Life older than previously thought.

Life older than previously thought.

Author
Discussion

Lost_BMW

Original Poster:

12,955 posts

177 months

Friday 10th February 2012
quotequote all

Eric Mc

122,165 posts

266 months

Friday 10th February 2012
quotequote all
Only 760 million years.

I thought they had traced life back to about 3.5 billion years.

deeen

6,081 posts

246 months

Friday 10th February 2012
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Only 760 million years.

I thought they had traced life back to about 3.5 billion years.
This is described as the earliest animal life, I guess plant life or the first single cell that was some form of "life" is the older figure.

Simpo Two

85,771 posts

266 months

Friday 10th February 2012
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Only 760 million years.

I thought they had traced life back to about 3.5 billion years.
That's more like the age of the planet.

Caruso

7,445 posts

257 months

Friday 10th February 2012
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Only 760 million years.

I thought they had traced life back to about 3.5 billion years.
I think that's the oldest rocks which are 3.8bn. Most of the crust has been recycled through tectonic processes or weathering more recently than that.

dodgyviper

1,197 posts

239 months

Friday 10th February 2012
quotequote all
550 Million years was thought to be the limit for quite a while

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion

Lost_BMW

Original Poster:

12,955 posts

177 months

Friday 10th February 2012
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Only 760 million years.

I thought they had traced life back to about 3.5 billion years.
I think that was for the earliest dated simple / single cell/ bacterial type forms?

This sounds like a more complex form. Seven hundred and sixty million years of evolution to peak at..


.. humans. And wasps. What a waste of time biggrin

Edited by Lost_BMW on Friday 10th February 21:37

Eric Mc

122,165 posts

266 months

Friday 10th February 2012
quotequote all
That's always been my understanding too.

Even though MOST of the earth's crust has indeed been recycled many times over through the plate tectonics process, there are some areas of the great continental shields where very, very ancient crust is still visible near the surface. Parts of Canada, South Africa and Australia have surface rocks that go back to around 3 billion years ago - and some of these rocks contain fossils of single celled life forms.

I got the book "First Life" last Christmas and it goes through the development of early life.


Halb

53,012 posts

184 months

Saturday 11th February 2012
quotequote all
If First Life isn't too stodgy, I may give it a go.

I remember some of the life that is discussed in SoD, blobs and things, where stuff went from having an inside and outside to also having a 'within'.
Need to reread it.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Science_of_Discworld

Eric Mc

122,165 posts

266 months

Saturday 11th February 2012
quotequote all
I have to say, it is a bit stodgy.

Simpo Two

85,771 posts

266 months

Saturday 11th February 2012
quotequote all
A self-replicating molecule is the hard bit, then you have to get from prokaryotic cells to eukaryotic cells. Then you get lots of the latter to work together as a community, then form a single organism, then you're home and dry smile


Halb

53,012 posts

184 months

Saturday 11th February 2012
quotequote all
Is that a census map of Huyton to Moss Side?

Lost_BMW

Original Poster:

12,955 posts

177 months

Saturday 11th February 2012
quotequote all
Halb said:
Is that a census map of Huyton to Moss Side?
Would that be the posh part of the third city then?

BuzzLightyear

1,426 posts

183 months

Saturday 11th February 2012
quotequote all
Shall I be the first to suggest you just ask MBH?

hehe