NASA Sets News Conference on Astrobiology Discovery - Page 5 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Fozzie_DeBear · 12-02-2010, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thor

That's a very depressing viewpoint

Well...to play devil's advocate...you could say that choosing to build Rockets and uber-telescopes rather than feed starving humans is also depressing...

Thor · 12-02-2010, 10:31 AM

Call me astounded, while it was theorized to be possible; having it being discovered here on earth is amazing!

So what do we have here, an alien DNA or something that evolved completely isolated and away from the rest of nature.

3 Justin 3 · 12-02-2010, 10:32 AM

So now that they have found new life, this really opens up the realm that aliens outside our solar system can differentiate than humans, as in they possibly could be small gray men. It changes how life is made/formed and is now open to the possibility that life other than ours exists and is completely different.

That is insane.

Thor · 12-02-2010, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

Well...to play devil's advocate...you could say that choosing to build Rockets and uber-telescopes rather than feed starving humans is also depressing...

Yet we build fancy new cars, go out to nice dinners, buy new clothes, build bigger warships, pay for massive governments, etc..

Its all about being realistic, the funding for Nasa compared to say the US military budget is pennies.

The starving humans is a matter of will and desire on the part of the wealthy nations. We won't fix it by removing a great institution like NASA and handing out food instead.

You can't starve the human mind and its curiosity, well unless you love the dark ages.

FlameOn · 12-02-2010, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thor

Call me astounded, while it was theorized to be possible; having it being discovered here on earth is amazing!

So what do we have here, an alien DNA or something that evolved completely isolated and away from the rest of nature.

If its happened twice on our world... what are the chances that it happened on the trillions of other stars out there? Probably fairly high

Bigtime · 12-02-2010, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troutman

But not this one. This one is completely different. Discovered in the poisonous Mono Lake, California, this bacteria is made of arsenic, something that was thought to be completely impossible

Hey NASA, you're supposed to be looking out into space. Not at lakes on earth.

FAIL!

Fozzie_DeBear · 12-02-2010, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thor

Yet we build fancy new cars, go out to nice dinners, buy new clothes, build bigger warships, pay for massive governments, etc..

Its all about being realistic, the funding for Nasa compared to say the US military budget is pennies.

The starving humans is a matter of will and desire on the part of the wealthy nations. We won't fix it by removing a great institution like NASA and handing out food instead.

You can't starve the human mind and its curiosity, well unless you love the dark ages.

Nah...I'm a big science guy...but I just like being devil's advocate for fun

Thor · 12-02-2010, 11:01 AM

But starving people argument is sooooo "Thor finish your dinner, there are kids in Africa who don't even have food to eat!"

FlameOn · 12-02-2010, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thor

But starving people argument is sooooo "Thor finish your dinner, there are kids in Africa who don't even have food to eat!"

Lol... I used to respond to that with... "Fine ship my leftovers to Africa then". Then get grounded for a day or so.

Knut · 12-02-2010, 11:03 AM

We have not had the requisite.... "I for one, bow down to our arsenic-based overlords".

Very interesting discovery. The next step is to find some primitive life on another planet in our solar system. That would exponentially increase the chance of intelligent life elsewhere.

Fozzie_DeBear · 12-02-2010, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thor

But starving people argument is sooooo "Thor finish your dinner, there are kids in Africa who don't even have food to eat!"

Or the classic..."There are starving kids in Africa? Name one of them"

Cowperson · 12-02-2010, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlameOn

If its happened twice on our world... what are the chances that it happened on the trillions of other stars out there? Probably fairly high

Coincidentally, a new estimate of the number of stars in the universe came out a few days ago . . . . . 300 Sextillion.

That's 100 billion squared X 30.

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/...,6202786.story

Cowperson

Hanni · 12-02-2010, 11:55 AM

I'm no scientician but does this not completely change the number of possible planets that could harbor life. This lends credence to the idea that life could evolve completely different than we know it. Maybe something like oxygen would be poisonous to life on another planet and they have a completely different system for respiration.

Phaneuf3 · 12-02-2010, 11:59 AM

Is it socially acceptable to discriminate against arsenic based life forms because they're different than me?
Don't want these little jerks coming in and taking the jobs of patriotic CANADIAN bacteria!

FlameOn · 12-02-2010, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hanni

I'm no scientician but does this not completely change the number of possible planets that could harbor life. This lends credence to the idea that life could evolve completely different than we know it. Maybe something like oxygen would be poisonous to life on another planet and they have a completely different system for respiration.

3 Justin 3 · 12-02-2010, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hanni

I'm no scientician but does this not completely change the number of possible planets that could harbor life. This lends credence to the idea that life could evolve completely different than we know it. Maybe something like oxygen would be poisonous to life on another planet and they have a completely different system for respiration.

Thats what I take from it. When we observe planets for we not only have to look for atmospheres like ours anymore. If we found a new life form, who knows how many more can exist. There are about an infinite amount of stars and each star is it's own solar system, the possibility of life other than our own is pretty high in my opinion.

The day humanity figures or lightspeed, which I think we will, is the day we contact other lifeforms.

I am overly optimitic though at the fact intelligent life exists other than our own.

troutman · 12-02-2010, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3 Justin 3

Thats what I take from it. When we observe planets for we not only have to look for atmospheres like ours anymore. If we found a new life form, who knows how many more can exist. There are about an infinite amount of stars and each star is it's own solar system, the possibility of life other than our own is pretty high in my opinion.

The day humanity figures or lightspeed, which I think we will, is the day we contact other lifeforms.

I am overly optimitic though at the fact intelligent life exists other than our own.

Even at light speed, it takes 4 years to travel to the nearest star.

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

Searches for companions orbiting Proxima Centauri have been unsuccessful, ruling out the presence of brown dwarfs and supermassive planets.[15][16] Precision radial velocity surveys have also ruled out the presence of super-Earths within the star's habitable zone.[17][nb 3] The detection of smaller objects will require the use of new instruments, such as the proposed James Webb Space Telescope.[18] Since Proxima Centauri is a red dwarf and a flare star, whether a planet orbiting this star could support life is disputed.[19][20] Nevertheless, because of the star's proximity to Earth, it has been proposed as a destination for interstellar travel.[21]

octothorp · 12-02-2010, 12:45 PM

I think this news is just as interesting as extraterrestial life. This really bolsters the theory that abiogenesis actually isn't that uncommon, but is difficult to detect because on our life-filled planet, any abiogenesis gets lost in the noise and is probably either immediately swallowed up by pre-existing life forms or mistaken for pre-existing life-forms. But in a poisonous lake, none of that noise exists and so these arsenic life forms can actually survive long-enough to be observed.

I'm really curious to see what the creationists and intelligent designists do with this info.

T@T · 12-02-2010, 12:55 PM

NASA fails. No new info at all. It was shown August 30th on Morgan Freemans "threw the wormhole" EP-5.

Felicia Wolf Simon was the scentist who discovered it.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/throu...d-we-get-here/

Fast forward to 33:30

Lego Man · 12-02-2010, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by octothorp

I think this news is just as interesting as extraterrestial life. This really bolsters the theory that abiogenesis actually isn't that uncommon, but is difficult to detect because on our life-filled planet, any abiogenesis gets lost in the noise and is probably either immediately swallowed up by pre-existing life forms or mistaken for pre-existing life-forms. But in a poisonous lake, none of that noise exists and so these arsenic life forms can actually survive long-enough to be observed.

I'm really curious to see what the creationists and intelligent designists do with this info.

Even if aliens do get discovered... they will just say..."well that means God created humans and aliens"

Isn't that what they have been doing for centuries with new ideas and discoveries?