PANEL DISCUSSION 



The Identity of the "Organized Elements" 



H. C. Urey (Moderator; University of California, LaJolla, Calif.): In re- 

 viewing the events that led to this symposium, the moderator recalled that 

 approximately one year ago at The New York Academy of Sciences a presenta- 

 tion was made by Nagy el al. regarding the finding of what might be biogenic 

 hydrocarbons in the Orgueil meteorite. The moderator stated that although 

 he viewed their finding with skepticism at that time, he later looked over the 

 mass spectrometric data collected by the investigators and was sufficiently im- 

 pressed to suggest that additional analyses be run, such as infrared and ultra- 

 violet spectra. Once these suggestions had been carried out, the moderator 

 viewed microscopic preparations obtained from the Orgueil and Ivuna meteor- 

 ites that reminded him of biological matter. The moderator said he then posed 

 the following question to himself: Suppose these were living things, how did 

 they become imbedded in dolomite? In a subsequent published article, the 

 moderator suggested that these "organized elements" might be earthly forms 

 that had somehow been transferred from the earth to the moon in early geo- 

 logical times and later had returned to earth in carbonaceous meteorites. 

 Reactions among scientists to this theory varied; doubts were expressed, and 

 the moderator himself was (and still is) unsure of it. The moderator believes, 

 however, that the study of carbonaeceous meteroties for Ufe-like forms is not 

 an unreasonable pursuit, particularly when one considers that the United 

 States plans to spend some 25 billion dollars to put a man on the moon. 



The moderator acknowledged, on the other hand, that he was also impressed 

 by the arguments of Fitch et al. that the "organized elements" might be merely 

 terrestrial contaminations, such as ragweed pollen. He noted, however, that 

 investagators Nagy, Claus, Meinschein, and Hennessy have been willing to 

 show their sample preparations freely and to solicit the opinions of others. He 

 noted, also, that they are enthusiastic; and while it is true that enthusiasm 

 may lead to errors, it is also true that lack of enthusiasm is not an especially 

 strong motivation for further work. 



J. D. Bernal {Department of Physics, Birkbeck College, University of London, 

 London, England) : This discussant suggested that the problem be defined in 

 terms of the question, "What is it we are looking at?"; also that the problem be 

 approached in terms of all related subjects and that carbonaceous meteorites 

 be considered only as related to other meteorites. He raised the question of 

 whether carbonaceous meteorites represent the beginning or the end of the 

 development of meteorite bodies; the origin of these objects, he pointed out, is 

 an extremely important question. In his opinion, the "organized elements" 

 could be contaminations, "jokes of nature," or remnants of organisms. One 

 approach to the contamination problem is to determine whether anything could 

 have gotten into the samples since the meteorite fell on earth; another is to 

 ascertain whether the "organized elements" resemble any known biological 

 forms. If they are not contaminations, the burden of proof lies with Nagy 

 et al., and it is the biologists who must evaluate such proof. As for being "jokes 

 of nature," the "organized elements" might, for example, be mineral concretions 



606 



