Do all meteorites contain fossils?
Wretch Fossil
I cannot confirm that all meteorites, cut or uncut, contain fossils,
but all the meteorites I bought (over 60 pieces) contain fossils. The
following is just a randonly chosen meteorite ball exposing ET blood
vessel containing red blood cells. I purchased the meteorite ball at US
$12 via an auction on the web.
Figure 1: shows the meteorite ball and the blood vessel remains marked
by a sticker http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691395464&p=80
Figure 2: 60x micrograph showing the sticker and the BV remains
http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691395465&p=81
Figure 3: 200x micrograph showing the sticker and the BV remains
http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691395461&p=82
Figure 4: 500x micrograph showing the sticker and the BV remains
http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691405327&p=83
Figure 5: 1,000X micrograph showing the sticker and “fossilized RBC’s
in BV” http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691395463&p=84
Figure 6: 1,000x micrograph showing small BV remains—not contaminants
http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691405328&p=85
rick++
> I cannot confirm that all meteorites, cut or uncut, contain fossils,
> but all the meteorites I bought (over 60 pieces) contain fossils.
I suspect you've been sacmmed by your minerals dealer then.
Chris L Peterson
wrote:
Most certainly. Exactly one meteorite (ALH 84001) might, possibly,
contain fossils. There's only one source for meteorites that have even a
remote possibility of containing fossils, and that's Mars. Martian
meteorites represent a fraction of a percent of all meteorites, and are
generally the most expensive and difficult to obtain.
Ordinary meteorites from asteroidal parents cannot and do not contain
fossils.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
justbeats
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:11:49 -0800 (PST), "rick++" <rick...@hotmail.com>
Oof! Steady on ;-)
There *could* be other sources of course, but I agree it's very, very
unlikely the OP's images show fossilised blood cells. Because...
First, I don't think it's fully established that red blood cells CAN
be fossilised. There are other possibilities. This is one alternative
explanation. http://palaeontology.palass-pubs.org/pdf/Vol%2040/Pages%20619-624.pdf
Second, although blood corpuscles are 6-8um in a natural hydrated
state they'd look utterly different after enduring the conditions
suitable for their fossilisation. Put blood in strong salt water and
look at it under a microscope then. The cells shrink to wizened little
jagged things. Osmosis would deform them before fossilisation.
Third, so the nice, round "red blood cells" in the supplied images are
more likely just defocussed highlights. Were they captured at the very
sharpest point of focus? What is the maximum resolution of the
photomicrography setup used? And so on...
Or, to answer the original question in simpler terms...
NO!
justbeats
>
> Second, although blood corpuscles are 6-8um in a natural hydrated
> state they'd look utterly different after enduring the conditions
> suitable for their fossilisation. Put blood in strong salt water and
> look at it under a microscope then. The cells shrink to wizened little
> jagged things. Osmosis would deform them before fossilisation.
>
> Third, so the nice, round "red blood cells" in the supplied images are
> more likely just defocussed highlights. Were they captured at the very
> sharpest point of focus? What is the maximum resolution of the
> photomicrography setup used? And so on...
>
> Or, to answer the original question in simpler terms...
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ref: mars as the only source of meteorites that could, possibly,
maybe, perhaps contain fossils.
Given past large impact (and extinction) events, couldn't earth be a
source too?
Wretch Fossil
No.
Wretch Fossil
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:11:49 -0800 (PST), "rick++" <rick...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Dec 17, 1:01 am, Wretch Fossil <wretchfos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> I cannot confirm that all meteorites, cut or uncut, contain fossils,
> >> but all the meteorites I bought (over 60 pieces) contain fossils.
>
> >I suspect you've been sacmmed by your minerals dealer then.
>
> Most certainly. Exactly one meteorite (ALH 84001) might, possibly,
> contain fossils.
There's only one source for meteorites that have even a
> remote possibility of containing fossils, and that's Mars.
I can quote you on this
Martian
> meteorites represent a fraction of a percent of all meteorites, and are
> generally the most expensive and difficult to obtain.
NASA (never a straight answer) cannot say my meteorites are not from
Mars. NASA can say ALH84001 and a few others were (maybe?) from Mars
but it cannot identify the origin of all meteorites.
>
> Ordinary meteorites from asteroidal parents cannot and do not contain
> fossils.
My results are repeatable. See fossils for yourself.
Wretch Fossil
>
> - 顯示被引用文字 -
Meteorites found on Earth do not originate from Earth. Otherwise, it
should not be called a meteorite,
which is almost always much heavier than an Earth fossil of the same
size.
Wretch Fossil
micrographs, which are numerous in my numerous albums which are not
public yet.
There are other possibilities. This is one alternative
> explanation.http://palaeontology.palass-pubs.org/pdf/Vol%2040/Pages%20619-624.pdf
>
> Second, although blood corpuscles are 6-8um in a natural hydrated
> state they'd look utterly different after enduring the conditions
> suitable for their fossilisation. Put blood in strong salt water and
> look at it under a microscope then. The cells shrink to wizened little
> jagged things. Osmosis would deform them before fossilisation.
>
> Third, so the nice, round "red blood cells" in the supplied images are
> more likely just defocussed highlights. Were they captured at the very
> sharpest point of focus? What is the maximum resolution of the
> photomicrography setup used? And so on...
>
> Or, to answer the original question in simpler terms...
>
> NO!
YES, if you can see other fossilized remains of red blood cells listed
in my other albums.
Helpful person
>
> Most certainly. Exactly one meteorite (ALH 84001) might, possibly,
> contain fossils. There's only one source for meteorites that have even a
> remote possibility of containing fossils, and that's Mars. Martian
> meteorites represent a fraction of a percent of all meteorites, and are
> generally the most expensive and difficult to obtain.
>
> Ordinary meteorites from asteroidal parents cannot and do not contain
> fossils.
> _________________________________________________
>
> Chris L Peterson
> Cloudbait Observatoryhttp://www.cloudbait.com
How is it determined that certain metiorites originate from Mars?
Chris.B
Chris L Peterson
<rrl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>How is it determined that certain metiorites originate from Mars?
Several classes of meteorites (comprising around 30 total individuals)
have mineralogical properties similar to Martian material (and very
different from asteroidal material), and also have isotopic gas ratios
consistent with what is found in the Martian atmosphere.
They also tend to be young- less than a few hundred million years, as
compared with close to 4.7 billion years for most meteorites. These are
presumably objects flung off of Mars as the result of large impacts from
other bodies- a possibility supported by modeling. They aren't
meteorites from the surface of Mars, of course, of which several have
been identified by the Mars Rovers, but none returned.
Helpful person
Quadibloc
> I suspect you've been sacmmed by your minerals dealer then.
No. From his interpretation of photographs of Mars, it is clear that
he could look at the sand on the beach, or the plaster on a wall, or
the clouds in the sky, and see fossils. So he could purchase real
metorites and see fossils; this says nothing about the meteorites, it
says something about his perceptual problem.
John Savard
Quadibloc
> How is it determined that certain metiorites originate from Mars?
Isotope distributions, the mineral content of the meteorite. It is a
delicate chain of inference, and so it was quite a discovery when
first established.
John Savard
Wretch Fossil
I am adding a new micrograph showing you many cross sections of many
vertical blood vessels found within that 200-um blood vessel.
Those BV cross sections were obvious to any anatomists. You seemed to
know nothing about them or anatomy.
that >
> John Savard
Wretch Fossil
>
> - 顯示被引用文字 -
Here is the newly-labelled micrograph marked for lumens of vertical
blood vessels crossing the large,horizontal blood vessel:
http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691421063&p=85
BCC Meteorites
> Do all meteorites contain fossils?
>
> I cannot confirm that all meteorites, cut or uncut, contain fossils,
> but all the meteorites I bought (over 60 pieces) contain fossils. The
> following is just a randonly chosen meteorite ball exposing ET blood
> vessel containing red blood cells. I purchased the meteorite ball at US
> $12 via an auction on the web.
>
> Figure 1: shows the meteorite ball and the blood vessel remains marked
>
> Figure 2: 60x micrograph showing the sticker and the BV remainshttp://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691395465&p=81
>
> Figure 3: 200x micrograph showing the sticker and the BV remainshttp://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691395461&p=82
>
> Figure 4: 500x micrograph showing the sticker and the BV remainshttp://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691405327&p=83
>
> Figure 5: 1,000X micrograph showing the sticker and “fossilized RBC’s
> in BV”http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691395463&p=84
>
> Figure 6: 1,000x micrograph showing small BV remains—not contaminantshttp://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691405328&p=85
I have never seen fossils in meteorites. In fact many researchers have
been looking for any sign of microscopic organisms even single celled
organisms. Unfortunately I don't think they exist in other planetary
or sub-planetary bodies. The purpose of searching for life and water
abroad has evolved from one of intrigue and quest for knowledge to one
of, "hey here's a job I can get funded for life and never really have
to do anything. If we keep searching for something that is not there,
we can have a job forever since we're never going to find anything."
It's about the money and if you think someone sold you meteorites you
may have been taken. You so called fossilized blood vessels really
look like nothing more than veinlets of quartz. Having said that the
con artists are found at none other than The Meteoritical Society
which purports to be an independent non-profit but is really stacked
with NASA and industry friendly (military defense contractor) hacks.
Oh and as far as the recent claims about water on the Moon. Completely
bogus.........not possible. As a matter of fact the surveyor mission
scientists at one time claimed a spectral signature for millions of
gallons of water on the Moon but a subsequent crash landing surprised
the scientists with finding nothing. This latest mission, LCROSS,
where scientists claimed they found water is also completely bogus.
As part proof the scientist who worked with the Indian Space Agency
(Chandra) making their water claim, and pushing for water on the lunar
surface for decades is none other than Stewart Nozette.
Nozette who once worked on the Star Wars missile defense project and
is credited with discovering the presence of water on the moon is
being accused by federal prosecutors of attempting to sell top secret
information to a foreign intelligence agency.
Stewart Nozette, 52, of Chevy Chase, Md., was arrested yesterday on
charges of attempted espionage after he was allegedly caught trying to
sell classified national defense information to someone he thought
worked for Israel's Mossad intelligence agency. If convicted, Nozette
faces life in prison, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) said.
Nozette is a Ph.D in Planetary Sciences from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and served on the White House National Space
Council in 1989 and 1990. He is credited with developing a radar
experiment to look for water on the south pole of the moon, the DOJ
said. Nozette worked at the Department of Energy's Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory after his White House stint. During the nine years
he worked there developing "highly advanced technology," Nozette held
a special security clearance that gave him access to Top Secret and
critical nuclear weapon design information.
He later established a non-profit organization called the Alliance for
Competitive Technology (ACT). Between January 2000 and February 2006,
Nozette's ACT entered into several agreements to develop advanced
technology for the U.S. government. The facilities that Nozette's
company did work for included, the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory and
NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. Over the last decade, Nozette also
consulted with an Israeli aerospace company that is wholly owned by
the Israeli government.
Q So why has Mr. Nozette been trying to convince the public there is
water on the Moon for so long?
A $$$$$$$$, because this creates funding opportunities and jobs
programs for the scientific community while at the same time funding
the military defense industry to the tune of billions for the
production of hardware and software for these FAKE projects.
So the question is, do you want NASA to tell the truth and lay off
tens of thousands creating lots of pain suffering and economic misery
losing their homes etc? Or do you want lots of jobs and a flourishing
scientific base. If you want a bright rosy economic outlook then you
better buy the lies, fabrications and misinformation. You choose.
Wretch Fossil
> On Dec 17, 2:01 am, Wretch Fossil <wretchfos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Doallmeteoritescontainfossils?
>
> > I cannot confirm thatallmeteorites, cut or uncut,containfossils,
> > following is just a randonly chosen meteorite ball exposing ET blood
> > vessel containing red blood cells. I purchased the meteorite ball at US
> > $12 via an auction on the web.
>
> > Figure 1: shows the meteorite ball and the blood vessel remains marked
> > by a stickerhttp://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691395464&p=80
>
> > Figure 2: 60x micrograph showing the sticker and the BV remainshttp://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691395465&p=81
>
> > Figure 3: 200x micrograph showing the sticker and the BV remainshttp://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691395461&p=82
>
> > Figure 4: 500x micrograph showing the sticker and the BV remainshttp://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691405327&p=83
>
> > Figure 5: 1,000X micrograph showing the sticker and "fossilized RBC's
> > in BV"http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691395463&p=84
>
>
> I have never seenfossilsinmeteorites. In fact many researchers have
> been looking for any sign of microscopic organisms even single celled
> organisms. Unfortunately I don't think they exist in other planetary
> or sub-planetary bodies. The purpose of searching for life and water
> abroad has evolved from one of intrigue and quest for knowledge to one
> of, "hey here's a job I can get funded for life and never really have
> tens of thousands creating lots of pain suffering and economic misery
> scientific base. If you want a bright rosy economic outlook then you
> better buy the lies, fabrications and misinformation. You choose.
>
>
> - 顯示被引用文字 -
You have written a lot of things unrelated to fossils found in
meteorites.
Can you deny these red blood cells/blood vessels/Haversian canals
(fossilized)?
http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?i=lin440315&b=25&f=1691443717&p=94