Scientists May Have Found the Earliest Evidence of Life On Earth (sciencemag.org) 71
sciencehabit writes with news that UCLA scientists have found evidence that life likely existed on Earth at least 4.1 billion years ago, 300 million years earlier than previously thought. Science reports: "When did life on Earth begin? Scientists have dug down through the geologic record, and the deeper they look, the more it seems that biology appeared early in our planet's 4.5-billion-year history. So far, geologists have uncovered possible traces of life as far back as 3.8 billion years. Now, a controversial new study presents potential evidence that life arose 300 million years before that, during the mysterious period following Earth's formation. The clues lie hidden in microscopic flecks of graphite—a carbon mineral—trapped inside a single large crystal of zircon. Zircons grow in magmas, often incorporating other minerals into their crystal structures of silicon, oxygen, and zirconium. And although they barely span the width of a human hair, zircons are nearly indestructible. They can outlast the rocks in which they initially formed, enduring multiple cycles of erosion and deposition."
Where's the evidence!? (Score:2)
Re:Where's the evidence!? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's tough to get a good discussion on biology going here at /. This is a really interesting find if it holds up. The structures they found are interesting, and have characteristic features that don't seem like they could have been produced by geological means. But still, I think they have their work cut out for themselves to find more samples, and confirm that these aren't just some very odd geological artifacts.
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
See what I mean?
Re: (Score:2)
Also see this [nature.com].
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Get it right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
No one reads the article so... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The link is there. You wouldn't know it by looking at it but "(sciencemag.org)" is actually a clickable link. UX ftw!!!
Re: (Score:2)
/. going beta one step at a time
Re: (Score:1)
Let's not even include a link to it!
The link is right next to the title.
Re:No one reads the article so... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I reckon a lot of Slashdot regulars come here for the comments rather than the summaries.
Paywall avoidance, for one (Score:2)
Still it's the traditional poorly referenced third party article instead of the actual source article but what else do you expect?
A lot of Slashdot's readership don't subscribe to numerous paywalled scientific journals, nor are they willing to pay $30 for a single article. Therefore, those who do take the time to read the featured article often have to rely on pop-science distillations.
Actual article link (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Pope (and by extension, The Catholic Church) believes in divine creation as well as a the theory of evolution. It's only a few nutjobs who actually believe that we descended from 2 single humans and that the earth is only 6000 years old.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't we come from Adam & Eve and their children, Cain and Able?
Cain and Seth. Abel was killed before he had any children.
UCLA News (Score:4, Informative)
Haven't found any scientific article yet but here is the news page from UCLA:
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/relea... [ucla.edu]
In short, they found graphite in a crystal and the graphite has a carbon 12 to carbon 13 ratio which indicates biological origin.
So, the current status is "plausible" but if someone comes up with another explanation it is "busted".
Re: (Score:2)
You really Busted that Myth.
Right in the middle of the Hadean period. (Score:5, Insightful)
These clues might just tell _how_ cellular reproduction and upwards energy gradients (i.e. life) began, not just _when_.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I presume you mean "half a billion"
Yes, half a billion. Thank you. I was trying to put the discovery into perspective, and this correction shows just how hard it is to grasp the vast time periods involved.
Re: (Score:1)
No. Given its size and temperature, the earth would have been differentiated almost immediately, with oceans present at 4.4Gy. The moon would have been completely formed, though very hot and active. A ring moon would have been very short lived. Tectonics, of some form, in the presence of water would have started almost immediately, and been very vigorous.
Re: (Score:2)
If the oceans and plate tectonics, along with the differentiated interior, did in fact develop 4.4 Ga, then why is the period that we call Hadean said to have ended only at 3.8 Ga?
Thank you for your clarifications!
Re: (Score:3)
This perspective hints that the role of the Moon and plate tectonics in the formation of life is overrated.
I'm not sure about plate tectonics, but the role of the moon was, so far as I understand, to allow _complex_ life to develop. A few self-replicating proteins don't need stable seasons and tides, but eukaryotes and multi-cellular life do benefit from the repeating (and replenishing) energy gradients.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, but for your PENCIL.
"Mysterious" (Score:2)
Using "mysterious" in a scientific publication. Ever.
Somewhere in Kentucky.... (Score:1)
Ken Ham is curling up in a ball chanting "6000 years, 6000 years, 6000 years!"
Panspermia (Score:3)
I'm not saying it was aliens, but...
WTF is with the article links! (Score:2)
Ok aside from the fact that it took me a few minutes to figure out where the article link was (I nearly posted some critique on the editor for not including it), how do you think this is going to work Dice? I mean it's one thing to turn Slashdot into a typical trashy blog, but even they follow conventions of inline links.
What happens when you suddenly include multiple articles or multiple sources in your posts? Who gets to go in the title, the one who paid the most?
I can't believe how hard to use this site
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how the AC two posts above you broke yours and the post before you.
http://science.slashdot.org/co... [slashdot.org]
Your post now shows (when you show all the posts) as strikethrough.
Re: (Score:2)