R.B. (2011). Fossils of cyanobacteria in CI1 carbonaceous meteorites. Implications to life on comets, Europa and Encaladus. Journal of Cosmology, 13, xxx. McLoughlin, N., Brasier, M.D., Wacey, D., Green, O.R. & Perry, R. (2007). On biogenicity criteria for endolithic microborings on early Earth and beyond. Astrobiology. 7. 10-26. Wacey, D., Kilburn, M., McLoughlin, N., Parnell, J. , Stoakes, C., Grosvenor, C. & Brasier, M.D. (2008a).Use of NannoSIMS in the search for early life on Earth: ambient inclusion trails in a c, 3400 Ma sandstone. Journal of the Geological Society, 165, 43-53. Wacey, D., Kilburn, M., Stoakes, C.A., Aggleton, H. & Brasier, M.D. (2008b). Ambient inclusion trails: their recognition, age range and applicability to early life on Earth. In Y. Dilek et al. (Ed.) Links Between Geological Processes, Microbial Activities and Evolution of Life. 113-134. Springer, Berlin. Zhegallo, E, Rozanov, A.Yu, Ushatinskaya, G.T., Hoover, R.B., Gerasimenko, L.M., & Ragozina, A.L. (2000). Atlas of microorganisms from ancient phosphorites of Khubsugul, Mongolia. NASA TP29901, 167pp.



10. Bioinformatic Analysis of Cyanobacterium Nitrogen Fixation Genes in Support of the Cylindrospermopsis-like Fossil Explanation of Meteorite Microscopic Data

Todd Holden, Ph.D., George Tremberger Jr., Tak Cheung, Ph.D.

CUNY Queensborough Community College, Bayside NY 11364 Hoover makes a compelling case that the filamentous-heterocyst structures observed in CI1 meteorites are likely to be fossils of extraterrestrial microscopic organisms with phenotypes similar to some cyanobacteria (Hoover, 2011). Among the many observations the absence of nitrogen as well as several crucial amino-acids is good evidence against the possibility of terrestrial biological contamination. Chemical analysis also shows that the proposed fossil structures are dissimilar to the matrix materials. However, with a topic as essential and historically fraught with controversy, even this weighty evidence is not yet completely convincing. There is certain to be attacks claiming that the microstructure could be caused by abiotic means, but whether a mechanism can be found that can explain the chemical information is unclear at this time. In this commentary, we address the question of what sort of evidence of extraterrestrial life one might expect to encounter. With little material of extraterrestrial origin available for study, we are unlikely to see remnants other than ubiquitous organisms from a life-sustaining environment. On the other hand, single cell organisms may be too small to leave discernable traces, unless they are found alive in their native extraterrestrial environment. Earth’s prokaryotes are among the simplest life forms that show distinguishing structures that could leave behind fossilized evidence, avoiding the complications of sustaining life in space and terrestrial biological contamination. The great diversity of cyanobacterial morphology certainly includes multicellular filaments such as those presented by Hoover (Stucken et al., 2010). Although the evidence suggests only morphological similarity, cyanobacteria are excellent candidates for the type of extraterrestrial life that we might expect to find, due to their omnipresence, adaptability, and variety on Earth. We would like to comment on the genetic diversity of cyanobacteria that we found in our previous studies of the nitrogen fixation genes (Tremberger et al., 2010). Nitrogen fixation genes NifH, NifD, and NifK have been studied phylogenetically, and recent results on NifD and NifK genes provide strong support for the placement of Actinobacteria (Frankia) nitrogen fixation genes at the base of the combined Cyanobacteria-Proteobacteria clades (Hartmann and Barnum, 2010). A study using phylogenetic analysis of the nitrogen fixation gene cluster suggests a common ancestor for several cyanobacteria (Welsh et al., 2008). We have studied the bioinformatics of several cyanobacteria nucleotide sequences of NifH, NifD and NifK genes in terms of Shannon entropy and fractal dimension (Tremberger et al., 2010). The fractal dimension analysis of nucleotide fluctuation uses the nucleotide atomic number to form a numerical series. We found that the suggested common ancestor referred to above gave rise to a correlation in Shannon mono-nucleotide entropy of NifD (Mo-Fe nitrogenase alpha chain) and NifK (Mo-Fe nitrogenase beta chain). A fractal dimension correlation exists between the NifH (coding the Fe nitrogenase) and NifD sequences. The observed correlation suggests the ability of these organisms to adapt to evolutionary pressure even at the DNA level. At the protein level, these genes bear only slight resemblance. For example, a comparison of the NifH and NifD amino acid sequences in BLASTP generates 17% query coverage at E-value of 1.2, showing very little similarity (NifH Genbank ACB49910 & NifD Genbank ACB49911). The nucleotide fractal dimension correlation of NifH with that of NifD across the studied cyanobacteria would point to similar evolutionary selection on positional ordering of nucleotides. To relate our study to Hoover’s comparison of the meteorite fossils with Cylindrospermopsis, we added Cylindrospermopsis raciborskii CS-505, which has the smallest genome among free-living filamentous cyanobacteria, to our regression study. In addition, we added UCYN-A, a unicellular cyanobacterium with only nitrogen fixation and no photosynthesis activity (Tripp et al., 2010), as well as the smallest known genome sized cyanobacterium (1.5 Mb compared to the studied common ancestor cyanobacteria of ~ 5 to 9 Mb). These organisms fit our general trend, although imperfectly, possibly due to their more distant relation to the seven cyanobacteria studied by Welsh et al. Therefore, the Cylindrospermopsis-like organism’s once-upon-a-time existence outside Earth would be an interpretation consistent with Hoover’s reported data. For these reasons, and those given in Hoover’s paper, the picture of fossils of a cyanobacteriumlike species explains simply the morphological and chemical makeup of the samples. Further evidence will be needed to give a definitive conclusion as to the validity of the proposed find of fossils in these samples. Contradictory evidence would likely come in the form of a purely chemical and physical explanation of the sample chemistries and morphologies based on the likely histories of the meteorites. Supporting evidence would come from studies on other cometlike meteorites or direct experiments in space. In the meantime, a simple putative model of extraterrestrial life can explain all of the current data reported by Hoover. References Hartmann L.S., Barnum S.R. (2010). Inferring the evolutionary history of Mo-dependent nitrogen fixation from phylogenetic studies of nifK and nifDK. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 71(1):70-85. Hoover, Richard B. (2011). Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites: Implications to Life on Comets, Europa, and Enceladus. Journal of Cosmology, 13 Stucken K., John U., Cembella A., Murillo A.A., Soto-Liebe K., et al. (2010). The Smallest Known Genomes of Multicellular and Toxic Cyanobacteria: Comparison, Minimal Gene Sets for Linked Traits and the Evolutionary Implications. PLoS ONE 5(2): e9235. Tremberger George, Jr., Holden T., Cheung E., et al. (2010). Cyanobacteria gene and protein sequences in diurnal oscillation metabolic processes. Proc. SPIE 7819, 78190U Tripp H. James, Bench Shellie R., Turk Kendra A., Foster Rachel A., Desany Brian A., Niazi Faheem, Affourtit Jason P., Zehr Jonathan P. (2010). Metabolic streamlining in an open-ocean nitrogen-fixing cyanobacterium, Nature, 464, 90-94. Welsh Eric A., Liberton Michelle, Stocke Jana, et al. (2008). The genome of Cyanothece 51142, a unicellular diazotrophic cyanobacterium important in the marine nitrogen cycle. PNAS., 105, 15094 – 15099.



12. Microfossils in Meteors and Comet Dust: A Vindication of Panspermia

Chandra Wickramasinghe , Ph.D.

Centre for Astrobiology, Cardiff University, UK The detection of microfossils in carbonaceous meteorites (Hoover 2011) adds to the substantial body of evidence that now supports theories of panspermia. At the dawn of the 20th century Nobel Laureate Svante Arrhenius (1908/2009) placed the ancient theory of panspermia in a scientific context in his book Worlds in the Making. In the 1970’s and 1980’s one the twentieth century’s foremost astronomers, Fred Hoyle and the present writer (Hoyle and Wickramasinghe 1981, 1982, 2000) promulgated a new theory of cometary panspermia. The basic idea was that the de novo emergence of life in the diminutive setting of the Earth is untenable, and that the origin of life must be considered in a pan-astronomical or cosmological context as a possibly unique event. According to this theory, following such a cosmic origin microorganisms remain frozen in cometary bodies, and are also transported within comets from one location to another. Interstellar dust contains a minute fraction of viable microorganisms expelled in the tails of comets along with a vast preponderance of dead/fossilised microbes and their degradation products (Wickramasinghe et al., 2010). Surviving microbes are continually recycled and vastly amplified within the warm liquid interiors of comets during the initial phases of the formation of any planetary system. Inevitable exchanges of biotic material between planets, comets as well as embryonic planetary systems provide ample scope for Darwinian evolution on a cosmological scale (Joseph 2000; Joseph & Schild 2010a,b). The theory of cometary panspermia is exempt from the criticism of non-falsifiability that so plagued earlier versions of panspermia. Various predictions of this theory can be identified and tested. The prediction that comets expel organic and biological material in various stages of degradation is imminently testable using modern astronomical techniques. After the 1986 missions to comet Halley, the organic content of comets was amply verified. A wide range of complex organic molecules has indeed been observed in comets, including the results of insitu studies of cometary nuclei following the Deep Impact and Stardust missions (Wickramasinghe et al., 2010). Vast quantities of organic molecules including PAH’s discovered in interstellar clouds are better understood as biodegradation products, rather than as evidence for the dubious thesis of ubiquitious prebiology (Joseph 2009; Wickramasinghe 2010). Figure 1 shows spectroscopic evidence in support of the former possibility.

Figure 1: Upper: Extended red emission arising from galactic and extragalactic nebulae, matching data on the fluorescence of biochemicals – in chloroplasts and phytochrome. Lower: The 2175A absorption feature in the spectrum of a very distant galaxy SBS (redshift z=0.83, light emitted at a time when the universe was half its present age), matching the behaviour of biological aromatics. A more startling and controversial prediction of cometary panspermia is that material from comets reaching Earth contains not just organic molecules but evidence of life itself. During annual meteor showers such as the Leonids, cometary debris in the form of centimetre-sized particles burn up as they enter the atmosphere at high speed. Smaller clumps of comet dust enter the atmosphere steadily at the rate of about 50 tonnes per day, and these particles do not burn up on entry. Occasionally much larger bodies – meteorites - , which can be regarded as chunks of spent comets, also make their way through the atmosphere. Outer surfaces of such meteorites are ablated by friction with the atomosphere, but their interiors remain cold during the re-entry process in a way that fragile organic structures could be preserved (Wickramasinghe 2011). Is there evidence for microbial life in extraterrestrial bodies that reach Earth? In January 2001 clumps of cometary dust were collected aseptically in the stratosphere from heights that are too high to loft 10 micrometre sized of dust from the Earth’s surface. We have reported evidence of both fossilised microbes (acritarchs) and living microorganisms in the cometary dust, the analysis being from electron microscopy and EDX studies (Wickramasinghe et al., 2011). Electron micrography and EDX data for putative acritarchs (common fossils in the geological sediments) are shown in Figure 2a. Images of living microbes are shown in Figure 2b. Evidence for living microbes could, if one so wished, be dismissed as contamination, however unlikely this might be in view of the stringent containment protocols that were adopted. However, the morphologies fossil microbes that we have discovered, combined with other biosignatures including a nitrogen deficit, are more difficult to ignore.

Figure 2a: Putative fossil bacteria (acritarchs, commonly found in Earth sediments) with cracked outer shells, and a conspicuous N deficiency characteristic of fossils.

Figure 2b: SEM images of putative living microbes with evidence of biofilm (A,C,D). B is a confocal microscope image of a clump of cells fluourescing with the application of a carbocyanine dye, indicating viability of cells. In the 1960’s there were serious claims (Claus and Nagy 1961) that bacterial fossils exist in meteorites, but these were dismissed quickly because in a few instances contamination was actually proved. Nearly two decades later the problem of microbial fossils in carbonaceous meteorites was re-examined by Hans D. Pflug (1984) with special attention being paid to avoid the criticisms of earlier. Pflug used state-of-the-art equipment to prepare ultra-thin sections (< 1mm) of the Murchison meteorite in a contaminant free environment. Thin slices of the Murchison meteorite were placed on membrane filters and exposed to hydrofluoric acid vapour. In this way in situ demineralisation was achieved, the mineral component being removed though the pores of the filter, leaving carbonaceous structures indigenous to the meteorite in tact. A wealth of morphologies with distinctive biological characteristics was thus revealed. Examples are shown in Figs 3a and 3b. Fig 3a shows structures uncannily similar to a well-known bacterium pedomicrobium, and Fig. 3b displays a clump of nanometric-sized particles with internal structure similar to a modern influenza virus. In view of the techniques used in the preparation of the slides, it could be asserted with confidence that all these structures are indigenous to the meteorite, not contaminants. Microprobe analysis using laser mass spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy, UV and IR spot spectroscopy were used to determine composition as well as to establish the indigenous nature of individual particles. Pflug’s laser mass spectrum analysis on one of these particles is shown in Fig. 3c. From the disposition of Fig.3c, with many of the peaks yet to be unambiguously identified, we see that the particles with these biological-type morphologies also have chemical signatures fully consistent with degraded or fossilised microbial matter.

Figure 3a: Left panels – pedomicrobium morphology in Murchison (supported by independent biomarkers) Right panel is modern pedomicrobium – Data from Hans D. Pflug.

Figure 3b Pflug’s Murchison meteorite structures resembling influenza virus

Figure 4: Right Panel: Richard Hoover’s cyanobacterial microfossils in Murchison; Left panel – Modern living cyanobacteria Recent work by Richard Hoover (2011) appears to be even more secure from the criticism of contamination. Fig. 4 shows one of very many organic structures identified by Hoover in the Murchison meteorite. The similarities of morphology between living cyanobacteria and the Murchison fossils are staggering to say the least. In addition to morphology Hoover points out that the putative fossils are deficient in N compared with modern organisms, indicating that the structures cannot be modern contaminants. It is also exceedingly difficult to understand how modern cyanobacteria can be sucked into the interiors of infalling meteorites – meteorites are heated and expel volatiles as they come in, they do not suck in terrestrial microorganisms, particularly those with a Nitrogen deficiency. The pioneering work of Pflug and Hoover leaves little room to doubt that carbonaceous meteorites such as the Murchison meteorite (that fell near Victoria, Australia in 1969) have unequivocal evidence of microbial fossils. The criticism that this constitutes an extraordinary claim for which extraordinary evidence is needed is facile to say the least. The more extraordinary claim is to justify that life is centred on the Earth, and that Earth-life is in some way special to our minuscule abode in the universe. The presence of fossils of alien life in the dust and fragments of comets would provide strong support for cometary panspermia, and indeed confirm our cosmic ancestry beyond doubt. The emerging picture is that the origin of life was a unique cosmological event that was accomplished within planetary interiors within interiours of cometary type bodies within a few million years of the Big Bang (Gibson et al 2010). Comets are carriers and amplifiers of cosmic life and Earth was seeded with such life some 4 billion years ago, and continues to be seeded even to the present day. On this picture self-similar life forms must exist abundantly throughout the entire universe. These conclusions are so far-reaching that further studies are urgently needed for their absolute and final confirmation. If this can be done the implications for science and humanity will be profound. The cost of such projects would be only a minute fraction of that involved in manned space flights and probes to study planets and comets that are already in train. And the payoff would be well worth the effort and the cost. References Arrhenius, S. (1908) Worlds in the making (Harper, London); Reprinted, Journal of Cosmology, 1, Claus, G., and Nagy, B., (1961). Organised elements in meteorites, Nature, 192, 594-596. Pflug, H.D. (1984). Ultrafine structure of organic matter in meteorites, in Fundamental Studies and the Future of Science - ed C. Wickramasinghe) Cardiff University College Press. Pflug, H.D. Heinz, B. (1997). Analysis of fossil organic nanostructures – terrestrial and extraterrestrial, ProcSPIE, 3111, 86-97. C. Gibson, N.Chandra Wickramasinghe, Rudolph E. Schild, Primordial planets, comets and moons foster life in the cosmos, ProcSPIE, 7819-34. Hoover, R. B. (2011). Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites: Implications to Life on Comets, Europa, and Enceladus. Journal of Cosmology, 13 Hoyle, F. and Wickramasinghe, N.C. (1981). Comets and the Origin of Life, (ed. C. Ponnamperuma). Hoyle, F. and Wickramasinghe, N.C. (1982) Proofs that Life is Cosmic (Govt of Sri Lanka Press) (www.panspermia.org/proofsthatlifeiscosmic.pdf). Hoyle, F. and Wickramasinghe, N.C. (2000), Astronomical Origins of Life: Steps towards Panspermia Kluwer Academic. Joseph, R. (2000) Astrobiology, the origin of life, and the Death of Darwinism. University Press, California. Joseph, R. (2009). Life on earth came from other planets. Journal of Cosmology, 1, 1-56. Joseph R. Schild, R. (2010a). Biological Cosmology and the Origins of Life in the Universe. Journal of Cosmology, 5, 1040-1090. Joseph R. Schild, R. (2010b). Origins, Evolution, and Distribution of Life in the Cosmos: Panspermia, Genetics, Microbes, and Viral Visitors From the Stars. Journal of Cosmology, 7, 1616-1670. Wickramasinghe, N.C. (2010). The astrobiological case for our cosmic ancestry, Int. J. Astrobiology, 9(2), 119-129. Wickramasinghe, C. (2011). The Biological Big Bang: Panspermia and the Origins of Life. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge. Wickramasinghe, J.T., Wickramasinghe, N.C., Napier, W.M. (2010). Comets and the Origin of Life. World Scientific Pub. Wickramasinghe, N.C, Wallis, M.K., Gibson, C.H., Wallis, J., S.Al-Mufti and Nori Miyake (2011), Bacterial morphologies in carbonaceous meteorites and comet dust, ProcSPIE 7819-35.



12. The Discovery of Fossil Evidence of Extraterrestrial LIfe in Meteors

Elena Pikuta, Ph.D.

University of Alabama, Huntsville, Alabama The research and findings reported by Hoover (2011) began 10 years ago. His article represents a sensational discovery which will has the potential to change our understanding on the origin of biosphere, and which has profound implications for biology, astrophysics, and cosmology. The results of this investigation conducted on unique samples of CI1 carbonaceous meteorites has revealed new unknown data which was analyzed and interpreted according to the current standards in science using highly sensitive laboratory techniques. While conducting this pioneering work, the author had faced difficulties associated with differentiation of fossilized remnants of microorganisms so as to distinguish them from any possibility of modern contamination. His work is remarkable as he had to discover and employ the most rigorous validation requirements for biological fossils in meteorites. All of this work took enormous time and energy. Furthermore, morphological identification itself involved the participation of world-known authorities in different fields of microbiology, geology, and paleontology. Hoover devoted his life to these pursuits and spent enormous time in consultations with specialists from numerous institutions and countries, organization of conferences and meetings. The result was the establishment of the commission for improvement and validation of biomarkers in meteorites. Hoover's article became possible because of all these uneasy tasks were successfully solved after 10 years of hard work. Moreover, I would like to emphasize the importance of development of specific instrumentation without which this work would probably not exist. Only the application of Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) allowed for measurements of element composition along with receiving high quality images. During these measurements, Hoover came to a conclusion that modern bacterial contamination differs from embedded fossils in meteorites by several criteria. These criteria became biomarker standards for the validation process of microfossils. As control measurements. Hoover applied divers biological samples from different (by time) sample sites; they included mammoth hair, materials from Egyptian mummies, Archaean rocks with fossilized Cyanobacteria, insects sealed within amber, trilobites, modern samples of Cyanobacteria, and living cultures of extremophilic bacteria. The comparative measurements demonstrated that microbial microfossils do not contain nitrogen and have a low ratio of some elements. Moreover, only 8 of 22 amino acids were detected in water/acid extracts of studied meteorites. An interesting working hypothesis about an extraterrestrial origin of the biological microfossils was developed based on the fact that several amino acids were missing in measured meteorite samples. In the introduction, Hoover outlines the definition and current classification of CI1 carbonaceous chondrites, and gave a brief history including the scientific developments that were available at that time to analyze the meteorites. Mostly, chemical analyses were performed for certain chemical elements and salts. No microscopic observations were reported for these meteorites. In this article Hoover presents data of Ivuna CI1 and Orguei CI1 meteorites studies. These meteorites are two of the five known CI1 carbonaceous meteorites, which are very rare and were documented by eyewitnesses as falls. The Orguei meteorite was found to contain 4.56 Gy magnetites, and that means its microfossils were originated before life developed on Earth. Let me stress this again: The Orguei meteor is older than Earth. On my opinion, the most exciting conclusion in this work is the finding that δ13C and D/H content of amino acids and other organics in meteorite samples are very consistent with an interpretation of comets as the parent bodies of the CI1 carbonaceous meteorites. In my opinion, Hoover was overly cautious in referring to the observed subjects as "complex filaments." Any experienced microbiologist can see these are fragments of cyanobacterial mats. In nature cyanobacterial mat represents a complex system, where symbiotic relations between algae (usually dominated by Cyanobacteria) and bacteria create tissue-like formations. Members of such a mat coexist on base of closely depended upon physiological functions, and the location of each participant is determined by red-ox potential, links in trophic chain, etc. Modern studied types of Cyanobacterial mats form the stromatolite structures that according to the paleontological records represent lithified remnants of predominant life forms on Early Earth (Precambrian). At least three to six months would be required to form such a mat, and the complexity of such structures is typically much higher than that associated with ordinary biofilm of contamination, which is usually dominated by monoculture of a substrate surface colonizer. In other words, Hoover discovered evidence of established bacterial colonies. Another important fact: The evidence that C/N and C/S ratios in investigated filaments were similar to ancient fossilized bio-materials and kerogens but very different from biological samples of living organisms proves that studied samples did not contain any modern bio-contamination. I would like to add several words about Taxonomy and Systematics of microorganisms. At present, Cyanobacteria are the subject for both botanical and bacteriological nomenclature. Bacteriological taxonomy uses phenotypic description and data of 16S rRNA sequence analysis. In botanical Systematics, the morphological description plays a central role in the determination of appropriate taxa for studied species. That is why algologists as well as paleontologists classify their samples exclusively based on observations, and why specialists of these fields can easily identify the species and the genus of well preserved fossils just by looking at images of cells. It is precisely for this reason that Richard Hoover dedicated his time to a scrupulous description of found fossils. However, he was also aided following numerous consultations at the Institutes of Microbiology, Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry, and Paleontology at Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Pasteur, Geological Institute at Royal Society of Belgium, etc.. It was the efforts of hundreds of scientists who made this work possible. As one of the results of this collaborative work, was the publication of the first atlas for astrobiology and paleontology with the best images of phosphorites in microfossils. The importance of Hoover work is unparalleled. Its implications will be reverberate through the halls of science for decades, and will only be surpassed with the discovery of extra-terrestrial life. Long time ago, one of the ancient Greek philosophers said "Per aspera ad astra!" ("Through the Thorns to the Stars"), and with these words I am finalizing my commentary. References Hoover, R. (2011). Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites, Journal of Cosmology, 13.



13. Understanding the Emergence of Life on Earth

Rosanna del Gaudio, Ph.D.,

Molecular Biology Laboratory, Dept of Biological Sciences, University Federico II, Via Mezzocannone 8, 80134, Naples, Italy The complexity of life, of even a single celled organism, has made it difficult to understand how life itself could spontaneously emerge from chemical processes on the early Earth. Not much is known about plausible pathways of pre-biotic evolution though theories abound (Russell, 2011). There is a growing of evidence indicating that "life" began in interstellar clouds perhaps in planets within these clouds, before the Solar System was formed (Hoyle and Wickramasinghe 2000, Gibson and Wickramasinghe 2010, Joseph and Schild 2010). It is also proposed that the evolution of life on Earth has been directly impacted by viral and microbial genes transferred from life forms outside our planet (Joseph 2000, 2009). Although no indisputable demonstration exists yet of extraterrestrial life, it is largely agreed that the presence of living systems on Earth may be the outcome of evolutionary processes started elsewhere in the Galaxy beginning with simple chemicals. Hoover (2011), in general agreement with the panspermia hypothesis, provides convincing experimental evidence of fossils of different types of bacteria, which are similar to Cyanobacteria, are present inside the most primitive of all known meteorites. This supports those theories that life on Earth and elsewhere originated from microbes (and/or spores) that survived in the nebula which gave birth to our solar system. As Joseph (2009) has convincingly argued, life did not originate as a simple and random specific event on Earth, but probably through cycles of repeated events in a long time history that led to selfassembling and reproducing systems that evolved somewhere in the galaxy and that were transported from one planet or its satellites to another via generally accepted mechanisms of star and planet formation. Assuming that life potentialities can express themselves only in proper conditions, there certainly is the possibility (and indeed plausibility based on experimental data) of panspermia as a mechanism of transmitting life between planetary bodies (Arrenhius, 1908) and for delivering alien life from one planet or moons to another and on Earth as a cosmological infection (Joseph, 2009). A thousand word commentary is not sufficient for discussing in detail different points of views, or abiotic geochemistry). Instead I will focus on a particular experimental fact reported in Hoover's paper. I fully agree with Richard Hoover that the finding of several of the amino acids, abundant in living bacteria and not found in CI1 carbonaceous meteorites and ancient terrestrial fossils, provides strong evidence that these meteorites are not contaminated by modern biological materials. Indeed, Hoover's discovery is a step forward, but perfectly in line with the most recent results of Pizzarello et al. (2011) on carbonaceous meteorites (CR2). However, the statement that fossilized microorganisms are present in meteorites could also be better supported. In other words, I am not convinced that the bacteriomorphic structures identified by Hoover are fossilized bacteria. Instead, I propose as provocative speculation that a variety of alien life different from modern earthly microrganisms are inside meteorites as well as inside rocks of our planet (Geraci et al. 2001) and other moons of our solar system. These "seeds of life", that is, actual living organisms are dormant and waiting, across time and space, for the right conditions to emerge, after which, they may begin to evolve. I can accept that life on Earth may have come from other planets (Joseph 2009) or from elsewhere (Hoover, 2011). However, I'm personally convinced, (on the base of results of my recent experiments, to be published) that early forms of life were also already present in our solar system at the time of Earth formation. In addition, my belief is that life has also could spontaneously emerge from abiotic geochemical processes on the early Earth as previously proposed (Martin and Russel 2003, del Gaudio et al 2009) and supported (del Gaudio et al. 2010). Therefore, I proposed a Multiple Root Genesis (MuRoGe) hypothesis in which deterministic and randomness views are not necessarily considered to be alternatives (del Gaudio et al, in preparation), but rather that both may have been at work. That is, life may have been deposited on this planet, but life may have also independently arose on this planet. In conclusion, even if forms of microbial life were delivered, are delivered or will be delivered by meteorites, evidence is not yet sufficient to consider an extra-terrestrial origin of life as a solid fact. Is it possible that different organisms subject to similar environmental conditions gradually converge and can mask evidence of independent biogenic events? Is it possible that alien life forms have begun their activity on the Earth using a different set of amino acids evolving up using the same basic molecules appearing analogous to life forms of the current life tree? I'm convincing that Hoover's results (2011) provide good evidence which may provide an answer to these questions. Basic questions remain: i) How and where were the first life forms formed? ii) What were the conditions on those planets which provided these life "seeds" with the necessary ingredients to kick-start life, and how did these conditions make life possible? Diffusion of Hoovers results (2011), collaborative works and continuation of this research line will be necessary in order to collect evidence of a "second" genesis giving a strong support to the theory that microbial life is a cosmic phenomenon. References Arrhenius, S. (1908). World in the Making. Harper & Brothers, New York. del Gaudio, R., D'Argenio, B., Geraci, G. (2009). Evidences of catalytic activities from and inside meteorites. Did they contribute to the early Life by increasing molecular complexity of a "primitive soup"?. Orig. of Life and Evol of Biosph., 39, 357-358. del Gaudio, R., Geraci, G., D'Argenio, B. (2010). Role of meteorites and terrestrial rocks in prebiotic chemistry. European Planetary Science Congress, 5, 907. Geraci, G., del Gaudio, R., D'Argenio, B. (2001). Microbes in rocks and meteorites: a new form of life unaffected by time, temperature, pressure. Rendiconti Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, s.9 (Mat) 12, 51-64. Gibson, C. H. and Wickramasinghe, N. C. (2010). The imperative of cosmic biology. Journal of Cosmology, 5, 1101-1120. Hoyle, F. and Wickramasinghe, N.C. (2000). Astronomical Origin of Life: Steps towards Panspermia. Kluwer Academic Press. Hoover, R. B. (2011). Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites: Implications to Life on Comets, Europa, and Enceladus. Journal of Cosmolog, 13, in press. Joseph, R. and Schild, R. (2010). Biological Cosmology and the Origins of Life in the Universe. Journal of Cosmology, 5, 1040-1090. Joseph, R. (2000) Astrobiology, the origin of life, and the Death of Darwinism. University Press, California. Joseph, R. (2009). Life on earth came from other planets. Journal of Cosmology, 1, 1-56. Martin, W. and Russel, M.J. (2003) on the origins of cells: A hypothesis for the evolutionary transition from abiotic geochemistry to chemoautotrophic prokaryotes, and from prokariotes to nucleated cells. Philosophical Tansactions, Biological Sciences, 358: 59-85. Pizzarello, S., Williams, L.B., Lehman, J., Holland, G.,H. and Yarger, J., L.(2011) Abundant ammonia in primitive asteroids and the case for a possible exobiology. Proceedings of the Academy of Science, ahead of print doi:10.1073/pnas.1014961108. Russell, M. (2011). Origins, Abiogenesis, and the Search for Life. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge.



14. Is The Origin of Life Really Alien?

Andrea Nani, Ph.D.1, Andrea E. Cavanna, M.D. Ph.D.2,

1School of Psychology, University of Turin, Italy. 2Department of Neuropsychiatry, BSMHFT and University of Birmingham, UK, 2Department of Neuropsychiatry, Institute of Neurology and University College London, UK The perennial question on the origin of Life on Earth has been revived by a recent discovery by Hoover (2011) of microfossils similar to Cyanobacteria, in freshly fractured slices of the interior surfaces of the Alais, Ivuna, and Orgueil CI1 carbonaceous meteorites. According to Hoover's article, Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy and other measures show that the microfossils are indigenous to these meteors and are similar to trichomic cyanobacteria and other trichomic prokaryotes such as filamentous sulfur bacteria. In other words, these fossilized bacteria are not Earthly contaminants but are the fossilized remains of organisms which lived in the parent bodies of these meteors, e.g. comets, moons, and other astral bodies. Hoover's article is plentiful of attractive implications as long as his hypotheses are going to be confirmed. One of the most intriguing possibilities is that life might find its origin in the very ancient past of our Solar System, when myriads of rocks, stardust, and comets were orbiting around the protosun in a chaotic rolling dance. The idea is that the essential elements of life were created in the hearts of comets and asteroids rather than being synthesized in the primordial atmosphere and surface of newborn planets. If this picture is correct, a further astonishing conclusion could be drawn: the process that leads from inorganic to organic matter – i.e. aminoacids, the bricks of every form of life as we know it – is more common and simple than we would have expected. In fact, following Hoover's interpretations of empirical data, we can conceive of the possibility that a considerable amount of organic components were spread out across the universe in the depths of rocky fragments which originated from the massive explosions of dying stars. It is not known, however, how long these rocky formations wandered through the space before landing on the Earth, Mars, Venus, Jupiter, etc., and their satellites. We know that billions of years ago the Earth and the other planets were subjected to heavy rains of comets and meteorites, which could have provided water and organic materials. The hypothesis that this turbulent period of the Solar System was pivotal for the origin of life on Earth is extremely fascinating. However the existence of alleged biological fossils in meteorites does not rule out the scenario that aminoacids and other organic constituents of living organisms were already present – at least in traces - on our planet. In addition, it is debatable whether the conditions necessary for life were better in the inner core of comets and asteroids or on the terrestrial surface, or even in the depths of the oceans. Moreover, the evidence that the organic material found in meteorites constitutes fossilized biological remnants of microorganisms like bacteria is far from being conclusive. The tests conducted on meteorite samples only prove that elements compatible with life are present in certain rocky fragments fallen on Earth. At present, it is not possible to affirm that comets and asteroids bear germs of life, nor that the organic elements identified were solely produced by metabolic activities of living organisms. Even the comparison between images of terrestrial bacteria and those obtained from the meteorite samples in order to distinguish filaments for motility and globules – possibly identified as heterocysts – is somewhat hazardous. Arguably, we need stronger evidence to conclude that what has been found in meteorites are fossilized traces of very ancient biological microorganisms. Specifically, we would welcome as less controversial evidence the discovery of protein residuals associated with biological functions, such as metabolic activities. If the globules identified by Hoover are truly fossilized heterocysts, only the discovery of such protein remnants within their structures could resolve the controversy in favor of the alien life beyond any doubt. The implications that life is everywhere, and that life on Earth may have come from other planets (Joseph 2010; Wickramasinghe 2011), is not justified by the relatively small samples on which the analyses were conducted. References Chambers, P. (1999), Life on Mars: The Complete Story. London: Blandford. Hoover, R.B. (2011), Fossils of Cyanobacteria in CI1 Carbonaceous Meteorites: Implications to Life on Comets, Europa, and Enceladus. Journal of Cosmology, 13. Joseph, R. (2010). Life on Earth, Came From Other Planets. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge. Wickramasinghe, C. (2011). The Biological Big Bang: Panspermia and the Origins of Life. Cosmology Science Publishers, Cambridge.



15. Cyanobacteria on Terrestrial Meteorites and Stromatolites on Mars

1 Geologist, Scientific collaborator of Earth Science Department, Florence University. Senior Researcher of CNR IRPI, pensioned. Via L. Repaci snc, 87036 Rende (CS), Italy. 2 Biologist, Researcher of CNR, ISAFOM-UOS, Via Cavour, 4/6, 87036 Rende (CS), Italy The Hoover paper (Hoover, 2011) is quite consistent and properly documented. The paper is very detailed and supported by a lot of high quality images at ultramicroscopic scale. Really the great news of these last findings is to have discovered in CI1 meteorites the remains of some microfossils very close in appearance to terrestrial cyanobacteria. The finding of these microfossils is very important since Hoover found not only “complex filaments”, but also clear fragments of a cyanobacterial mat resembling the typical stromatolite structures (Precambrian Age) on early terrestrial forms of life (Pikuta, see commentary n. 12). At the beginning of this saga, the possible existence of extraterrestrial life on meteorites was highly debated. Nagy et al. (1961) reported the occurrence of biogenic hydrocarbon in the Orgueil meteorite and, later, described some microstructures similar to microbial life forms on Earth (Nagy et al., 1963). Twenty years after, Engel and Nagy (1982) described some non-racemic aminoacids in the Murchinson meteorite that could be interpreted as possible evidence for a past extraterrestrial life. Fossil evidences of ancient microbial life was, originally, advanced by David McKay et al. (1996) on Martian meteorite ALH84001. McKay’s hypothesis was, later, refuted by other NASA research teams in 1998 (McKay et al., 1998) but some years after was resumed by Robert Folk and Lawrence Taylor (Folk and Taylor, 2002) who stated that the carbonate globules in ALH84001 were fossil nannobacteria associated with Fe-oxide precipitation and, afterwards other researchers found on these carbonate discs a lot of magnetite nanocrystals probably added by biogenic processes (Thomas-Keprta et al., 2009). The latest findings, released by NASA and spread in internet by Spaceflightnow (HYPERLINK "http://spaceflightnow.com"http://spaceflightnow.com) have revealed that, besides ALH84001, there are two additional Martian meteorites, named “Nakhla” and “Yamato 593”, with evident biological signatures of alien life on the Red Planet. Several reports have been advanced that the apparent microbial structures shown by Hoover may be the result of a contamination process which has affected the meteorites over time (Brasier et al., 2002). At the same time other scientists have pointed out that there are good reasons to believe that there is no contamination. We briefly recall: 1) the accuracy of sampling, sealing and conservation, well documented at least for one of these meteorites (Murchison); 2) the biological features of microbial life in the meteorite was restricted to freshly fractured interior portions of the stones exposed only after cracking and, therefore, with no contact with the terrestrial environment; 3) the short time of at air exposition in comparison to the massive occurrence of cianobacteria; 4) the long time of bacterial coexistence is proved by their permineralisation; 5) the cohesive nature of condrites, generally cracking along new surfaces, as confirmed by the rupture of a pre-existing microfossils; 6) the massive presence of forms of life, not limited to the simple surface of investigation; 7) the absence of such form in a lot of other examined meteorites, over a long time exposed to the air contamination in spite of their natural fracturing. Indeed, the absence of nitrogen as well as the lack of several crucial aminoacids, is a good evidence against the possibility of any terrestrial biological contamination. Brasier (Brasier, see comment n. 9) suggests morphological similarity for some of such forms to the Ambient Inclusion Trail (AIT) and further investigation to exclude their possible abiogenicity. Nevertheless we have to observe that the proposed similarity is roughly referred to the external shape and it seems not supported by their quite different fine microfabric. Figure 1. Microspherule aggregation on Mars are resembling terrestrial stromatolites structures, forming various kind of aggregates and filaments (above) and texture of intertwined filaments (below). Bars represent 1 mm. (see Rizzo and Cantasano, 2011). At the end, we have to consider that criticism are posed for each single-separate feature, and that most of them are feeble and lay as general statements; as well their altogether convergence is relevant, too and more. Suspects and possibilities are not proves. Then, we are looking forward to the search results deepening proposed by sceptics, in order to prove -without any reasonable doubt- to the scientific readers that their criticisms are right. At the moment considering the careful procedures used for sample’s analysis, the nature and the history of their biological contents, we totally agree with the interpretation given by Hoover in his article. In fact, in our studies (Rizzo and Cantasano, 2009a; Rizzo and Cantasano, 2009b; Rizzo and Cantasano, 2010; Rizzo and Cantasano, 2011 in print), analyzing a selected set of NASA REM MI imagery shot by Rover “Opportunity”, we have found a lot of similarities, both at microscopic and macroscopic scale, between Mars sediment’s structures and those of terrestrial stromatolites. Similarities include occurrence of microspherules aggregates, somewhere linked in filaments, in sheet, in larger spherules known as “blueberries” and in other massive bodies made by intertwined filaments textures (figure 1). Such possible microbial structures somewhere contain encapsuled aggregates (like those of sheathed colony of cyanobacteria) and other peculiar forms recalling biological structures (as are tubules, threads, chambered bodies ..etc; figs. 2a-c). At larger scale similarity include laminated sediments, regressive sequences, columnar and planar structures. Both laminated sequences, blueberries and other massive bodies could be explained by peculiar planar/spatial microspherules aggregation and/or by