• Home
  • Thoughts
  • News
  • Meditations
  • About Us
  • Archives
  • Contact Us
Menu

Extinct

The Philosophy of Palaeontology Blog
  • Home
  • Thoughts
  • News
  • Meditations
  • About Us
  • Archives
  • Contact Us

Oily blobs from the underworld

February 5, 2023

How many nails must be pounded into a coffin before it ceases to spring open? Find out now, in Science Advances!

Defenders of the biogenicity of the ~3.5 Ga Apex chert “microfossils” have been fighting a rearguard action since 2002, when Martin Brasier and colleagues published a damning reanalysis of the specimens and their geological context. These specimens were once thought to be the oldest known fossils in the fossil record. William Schopf, who described the specimens in a celebrated paper, claimed that they occurred in a sedimentary bedded chert, and more spectacularly (since they greatly predate evidence for significant oxygenation) that they may have been related to oxygen-producing cyanobacteria. But Brasier and colleagues showed that the specimens most likely originated in a hydrothermal setting, ruling out a cyanobacterial interpretation. They also showed, for example, that parts of the original specimens were cropped out of the published photographs (and not represented in the accompanying interpretive drawings), all of which led them to conclude that the putative fossils were in fact abiotic structures that formed around recrystallizing mineral grains during a series of hydrothermal events.

I am going to write about the Apex chert sometime, because what I have related is only the beginning of the story. But from my extreme outsider’s perspective, it seems that Brasier and friends gained the upper hand in 2002 and never relinquished it. (Martin Brasier died tragically in 2014, when a severely overtired man fell asleep at the wheel and collided with Brasier’s car. It is an extremely sad story, not least because it is impossible to read about the circumstances of the accident and not feel sorry for the man who caused the crash.) Anyway, this new publication is the latest chapter in the now thirty-year saga of these probably-not-actually-fossils. It argues that the carbon associated with the specimens is not biological in origin. But it also raises a question: where did the organic molecules in the chert come from? One possibility is from a reaction between water and rocks, an intriguing suggestion that nonetheless does not exclude the possibility that life existed during this time.

For the full story, follow the link above to the open-access article. A more accessible write-up can be found here.

In Max Dresow
← Treasure trove from the Early TriassicA "Neo-Gouldian" argument for evolutionary contingency →

Recent News

Featured
May 20, 2025
Naw, F**k That
May 20, 2025
May 20, 2025
May 15, 2025
Not as Alien as it Looks
May 15, 2025
May 15, 2025
Mar 26, 2025
Philosophy and Paleontology Online Talk (April 2)
Mar 26, 2025
Mar 26, 2025
Dec 13, 2024
"Exploding the Big Bang," or revenge of the first antinomy?
Dec 13, 2024
Dec 13, 2024
Jul 22, 2024
Penultimate PhilPaleo "Roadshow" Talk Tomorrow (Matt Brewer)
Jul 22, 2024
Jul 22, 2024
Jul 2, 2024
Sixth PhilPaleo "Roadshow" Talk Soon (Brunet, Yoshida, Currie)
Jul 2, 2024
Jul 2, 2024
Jun 24, 2024
Fifth PhilPaleo "Roadshow" Talk Tomorrow (6/25): Jan Forsman (Iowa)
Jun 24, 2024
Jun 24, 2024
Jun 18, 2024
Fourth PhilPaleo "Roadshow" Talk Today: Alison McConwell (Massachusetts Lowell)
Jun 18, 2024
Jun 18, 2024
Jun 11, 2024
Third PhilPaleo "Roadshow" Talk Today: Marilynn Johnson (USD)
Jun 11, 2024
Jun 11, 2024
Jun 10, 2024
PhD opportunity working on Charles Lyell's notebooks
Jun 10, 2024
Jun 10, 2024

Powered by Squarespace