Evidence of photosynthesis on earth at least 4.1 billion years ago.

[Pterodactylus]

The graphite is older than the zircon containing it, the researchers said. They know the zircon is 4.1 billion years old, based on its ratio of uranium to lead; they don't know how much older the graphite is.

The research suggests life in the universe could be abundant, Harrison said. On Earth, simple life appears to have formed quickly, but it likely took many millions of years for very simple life to evolve the ability to photosynthesize.

The carbon contained in the zircon has a characteristic signature -- a specific ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-13 -- that indicates the presence of photosynthetic life.

"We need to think differently about the early Earth," Bell said.

Lay-person's article is HERE and for those interested the Scientific Paper.

This data puts the earliest evidence for life back 300 million years and the fact, as noted above, that it's photosynthetic life, suggests life had been around awhile to evolve. Considering that the earth is only 4.54 billions of years old, this adds to an idea that I have always had - as soon as conditions were such were life could form, life did form. Anyway, pretty cool.

[Ripster42]

Slightly off topic, but if this type of thing interests you, you'd probably be interested in the miller-urey experiments. Basically some guys 60 years ago demonstrated how you get the amino acids we're 'built' from from non-biologic processes. The Great Courses (or whatever that series of lectures on tape is called) has a great series on them.

[Deleted]

Considering that the earth is only 4.54 billions of years old, this adds to an idea that I have always had - as soon as conditions were such were life could form, life did form. Anyway, pretty cool.

Not only that - but if that is the case, this happened during or even before the great bombardment - which should have eradicated any dawning life. Which means it actualy might have happened several times. The thousands of impact events might both have kickstarted and erazed life many times.

[Chickat]

Lay-person's article is HERE and for those interested the Scientific Paper.

This data puts the earliest evidence for life back 300 million years and the fact, as noted above, that it's photosynthetic life, suggests life had been around awhile to evolve. Considering that the earth is only 4.54 billions of years old, this adds to an idea that I have always had - as soon as conditions were such were life could form, life did form. Anyway, pretty cool.

Thats really exciting.

- - - Updated - - -

Now, can life exist in lakes of methane or a similar hazardous to life element on earth? If so, life is probably everywhere.

[Deleted]

Pretty interesting, going to look into this one in more detail

[apples]

inevitable discovery.

we knew this was coming ever since we discovered life on mars

[Kaleredar]

Thats really exciting.

- - - Updated - - -

Now, can life exist in lakes of methane or a similar hazardous to life element on earth? If so, life is probably everywhere.

Well methane is most commonly an organic compound, so...

[Herecius]

An awesome discovery, to find that life could develop so quickly once the conditions were right and the stage set.

[apples]

As much as there is a possibility that there is life on mars because of the water, there is also a possibility that its only a water

i was talking about the meteorites that landed on earth from mars but ok

[Iphie]

Now, can life exist in lakes of methane or a similar hazardous to life element on earth? If so, life is probably everywhere.

It's one of the reasons science is looking at Titan, it has liquids on it's surfaces and they are most likely a methane-ethane compound. Considering the ongoing discovery of extremophiles on earth we should not be *too* surprised if we find life on other planets/moons in our solar system. The real question will be: is this life related to us in any way, because if it is then we're likely looking at pan-spermia or contamination from our probes/landers/whatnot, if it is not then we will have found our second occurance of life and the likelihood of life out there, in the universe beyond our solar system, will increase enormously.

[Independent voter]

Did photosynthesis happen by random chance or was it the plant's destiny to develop photosynthesis? That everything needed was there and photosynthesis was inevitable? Why haven't animals developed it?

[khalltusk]

Did photosynthesis happen by random chance or was it the plant's destiny to develop photosynthesis? That everything needed was there and photosynthesis was inevitable? Why haven't animals developed it?

It might be down to how plants and animals co-evolved. Plants kept getting better at harvesting energy from the sun and getting nutrients from the ground/water, while animals that at some point evolved to eat plants because it was easier to devour something that had already done this hard task in the first place. Then obviously some animals over time ate the ones who were eating the plants.

Obviously thats a very simple view and there could have been other reasons.

[CptEgo]

This is exiting, I don't understand it but I'm exited..

[Deleted]

inevitable discovery.

we knew this was coming ever since we discovered life on mars

We haven't discovered life on Mars.

[GennGreymane]

I guess this confirms the theory I read a few years ago about planet life having to be first and around long enough to create better conditions for life.

[Daten-shi]

so what humans gain from this discovery? useless...

[Deleted]

So, ur saying there's a chance there could be hot draenei sluts somewhere in the Universe?

[khalltusk]

so what humans gain from this discovery? useless...

It helps us understand more about the planet we live on perhaps? Might enlighten a few people who believe the earths only 10 thousand years old understand its much much older than that? Who knows!

[Ripster42]

Well methane is most commonly an organic compound, so...

Methane does not require organisms. I know that's not what you said, but the way you're replying to the person you quoted makes it seem that's what you meant.

- - - Updated - - -

It helps us understand more about the planet we live on perhaps? Might enlighten a few people who believe the earths only 10 thousand years old understand its much much older than that? Who knows!

The only explanation I've heard from young earth creationists isn't that they don't believe the evidence that the earth is billions of years old, but that they believe physical constants aren't constants. So those billions of years happened during the 7 days of creation. It won't effect them at all.

[Endus]

Yeah, double-checking, but they mention that the prior establishment for the earliest traces of life was about 3.8 billion years back; 4.1 is in the "neat" category, but it isn't a complete reversal of prior thinking, either.