How bacteria stabilize nuclear waste: http://news.discovery.com/tech/biotechnology/how-bacteria-clean-up-nuclear-waste-110909.htm
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > The LENR energy source has a down side. It is not a source of free energy > to a biological system. The emitted radiation would be obviously harmful. > Consequently, the source would be only employed when this is the only way > to avoid death. Fortunately, evolution has found better ways to get energy. > Nevertheless, the energy source of all life-forms has not been identified. > I can imagine that some single-cell organisms use fusion and transmutation > as sources of energy, but these are rare and generally occupy environments > inaccessible to biologists where the easy sources of energy are not > available. > > In addition, what biologist would suggest that bacteria appear to be > causing a nuclear reaction without being able to show very strong evidence, > which is obviously not easy to get? You can now see the reaction to this > idea even in the face of strong evidence that the effect is real. > > You might ask why cockroaches are very immune to radiation? Why did > evolution give this protection unless they had to be defended from > radiation. Has anyone measured the exact energy source used by a cockroach? > > Ed > > On Jun 9, 2013, at 4:15 PM, James Bowery wrote: > > The subject say it all, really: 'Yet Another LENR "Miracle": Evolution >> Didn't Find It' >> >> If an energy source as abundant and ubiquitous as LENR appears to be >> exists, why wouldn't evolution have found ways of creating the NAE (nuclear >> active environment)? If you say "It did." then you have to explain why the >> manifest evolutionary advantages of such an energy source didn't cause it >> to become wide-spread enough to have baffled biochemists in the course of >> their analysis of metabolism. >> > >
