Tuesday, February 27, 2018

Abiotic oil

A study published in Science Magazine today presents new evidence supporting the abiotic theory for the origin of oil, which asserts oil is a natural product the Earth generates constantly rather than a “fossil fuel” derived from decaying ancient forests and dead dinosaurs.
The lead scientist on the study ? Giora Proskurowski of the School of Oceanography at the University of Washington in Seattle ? says the hydrogen-rich fluids venting at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean in the Lost City Hydrothermal Field were produced by the abiotic synthesis of hydrocarbons in the mantle of the earth.
The abiotic theory of the origin of oil directly challenges the conventional scientific theory that hydrocarbons are organic in nature, created by the deterioration of biological material deposited millions of years ago in sedimentary rock and converted to hydrocarbons under intense heat and pressure.
While organic theorists have posited that the material required to produce hydrocarbons in sedimentary rock came from dinosaurs and ancient forests, more recent argument have suggested living organisms as small as plankton may have been the origin.
The abiotic theory argues, in contrast, that hydrocarbons are naturally produced on a continual basis throughout the solar system, including within the mantle of the earth. The advocates believe the oil seeps up through bedrock cracks to deposit in sedimentary rock. Traditional petro-geologists, they say, have confused the rock as the originator rather than the depository of the hydrocarbons.
In 2003 and again in 2005, Proskurowski and his team descended in a scientific submarine to collect liquid bubbling up from Lost City sea vents.Lost City is a hypothermal field some 2,100 feet below sea level that sits along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge at the center of the Atlantic Ocean, noted for strange 90 to 200 foot white towers on the sea bottom.
Proskurowski found hydrocarbons containing carbon-13 isotopes that appeared to be formed from the mantle of the Earth, rather than from biological material settled on the ocean floor.
Carbon 13 is the carbon isotope scientists associate with abiotic origin, compared to Carbon 12 that scientists typically associate with biological origin.
Our findings illustrate that the abiotic synthesis of hydrocarbons in nature may occur in the presence of ultramafic rocks, water and moderate amounts of heat,” Proskurowski wrote.
The study also confirmed a major argument of Cornell University physicist Thomas Gold, who argued in his book “The Deep Hot Biosphere: The Myth of Fossil Fuels” that micro-organisms found in oil might have come from the mantle of the earth where, absent photosynthesis, the micro-organisms feed on hydrocarbons arising from the earth’s mantle in the dark depths of the ocean floors.
Affirming this point, Proskurowski concluded the article by noting, “Hydrocarbon production by FTT could be a common means for producing precursors of life-essential building blocks in ocean-floor environments or wherever warm ultramafic rocks are in contact with water.”
Finding abiotic hydrocarbons in the Lost City sea vent fluids is the second discovery in recent years adding weight to the abiotic theory of the origin of oil.
As WND reported in 2005, a NASA probe to Titan, the giant moon of Saturn, discovered abundant Carbon-13 methane that the agency declared to be abiotic in origin.


Saturday, February 3, 2018

To find subjects, themes or posts, please refer to the following link:


This blog received 4,564 visits.
Origin of the human species  from Peoples, Drugs and Serpents, D.Anton, Piriguazú Ediciones

The seashore


Max Planck, the famous German scientist and Nobel laureate, once said:
“A new scientific truth does not triumph convincing its opponents, but rather due to the natural death of the older generation, it is replaced by a new one that has become familiar with the new theory or belief.”.
The technological-industrial paradigm of today’s world is no exception. After three centuries it is destined to succumb under the weight of its own contradictions.
Its domain has caused unprecedented destruction of terrestrial and marine ecosystems, and has developed several generations of disoriented women and men lacking roots or references.
The human species is not larger, or more capable, even more complex than the others that make up the planet. Nor it is very different.  Humans shares with other animals and plants much of their genetic code, and have evolved to what they are presently through a pattern similar to many other animals.
The starting point for an analysis of our species should be understanding that we are not “superior” to any other.
We are not the top of natural evolution, far from it.
We can certainly say that, in a sense, we are “special”, but so are dolphins, palm trees or flatworms.
Each of these organisms live their lives, develops their own metabolism with the resources at their disposal, and do their  best to survive through their descendants.
The “special”, and not better, human traits, are the result of an old history.
About 5 or 6 million years ago, some ancient primates, probably pf arboreal origin, evolved, became bipedal, lost their body fur, developed a large brain and created sophisticated cultures based on the generation and interpretation of symbols. 
To produce these super-brained culture, they managed to prolong the infant stage of their offspring. Human babies take a long time to grow. For several years, they remain very vulnerable, totally unable to defend themselves. This children’s stage is the longest among all known mammals.
The end result this long period of human growth during childhood is an adult who is not really very different from adults of other species. Females and males carry out the normal physiological functions of the species, feed and metabolize plant and animal tissues, breathe oxygen from the air, put great efforts to protect their children, and finally they die and degrade like other plants and animals.

And here we are. 
Trying to hide our essence and roots. 
Wearing clothes that attempt to hide (unsuccessfully) our bodies, making us believe that we are not animals, destroying the same nature  which sustains us, polluting the water where we were born, and raising our offspring in large impersonal concrete and metal buildings.
  
Water Primates

The biblical patriarchal paradigm about the origin of human species waas base on years of misinformation and religious authoritarianism had created an uncritical culture who resisted hard for many centuries.
However, a couple of centuries ago a new technological and industrial culture succeeded dismantling the old religious model. It did it, gradually but surely,  and finally supplanted it.
The new paradigm was also deeply authoritarian. A new dogma developed. Reductionist approaches to science, contempt for ancient beliefs, profit-based and globalized economic systems gave rise to a presumtuous view of nature as a “resource” to be utilized and exploited.   The “priests” of the technological-industrial aristocracy defined their dogmas and once they were generally imposed they dug in to defend them by all available means. 
Those who did not agree with the technological-industrial supporting theories were considered heretical. They were ignored, ridiculed, and finally excommunicated and excluded from their academic positions or the distribution of research funds.
The theory of human evolution, a key element of the reigning scientific paradigm, is no exception..
Several decades ago. scientific authorities decreed that the species originated in African savannas. To sustain this theory there were numerous arguments, including several hundred fossil bone fragments and some tools.
The “savanna” origin of human primates became an article of faith.
Virtually no one dared to contradict it. Until 1930 when an English biologist Allister Hardy noted some contradictions of the “Theory of the Savannah” and proposed an alternative vision: human beings had developed as such through an amphibious stage of their evolution 1.2 .
In 1960, after almost thirty years of preaching, The New Scientist agreed to publish an article of his entitled: “Was man more aquatic in the past?” (March, 1960, 642-645 dpi.). During twelve years the paper was ignored.
Only in 1972 the concepts of Hardy were taken by a talented Welsh writer. Her name was Elaine Morgan and her work “The Descent of Woman”.
The title was a play on words contradicting the Darwinian famous book called “The Ascent of Man”.
Morgan’s book was completely neglected by the scientific “establishment”. In despite of this disregard, many people payed attention to the idea and the book gradually became a “best seller”.
Ten years after this first book, Ms Morgan published another one on the subject: “The Aquatic Ape” (1982). Then followed “Scars of Evolution” (1990), “The Aquatic Ape: Fact or Fiction” (1991). “The Descent of the Child, 1994) and “The Aquatic Ape Hypothesis” (1997).
All works of Elaine Morgan had great success with the public. Thirty years later it was very hard to ignore the persistent writer, who also became an expert in paleoanthropology.
The arguments of the “Aquatic Ape Theory” were overwhelming.
Humans are very different from savannah animals and, instead, have much affinity with amphibious mammals.
As marine mammals, they have very little body hair, possess 10 times more fat than other primates, and even more at birth.  Unlike ordinary fat in other apes, their fat is subcutaneous belonging to the type called “white fat”. This fat does not provide immediate energy and serves more as thermal insulation and buoyancy (as in aquatic mammals). 
For brain development humans have required and gotten substances found only in fish and shellfish (eg eicosnoic acid).
We discard our inner water through sweat (large number of sweat glands) and salty tears (absent in other primates), we practice frontal sex, such as seals and whales; we can contain breathing for several minutes (which is not true in any other ape), and instinctively we swim at birth.
Moreover, our specific diseases and parasites development require aquatic stages, and bipedalism (which is a typical human feature) is not found in any savanna mammal, or in any other primate. This last trait  is easily explained if we imagine their daily life in the shallow marine or lacunar waters and banks.
Also we must remember that one human anatomical weaknesses is, even today, the backbone, which must support the body weight (and of coourse, inside the water it is much less vulnerable because in the original aquatic conditions weight decreases significantly, and the effort required to keep the body erect is much lower.

Water birth

When we consider the changes of human behaviour and culture that may be necessary in order to adapt to a new aquatic paradigm new approaches may be required.
One of these is the natural birth of human offspring. If the species was originated in water environments, then, that condition should have influenced the modalities of natural childbirth.
This is something that has been known for a long time in some traditional cultures, and is being used successfully in some naturalist circles of contemporary societies.
Many midwives and authors have successfully explored the water birth method. Estelle Meyers, of Australia studied the connection between the birth of humans and dolphins, Jessica Johnson and Michel Odent published: “We are all children of the water”, and the book of Lakshmi Bertram and Michel Odent, “Choosing Waterbirth”, among others, have shown that water birth is not only possible, but in many cases, desirable.

Obviously, it is necessary to create the rights conditions for maximum relaxation. This implies an emotionally cozy, intimate, safe and personal environment. Delivery in warm water pools or bathtubs allows a more harmonious development of the maternal physiological process and above all reduces the trauma experienced by the child at birth.
Context B from "Peoples, Drugs and Serpents", D.Anton, Piriguazú Ediciones

Primates of the Seashore


That day the sea was calm.
The sun cleared wisps of cloud and quickly rose away from the horizon toward the highest point of the blue dome.
Several men were swimming in the bay and regularly diving for food. A few women remained in the shallower areas and every now and then swimmed a few strokes away from the beach and then returned.
Some children were swimming near the women and babies stayed afloat strongly clinging to the mothers long hair.
This people were excellent swimmers. For many thousands of lunar months they approached the shores of the sea and lagoons to search for  food.
They developed great skill with their hands. Their long fingers and opposable thumbs adapted marvelously to the exploration within the sandy and clayey bottoms, where shellfish lives.
The skin on their palms had spread slightly between the fingers to facilitate swimming.
Gradually their bodies had lost their old fur and now appeared smooth, tanned, just covered by a slight, almost invisible hair.
Adult males had their faces and breasts covered by curly hairs that showed their manhood in the eyes of females.
Very young children spent many hours in the water with their mothers. They instinctively swam from birth. The tasks of caring for infants were shared by women and men.
When night came, the group left the water and took refuge under the palm trees growing along the beach.
When the sea was rough, they preferred to remain on land where there was also enough food.  Many plants and animals provided a varied diet which complemented well the usual tasty menu of oysters and crabs.
The trees gave nutritious fruits and some plants had leaves and edible flowers.
There were animals that they could kill and eat.  Some were small and agile, others were large and powerful. But these animal-humans had managed to hunt through cunning ambushes or traps hidden in the foliage.
Some animals were very important because in their droppings special, almost magic, fungi grew.   When they ate them they increased their sensitivity and skill.  They could see much further away, feel extremely mild odours and hear almost inaudible sounds, allowing them to find rodents or other animals inside their deep burrows.

 The mushrooms had other main properties. Under their effect it was possible to hear the voice of the Mother Serpent.  She appeared in visions to explain the past and the future.
These animal-humans were at the same time, creatures of the sea and the forests, they could swim almost as dolphins, they were able to quickly climb the trunks of erect palms and, if necessary, ran quickly on the sands of the beaches.
We do not know how they called themselves. Probably they used different names according to their traditions and places.
We don’t know either how much time has passed since then.
Maybe 3 or 4 million years.
A few bones testify of their existence.
Some scientists have named ​​them with, hard to remember terms:, Australopithecus africanus , Australopithecus robustus ,Australopithecus afarensis , and other similar appellations.
Of those who lived near the beaches, may be the majority, very few remains were preserved.
The only incontrovertible remains are ourselves.
Some define them as primitive, semi-human, a very small and simple precursor to the “real” human beings who were to appear in the future version.
Surely it was not.
The spiritual essence that brings us together as a species  was already there. From them we came to be what we are ..
This happened long ago.

It was the time when humans were still brothers and sisters of animals and plants.

Tuesday, January 30, 2018

Unexpected discovery

European arrival to América about 24,000 years ago


Oldest human genome reveals less of an East Asian ancestry than thought.
Native Americans may have a more complicated heritage than previously believed.
Nearly one-third of Native American genes come from west Eurasian people linked to the Middle East and Europe, rather than entirely from East Asians as previously thought, according to a newly sequenced genome.
Based on the arm bone of a 24,000-year-old Siberian youth, the research could uncover new origins for America's indigenous peoples, as well as stir up fresh debate on Native American identities, experts say.
The study authors believe the new study could also help resolve some long-standing puzzles on the peopling of the New World, which include genetic oddities and archaeological inconsistencies. (Explore an atlas of the human journey.)
"These results were a great surprise to us," said study co-author and ancient-DNA specialistEske Willerslev, of the University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
"I hadn't expected anything like this. A genome related to present-day western Eurasian populations and modern Native Americans as well was really puzzling in the beginning. How could this happen?"
So what's new?
The arm bone of a three-year-old boy from the Mal'ta site near the shores of Lake Baikal in south-central Siberia (map) yielded what may be the oldest genome of modern humans ever sequenced.
DNA from the remains revealed genes found today in western Eurasians in the Middle East and Europe, as well as other aspects unique to Native Americans, but no evidence of any relation to modern East Asians. (Related: "Is This Russian Landscape the Birthplace of Native Americans?")
A second individual genome sequenced from material found at the site and dated to 17,000 years ago revealed a similar genetic structure.
It also provided evidence that humans occupied this region of Siberia throughout the entire brutally cold period of the Last Glacial Maximum, which ended about 13,000 years ago.
Why is it important?
Prevailing theories suggest that Native Americans are descended from a group of East Asians who crossed the Bering Sea via a land bridge perhaps 16,500 years ago, though some sites may evidence an earlier arrival. (See "Siberian, Native American Languages Linked—A First [2008].")
"This study changes this idea because it shows that a significant minority of Native American ancestry actually derives not from East Asia but from a people related to present-day western Eurasians," Willerslev said.
"It's approximately one-third of the genome, and that is a lot," he added. "So in that regard I think it's changing quite a bit of the history."
While the land bridge still formed the gateway to America, the study now portrays Native Americans as a group derived from the meeting of two different populations, one ancestral to East Asians and the other related to western Eurasians, explained Willerslev, whose research was published in the November 20 edition of the journal Nature.
"The meeting of those two groups is what formed Native Americans as we know them." (Learn more about National Geographic's Genographic Project.)
What does this mean?
Willerslev believes the discovery provides simpler and more likely explanations to long-standing controversies related to the peopling of the Americas.
"Although we know that North Americans are related to East Asians, it's striking that no contemporary East Asian populations really resemble Native Americans," he said.
"It's not like you can say that they are really closely related to Japanese, Chinese, or Koreans, so there seems to be something missing. But this result makes a lot of sense regarding why they don't fit so well genetically with contemporary East Asians—because one-third of their genome is derived from another population."
The findings could also allow reinterpretation of archaeological and anthropological evidence, like the famed Kennewick Man, whose remains don't look much like modern-day Native American or East Asian populations, according to some interpretations.
"Maybe, if he looks like something else, it's because a third of his ancestry isn't coming from East Asia but from something like the western Eurasians." (Read about history's greatmigration mysteries.)
What's next?
Many questions remain unanswered, including where and when the mixing of west Eurasian and East Asian populations occurred.
"It could have been somewhere in Siberia or potentially in the New World," Willerslev said.
"I think it's much more likely that it occurred in the Old World. But the only way to address that question would be to sequence more ancient skeletons of Native Americans and also Siberians."
Intriguing questions also exist about the nature of the advanced Upper Paleolithic Mal'ta society that now appears to figure in Native American genomes.
The Siberian child "was found buried with all kinds of cultural items, including Venus figurines, which have been found from Lake Baikal west all the way to Europe.
"So now we know that the individual represented with this culture is a western Eurasian, even though he was found very far east. It's an interesting question how closely related this individual might have been to the individuals carving these figurines at the same time in Europe and elsewhere."
By Brian Handwerk
National Geographic
22/11/2013



Thursday, January 25, 2018

Nothing to celebrate

While most Australians fire up the barbecue and crack open beers to celebrate national day on Friday, Robbie Thorpe will be marching in the shadow of Victoria's state parliament.
Like many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, he doesn't see anything to cheer on Australia Day, which marks the arrival of the First Fleet in 1778 to establish a British penal colony.
For him, January 26 is "Invasion Day", a reminder of the dispossession, violence, and loss that colonisation inflicted on the continent's first peoples. As far as the veteran indigenous activist is concerned, it's a day for mourning, solemn reflection, and resistance.
"Colonialism is a disease and this country has got a mental health problem known as denial of their genocidal acts," says Thorpe, who will march in Melbourne's annual Invasion Day rally aimed at changing the date of the national holiday.
"If it wasn't for their acts of terror and their policy of genocide, Australia wouldn't exist."
'Want for nothing'
More than simply symbolising a painful history, January 26 serves as a reminder to many of how Aboriginals remain marginalised to this day. Almost 250 years after European settlement, indigenous Australians on average die a decade earlier than the general population and have access to two-thirds the amount of disposable income.
"People don't realise how peaceful and how beautiful this country was when they arrived here," says Thorpe, who hosts a programme on indigenous affairs on community radio. "We had want for nothing."
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, who make up just three percent of the population, have organised en masse against Australia Day since at least 1938, when campaigner William Cooper held the first "Day of Mourning" in downtown Sydney.
More recently, though, the effort to change the date has gained momentum as an increasing number of white and other non-indigenous Australians have become attuned to the sensitivities around the date.
Earlier this month, the leader of the left-leaning Australian Greens, the third force in the country's politics, said moving Australia Day would be among the party's priorities in the coming year.
Richard Di Natale, the son of Italian immigrants, cited growing awareness, particularly among young people, that the day represented "hurt and suffering" for Aboriginal people.

In November, Triple J, a youth-orientated public radio station, announced it would move its popular annual music countdown from January 26 to the following day, pointing to the controversy around the date.
Reproduced from Al Jazeera
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/01/australia-national-day-fuels-debate-colonial-180124153019791.html

Monday, January 22, 2018

Oumuamua, the first recorded object from outside the solar system
.
Oumuamua was first spotted on October 19th by astronomers working on the Pan STARRS telescope in Hawaii. The telescope is used to scan the sky for objects orbiting near Earth, looking for any that might pose a threat to our planet. But one of the rocks in the latest observations looked as if it might not belong in our neck of the Universe.
The team at Pan STARRS continued observing the object over the next couple of days. Based on their measurements, they were fairly certain that they were watching the first ever interstellar asteroid. Up until then, such a distant visitor had never been seen before, so observatories all over the world started following the object, too, in order to calculate its path and figure out its shape.
Interstellar asteroids are thought to be rejects from other planetary systems. When our Solar System first formed, for instance, the giant planets tossed around all the smaller bits of material circulating around the Sun, some of which landed in the outer edges of the Solar System while others were ejected from our neighborhood completely. These outcasts then traveled through interstellar space, possibly passing by other stars. Conceivably, ejected material from other planetary systems must make their way to our Solar System once in a while, says Meech.
Such interstellar objects are thought to pass through our Solar System pretty frequently, but they’re usually moving too fast, and they’re usually too faint to see. With `Oumuamua, astronomers got lucky: the asteroid entered our Solar System at an angle, coming in close by the Sun, and then passed by Earth on its way out of the Solar System. That gave astronomers the chance to catch it with ground-based telescopes. “I think it’s really neat that we had this visitor, however briefly, and we had a chance to look at it up close,” says Meec