miRNA are order of magnitude smaller.
Chemists consider any covalent compound involving carbon that isn't only carbon to be "organic".
Normal usage is what you wrote.
Alternative but widespread usage is "agricultural products made without synthesized fertilizers and pesticides".
Oh, and business jargon uses organic to mean "natural market growth or internally developed capabilities", as opposed to buying the growth or capability.
And in military usage, organic means "a permanently assigned assisting unit", so that routine vehicle maintenance, for example, is handled by people who travel with the vehicle.
This is particular to stellar astrophysics. Astronomers studying asteroids maintain the conventional definition.
Nowadays, 'organic' refers to chemicals with a majority (?) carbon content. It gets a little tricky for things like diamond and graphene (both materials) or for compounds that have a lot of heteroatoms.
Oddly enough, another nucleotide base (adenine) is exactly 50:50 C:N and has been proved to be synthesised from just HCN. So is it 'half'organic' :)
Organic compound simply means that there are carbon-hydrogen bonds or carbon-carbon bonds in a compound.
The view that this requires "life" was a legitimate theory back in 1800s and was disproved in the late 1820s. (See the wiki link for more details)
Correct, and they don't say that. They found an RNA compound. Uracil, one of the molecules that is found in RNA.
Not sure of the purpose of this comment to regurgitate what's found in the article itself, which goes into greater detail.
There are also situations like this one where, while I find the headline interesting, I don't care enough to read through the whole link - so I'll check the comments for any significant additions or corrections or clarifications, and sometimes read the interesting discussions that occur, but won't even click through to the main link.
It might come down to a question of number of perspectives - the linked article is usually by a single person/group (or worse, a news org poorly interpreting the results of a group), while the HN comment section will be filled with a variety of people, often with domain specific knowledge and experience.
All that to say, HN is an interesting community, and I don't think there's a "wrong" way to interact with/be part of it (as long as you're being respectful etc.).
RNA is a compound, and Uracil is also a compound. Thus you cannot tell from just the words "RNA compound" whether they mean a compound that is RNA or a compound that is part of RNA.
instead, better to take tardigrades, induce tun state, embed that in rock, and let that float around for a while. They have pretty much everything needed to survive including safe storage for DNA, DNA repair enzymes, redundant DNA, radiation-resistant exterior, etc.
Or evidence for the RNA world hypothesis [1].
They didn't found any other nucleotides.
"Other DNA/RNA nucleobases were not positively identified in both the A0106 and C0107 samples. This does not necessarily exclude a possibility that those nucleobases are present in the Ryugu samples, but just they may be below the detection limit under the experimental conditions employed"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-36904-3
For having RNA you need a molecule composed of roughly 200 nucleotides. If we find RNA, it would be very indicative of DNA, so of living beings very similar to us