![[Wizard holding up a candle]](../../images/wizard.gif)
A current newspaper tabloid has on its cover a story that the earth is in imminent danger of being infected with 2 x 1014 tons of noxious sulfur breathing bacteria. The article cited a noted scientist to the effect that if these bacteria were concentrated on the surface of the continents, they would cover the ground with a five foot layer. No doubt they would exceed and overwhelm all existing land flora and fauna. I was very skeptical of the story as were the scientists who first heard the research reported in the mid-twenties by a University of Chicago researcher.
I haven't been completely honest with you because the article I cited is in the October issue of the Scientific American. The same topic is a major part of Chapter 14 in Stephen Jay Gould's new book, Full House. In the twenties Edson S. Bastin had noted hydrogen sulfide and bicarbonates as consistent ingredients in the water overlying oil deposits. He surmised that these common biological outputs of sulfate breathing bacteria were evidence of bacteriological contamination of oil deposits. He supported his hypothesis by culturing live colonies out of the water. The scientific community was highly skeptical and the topic was largely dropped until 1987.
New research proved that deep "subsurface bacteria were ubiquitous." At temperatures approaching 300°F and at depths up to four miles, bacteria were found in porous rock at concentrations of up to ten million per gram. They appear to be able to eat sedimentary and igneous rock as long as water is available. Oxygen is not needed, only a variety of reducing chemicals instead. The outputs are organic compounds which are used by more advanced life forms. Over nine thousand bacterial strains have been found as well as a hundred fungi sharing the habitat. Good skeptical instincts kept the existence of these new SLiMEs (subsurface lithautotrophic microbial ecosystems) from scientific acceptance for almost seventy years. Just a reminder that skepticism is a necessary but not sufficient condition for arriving at truth. It may prevent nonsense from entering the canon, but without researchers with the instincts and funds to challenge the doubters, it may get in the way of understanding the world. Too much of even a good thing may not be healthy.
Copyright 1992-2005, The Association for Rational Thought