
India's red rain may contain life not seen on Earth - keyle
http://www.news.com.au/technology/panspermia-theorists-say-indias-red-rain-contains-life-not-seen-on-earth/story-e6frfro0-1225913620448
======
vecter

      The team also found an unusual pattern in the way the cells changed colour under UV light, known as "fluorescence behaviour".
      They said it was "in remarkable correspondence" with red emissions from the Red Rectangle planetary nebula some 2300 light years away, "suggesting, though not proving, an extraterrestrial origin".
    

You have got to be kidding me.

~~~
jacquesm
I think you could find a good spectral match for just about _anything_ given
the number of stars out there.

This whole thing screams pseudo science at me, and I'm still not sure what
exactly is the state of arxiv published research. It's a mixed bag.

~~~
jonhendry
I think that currently, to get on arxiv you just need some arxiv-trusted
person to vouch for your work. The idea being that if you vouch for too many
kooks they stop letting you vouch for anyone.

~~~
jacquesm
_Any_ cook is a blemish on arxiv that diminishes both arxiv and all the rest
of the publications on there.

There is the reason why big name publications are very careful not to be
associated with cranks, reputable scientists will start to avoid your
publication and that is the start of a downward spiral.

Axxiv would do well to increase their barrier to entry to up the quality, the
principle is great but the execution so far is less than fantastic. And that's
a pity because something like arxiv with a really good reputation is badly
needed.

So, very good peer-review of all that's input and fewer rather than more
'publications' of excellent quality, with a very good set of verification
criteria for extraordinary claims.

------
DanielBMarkham
_The team's findings are yet to be verified._

Sigh. Nine years, no independent verification. For reproducible incredibly
unique behavior like that? Verification of a real phenomenon would be massive
and immediate.

~~~
marze
"Verification of a real phenomenon would be massive and immediate"

Incorrect. Something involving alien life, comets, etc? Scientists run the
other way.

In a sense, this publication is verification by scientists in the UK of a
previous paper by Dr. Louis that described the cells/particles/whatever
reproducing at high temperature.

If the cells are of extraterrestrial origin and are not DNA-based, this will
be the scientific discovery of the century. One would hope that other labs
will step forward and attempt to reproduce the work.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
You've misunderstood me.

Take any of the phenomenon described, say "organisms that reproduce at 121
degrees" Send samples out, samples are reheated, other independent scientists
verify this cause and effect.

Sure, the _entire_ set of wild claims would take a heckuva lot of
verification. But any one of the claims? Dead simple. Why don't we have
independent verification of dead simple things? Probably because there is no
verification to be had, sadly.

~~~
marze
I wouldn't be surprised if the Cardiff group spent six months on the research
and three years getting the paper accepted.

Agreed, it would have been nice if the Dr. Louis had sent samples to any lab
that would take them, but instead he sent them to just one lab.

Besides a possible lack of labs volunteering, perhaps he was motivated to
retain as much credit for what he felt would be an important discovery.

In any case, I still would like to see some other facilities step forward and
attempt to verify the work.

~~~
anigbrowl
Arxiv is not a peer-reviewed journal where papers need to be accepted or not;
it's more like HN for scientists, where anyone can present a result for
consideration. Without digging into the history in detail, it's worth noting
that one of the co-authors on this paper is at the University of Sheffield,
and was vocally critical of an earlier paper on the same subject; his co-
authorship may be a signal to other labs.

------
zitterbewegung
If I recall correctly this was properly debunked as false. See
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_rain_in_Kerala> from the article "The color
was found to be due to the presence of a large amount of spores of a lichen-
forming alga belonging to the genus Trentepohlia"

~~~
gaoshan
I'll second this. I was under the impression that it was spores of a decidedly
earthbound variety. I wish it were little extraterrestrial organisms but t
does not look to be the case.

------
stavrianos
Uh, guys... you found the rain _on earth_. This is where you saw it. Just
sayin'.

There should be some kind of rule that evidence is only strong enough to
support a theory of equal or lesser weirdness. "Bacteria reproducing at 121
degrees" is way less weird than "Bacteria from outer space".

~~~
oozcitak
Occam's Razor?

------
wallflower
I know a girl from Kerala. It is a very beautiful place - very lush - from the
photos I have seen. I will have to ask her about the Red Rain.

"Growth and replication of red rain cells at 121 oC and their red
fluorescence" (2010 August)

<http://arxiv.org/pdf/1008.4960v1>

"The Red Rain phenomenon of Kerala and its possible extraterrestrial origin"
(2006 January)

<http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0601/0601022v1.pdf>

~~~
kranner
The paper from 2006 (second link above) has very interesting scanning electron
microscope pictures of the critters (3D reconstructions).

~~~
jacquesm
These look quite similar:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microspherulite>

~~~
kranner
Yes, but the first paper has images of daughter cells in various stages of
reproduction.

Bit hard to get a piece of rock to do that, no?

~~~
jacquesm
I don't see a daughter cell in various stages of reproduction, I see different
'cells', and I'm not sure at all if they're cells or not. They could be dead
single celled organisms with some kind of outer coating.

A time-lapse series of the same cells from the first image would be conclusive
evidence, that can't be too hard to make, a magnification of 1,000 is well
within the abilities of oil immersion objective:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Xk_piPBnwY>

------
jonhendry
So Kerala was repeatedly hit by projectiles from space over a span of months,
producing a red rain of alien life.

But nowhere else was.

As the earth spun on its axis. And the earth moved around the sun.

The space-spores kept landing on Kerala.

Right. How does that work, exactly?

~~~
anigbrowl
The hypothesis is that the rainfall followed from a single meteoric event,
which preceded the first 'red rainfall' by a few hours, with greatest
concentrations of red material in the 10 days afterward.

Meteors burn up in the mesophere, about 40 miles above the earth's surface.
There is weather up there, but not the normal wind patterns that we are used
to. There are standing waves and strange weather phenomena like notilucent
clouds up there that we don't fully understand; also, some gasses separate
there, impossible at the higher temperature and pressures which we are used
to. A trail of dust debris from an incoming meteor may take much longer to
dissipate in the mesosphere than a cloud of the same size lower down.

~~~
jonhendry
" A trail of dust debris from an incoming meteor may take much longer to
dissipate in the mesosphere than a cloud of the same size lower down."

Making it even less likely that it would all land in the same place.

Adding unusual atmospheric phenomena on top of everything else just makes this
more and more absurd.

~~~
anigbrowl
It didn't all land in the same place. The 2006 paper mentioned upthread
documents 124 separate reports, spread along a path over 300 miles in length
down the coastline of India's Kerala province.

Nor am I not suggesting any unusual atmospheric phenomena; I'm pointing out
that that part of the atmosphere is known to differ substantially from lower
altitudes. Multiple interacting tides, for example:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_tide>

------
ggrot
That is alot of speculation for something that the article says is "rejected
by the scientific community at large" and "yet to be verified".

~~~
keyle
It's easier to dismiss theories than nail one...

~~~
vecter
I guess the question is, why does this theory deserve to not be dismissed?
There are (pulling a number out of my ass) tens of thousands of theories on
anything and certainly not enough resources to test them all. I think the
burden of proof rests with those pushing a new idea. There are people working
on this, but without further substantiation, there's nothing special about it.

------
marze
Link to the paper:

<http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1008/1008.4960.pdf>

------
gowiththeflow
"The only lifeforms that occur or Earth without DNA, according to another
commentor, are proteins known as 'prions', best known on Earth as the cause of
Mad Cow Disease."

I was not aware that prions were considered a lifeform.

~~~
Devilboy
It depends on the definition of 'life' you're using. There's lots of
disagreement on what the definition should be exactly.

~~~
carbocation
There really is nobody arguing that prions are alive. Unlike viruses, for
which there is at least a vigorous debate, prions just don't cut it, lacking
virtually all of the features that we associate with life.

I can't believe that this news article is quoting from _commenters_ on the
technologyreview arxiv blog.

------
danilocampos
I want to believe.

~~~
patrickgzill
I am listening to Peter Gabriel, truly the man is a prophet ... he did a song
called "Red Rain" years ago .

------
javanix
Is 'all-in boffin barney' a respectable news phrase in Australia?

~~~
kenj0418
Apparently. I think its Australian for kerfuffle.

~~~
WalterGR
_I think its Australian for kerfuffle._

Specifically, an argument amongst all scientists.

all-in: involving everyone

boffin: scientist

barney: argument (from rhyming slang: "Barney Rubble" - "trouble")

------
psiconaut
the "Growth and replication of red rain cells at 121 oC and their red
fluorescence" paper at arxiv does not contain a single reference to the
alledgelly-named "cells" lack of DNA (apart from being plagued of obvious
spelling errors). If I were them, I wouldn't bother with spectrographic
analysis if the real finding is non-dna based life form.

Having worked at a biotech lab, this "study" of replication without saying
anything about microbiological characterization smells like a fun replica of
the Sokal affair <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_Affair>.

~~~
jacquesm
Sokal is a hero for doing that.

------
teilo
This reads like a Pravda article. Sensationalist and next to no substance.

~~~
megablast
It is news.com.au, a Murdoch paper in Australia. It is as authoritative as a
Fox news broadcast.

~~~
Revisor
And it has more than 100 points at HN.

~~~
jacquesm
Not from me.

------
mitko
> While many spores on Earth can survive that kind of extreme heat, none have
> yet been discovered that can reproduce in those conditions, much less
> require it to begin reproducing.

Much less than none?

~~~
carbocation
>He says the cells - inert at room temperature - begin to reproduce at 121C.
... While many spores on Earth can survive that kind of extreme heat, none
have yet been discovered that can reproduce in those conditions, much less
require it to begin reproducing.

Right, except there is a word for those organisms, some of which _do_ thrive
at those temperatures: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperthermophile>

(Specifically, organisms are known that grow at up to 122 deg Celsius.) Did
this newspaper do any actual research before making those claims?

~~~
jacquesm
> Did this newspaper do any actual research before making those claims?

I wouldn't fault the newspaper as much as I would fault the original research.

~~~
anigbrowl
I'm starting to wonder if you read the paper or just glanced at it.

 _1\. INTRODUCTION Most forms of life on Earth are adapted to growth within
the temperature range, 10-45C. Microorganisms, known as thermophiles, however,
grow optimally between 45C and 70C. Recently novel microbes, growing at
temperatures above 80C have ben reported, and the upper temperature limit for
growth has been extended to 113C and 121C by the discovery of Pyrolobus
fumarii and “strain 121”, both having been isolated from hydrothermal vents
(Kashefi and Lovley, 2003). Stetter (1992) termed these newly discovered
microorganisms “hyperthermophiles”. There also exist in the literature
disputed claims that bacteria, isolated from black smokers can grow at 250C
(Baross and Deming, 1983). Louis and Kumar (2003) also reported that red cells
which fell in so-called “Red Rain” over at Kerala in India (and which are
studied here) could replicate at 300 C (Louis and Kumar, 2003, 2006), a claim
that needs to be verified independently if it is to gain acceptance._

Wickramasingh and Wainwright were publicly critical of the earlier claims made
by Louis and Kumar in 2003. This paper investigates one aspect of those claims
by testing whether any growth of these cells take place, and if so whether it
can occur at high temperatures. The answer to both those questions is 'yes'.
It's reasonable to begin by investigating whether the phenomenon occurs at the
known upper temperature bound mentioned in the first citation, and to solicit
confirmation of that result, before investigating other conditions for growth
whose very possibility is speculative at present.

I don't know why you're ragging on this paper so much. The news report is
trash but the paper is cautious (indeed the Louis papers are a good deal more
cautious than their linkbaity titles might suggest). Even if further study
determines that that the cells are definitely terrestrial, the fact that such
'extremophiles' are not confined to extreme environments like the walls of
volcanoes or undersea is itself news.

