OT Breaking: Life Found on Venus

[prelude00]

they keep finding ****
and then you never hear about it 3 months from now


lets put that money to good use like curing cancer

I say we leave the money in the "science/space exploration" bucket alone, and use the money in the "buying weed" bucket for curing cancer ...

Or better yet, grab the money from the military (looking at the states)

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk

[brownbobcat]

Y'all scientists need to leave the religious people alone lol. They don't hurt anyone believing in whatever they've been taught...so long as they don't force it on others. RealGM mobile app

Very true, except for all those other times they did try to force it on others and/or have wars over things like bread recipes.

[Hipster Doofus]

Time to watch 'Arrival', 'Interstellar' and 'Europa Report' again one night this week.

[TRik]

Y'all scientists need to leave the religious people alone lol. They don't hurt anyone believing in whatever they've been taught...so long as they don't force it on others. RealGM mobile app

Very true, except for all those other times they did try to force it on others and/or have wars over things like bread recipes.

Lol, just to name a few.... the Thirty Years' War, the French Wars of Religion, the Sri Lankan Civil War, September 11 attacks and other terrorist attacks, the Bosnian War, and the Rwandan Civil War.

But yeah, they don't hurt anyone.

[Lateral Quicks]

I love this kind of stuff. It scares the shite out of me though.

I try not to worry about things I can't control. If there are aliens out there that can reach Earth, they're likely far more advanced than we are, and if their intentions were hostile there's very little if anything we could do about it. We'd be like Joey Graham to their Kobe Bryant.

As far as this Venus news, if there is life in the clouds, it's very likely to be very primitive/unintelligent life (think bacteria). I wouldn't expect a Venusian invasion any time soon

Still, if true, this would be arguably the greatest discovery in human history. I hope it's true.

Coincidentally, the upper atmosphere of Venus is among the most hospitable environments in the solar system (outside of Earth, that is). There has talk about building cloud cities on Venus for decades. If their is atmospheric life already there, cloud cities probably become a non-starter for risk of cross-contamination.

[TRik]

We were too slow with our Venus terraforming plan and aliens beat us to the punch.

Next up, the war of 2200: the fight for Mars. Planet Earth shall never lose again!!!

[Lateral Quicks]

they keep finding ****
and then you never hear about it 3 months from now


lets put that money to good use like curing cancer

No, they need to take some money away from the military instead of taking it from science and space research. We gonna need to get off this rock one day.

Although there is no way to prove this since you and I are finite, that's never going to happen as it's physically impossible. From the impossibility of living for a long duration in space to the impossibility of faster than light travel and the energy it would required to possibly break that law.

Why is it impossible to live for a long duration in space? You don't need faster than light travel to live in space.

With improved energy sources (nuclear fusion for example, or even stuff we haven't thought of yet) and advanced construction methods (think automated asteroid mining, self-replicating machines, large scale additive manufacturing, etc.), we can build massive habitats in space that rotate to produce artificial gravity and that have strong magnetic fields to protect us against radiation. In many respects it's easier to build your own mini-planetoids than try to colonize/terraform other worlds - you can build exactly what you need/want to live comfortably.

Our solar system is chock full of useful raw materials - the asteroid belt for construction materials and the gas giants for possible fuel sources, for example.

The sun won't go nova for billions of years. It's just a matter of time before we have the technology to colonize other solar systems. In fact I'd bet we'll have the technology and the means to build colony ships in 100-200 years or so. Again, you don't need faster than light travel to explore the galaxy - just the patience for a long, long journey (think decades to close stars, and centuries beyond our local neighbourhood).

[GREATPURPLESHARK]

Kevin Willis,
I apologize if my approach to your post caused you to feel attacked. That was not my intention. I certainly appreciate that you say that your explanations were perhaps worded less clearly than you intended, and then you cited your original sources for clarification. I can’t tell you how happy I was to see that, because that is exactly how these things should be done !
I look forward to hearing any other thoughts you have on this evolving science/religion discussion.

[PD28]

Y'all scientists need to leave the religious people alone lol. They don't hurt anyone believing in whatever they've been taught...so long as they don't force it on others. RealGM mobile app

Very true, except for all those other times they did try to force it on others and/or have wars over things like bread recipes.

Lol, just to name a few.... the Thirty Years' War, the French Wars of Religion, the Sri Lankan Civil War, September 11 attacks and other terrorist attacks, the Bosnian War, and the Rwandan Civil War.

But yeah, they don't hurt anyone.

Lol my comment was for the people debating on a basketball forum. Well ya if we look at the effects of religion across human history, it's done worse than good.

[Johnny Bball]

No, they need to take some money away from the military instead of taking it from science and space research. We gonna need to get off this rock one day.

Although there is no way to prove this since you and I are finite, that's never going to happen as it's physically impossible. From the impossibility of living for a long duration in space to the impossibility of faster than light travel and the energy it would required to possibly break that law.

Why is it impossible to live for a long duration in space? You don't need faster than light travel to live in space.

It **** up your muscles, internal organs, bones become as brittle as a bread stick etc.

And there is no power source powerful enough to simulate gravity on anything of that size. And it wouldn't matter if it rotated in zero gravity. You see why?

[TRik]

Y'all scientists need to leave the religious people alone lol. They don't hurt anyone believing in whatever they've been taught...so long as they don't force it on others. RealGM mobile app

Very true, except for all those other times they did try to force it on others and/or have wars over things like bread recipes.

The irony as well. This thread was started because a certain gas was identified on Venus, that's it. Yet somehow, some people still managed to start fighting about religion.

[rbp246]

they keep finding ****
and then you never hear about it 3 months from now


lets put that money to good use like curing cancer

I say we leave the money in the "science/space exploration" bucket alone, and use the money in the "buying weed" bucket for curing cancer ...

Or better yet, grab the money from the military (looking at the states)

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk

It's the consumer driven economy that's the problem.

Everything is made cheap and to fall apart just so we can consume more and keep people employed making garbage we dont need.

If we got rid of this thinking and made stuff that lasted we could employ more people in sectors such as space exploration/ environmental clean up/ and so on. We would also create less pollution and save our natural resources.

Society as a whole needs a reset.





Sent from my SM-G950W using RealGM mobile app

[Lateral Quicks]

Although there is no way to prove this since you and I are finite, that's never going to happen as it's physically impossible. From the impossibility of living for a long duration in space to the impossibility of faster than light travel and the energy it would required to possibly break that law.

Why is it impossible to live for a long duration in space? You don't need faster than light travel to live in space.

It **** up your muscles, internal organs, bones become as brittle as a bread stick etc.

And there is no power source powerful enough to simulate gravity on anything of that size. And it wouldn't matter if it rotated in zero gravity. You see why?

With artificial gravity and protection from radiation - why would those things happen? You are talking about our current level of technology, not what we will be capable if the future. We already know how to do these things in principle - our technology just isn't advanced enough yet.

If you Google artificial gravity you'll find all sorts of resources. This is something we know how to do today, and could actually do if we wanted to tomorrow. We have the means. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if Elon Musk builds some rotating space stations for tourist revenue down the road - there will be a market for it once he gets his costs down enough.

What I'm talking about though is massive space stations that house millions of people. I see no reason this can't happen in the future, but we don't have the technology/means for it yet.

[TheBoi10]

Lol what a twist of the truth

[GREATPURPLESHARK]

Hi Matty, there is a huge, and very important, difference between belief and knowledge. People can believe anything they want. Some people still “believe” that the Earth is flat. But they are stupid and wrong for too many reasons to even begin to list here. I am not interested in what is possible for me to believe, I am interested in believing things that are actually, demonstrably true. It is possible for me to imagine that a being was the creator of the universe, but since there is absolutely no evidence to support this idea I choose not to believe it. The time to believe something is AFTER it has been demonstrated to be true. The god claims of many societies, involving many different gods, have never risen to the level of being provably demonstrated, so there is literally no good reason to believe in any of them. Many people do believe in them all around the world for reasons of indoctrination, wishful and hopeful thinking, lack of critical examination of those claims, among many other bad reasons for belief. I need good reasons to believe something, and without any good reasons I am making the only rational choice available to withhold my belief until any one of those many claims can be shown to be true, That is the only reasonable and defensible position an intelligent person can take. You also seem confused by the very big difference between believing in a god despite not being there to personally witness and verify it’s reality and believing in the big bang theory without being there to personally witness it’s reality. The difference is that there are exactly zero lines of scientific evidence to Support the reality of any god claim, yet there are multiple lines of scientific evidence to support the reality of the big bang theory, such as red shifted light that we can directly observe, and a measurably expanding universe that can be regressed back to a single point at some time in the past, which we have measured to be about 14 billion years ago (13.8 to be more precise). So, yes, there are very good, and scientifically valid reasons to believe that the big bang theory is correct, and yet there are no scientifically valid reasons to believe in either the existence of any god at all, or of the claim that any one of these gods is responsible for the creation of the universe. These two beliefs are not equal in any way, and believing in one is justified while believing in the other is not.

They don't call the big bang a theory for nothing. And I don't need to tell you about the countless of scientific reports that have been debunked over the years. Your idea of a "Scientific evidence" of something doesn't make it a fact unless we can actually observe it to be the case.

You just said the big bang can be demonstrated to be true, so do one for us. Show me that something - living or non-living - can come out of thin air.

Hello again Matty, Oh boy, where to even start with this mess ? First of all, you have made several different errors in your understanding of the science involved, as well as scientific terms. First, you seem to be saying “the big bang is not proven because it is only a theory”. In science a theory is very different than what you might mean when you use the word theory As just some kind of “guess”. In science a theory is a hypothesis that has one or multiple lines of supporting evidence that explains all known data without any contradicting data. That is not a guess. The big bang theory is not a guess, it is a well-supported scientific theory that explains all available data. If you drop a pen do you doubt that it will fall to the ground because gravity is “just a theory” ? If you stick your hand in a jar of influenza do you doubt that you will get sick because “germ theory” is “just a theory” ? Do you doubt that the Earth orbits the sun just because Heliocentrism is “just a theory” ? These theories are actually considered scientific fact. Just because you don’t understand how the word theory is used in science doesn’t make any of it untrue or unreliable.
Many theories change over time as new data emerges, and if the theory can not account for the new data it must be changed or discarded. That is how science works. That is why, when the extraordinarily few scientific hoaxes have occurred it was actually other scientists who exposed them. But do not be confused, there is a huge difference between a hoax or junk science claim that can legitimately be “debunked” and the large number of legitimate theories that have been modified over time to account for new information (such as evolution, that knew absolutely nothing about genetics when it was proposed). Theories that are amended over time are still legitimate and reliable explanations of the mechanisms of nature.
As for your contention that only science that is observable can be considered fact .... that just displays such a kindergarten level of misunderstanding of how science works that it is not even worth going through a lengthy explanation to make it clear to you how deeply and thoroughly wrong you are about that. Just go read a few science books and you will figure it out.
As for your last statement about the big bang theory, you asked me to give you a demonstration of how it can be scientifically supported, and yet you say this after I just gave you at least two examples of how we know it is correct. Maybe you should read more slowly to aid your comprehension.
You did say one interesting thing though. You implied that it is impossible for something to appear out of nothing, as if that is the stupidest thing that you can imagine, and yet you are clearly unaware of the recent discovery of particles that seem to pop in and out of existence without an apparent cause. Your attitude also seems very strange for a guy that seems to support the idea of a christian god. This is the same god, of course, that literally spoke some magic words and made the universe appear, out of NOTHING !
Maybe you need to sit down and think through your positions a little more carefully.

[TRik]

They don't call the big bang a theory for nothing. And I don't need to tell you about the countless of scientific reports that have been debunked over the years. Your idea of a "Scientific evidence" of something doesn't make it a fact unless we can actually observe it to be the case.

You just said the big bang can be demonstrated to be true, so do one for us. Show me that something - living or non-living - can come out of thin air.

Hello again Matty, Oh boy, where to even start with this mess ? First of all, you have made several different errors in your understanding of the science involved, as well as scientific terms. First, you seem to be saying “the big bang is not proven because it is only a theory”. In science a theory is very different than what you might mean when you use the word theory As just some kind of “guess”. In science a theory is a hypothesis that has one or multiple lines of supporting evidence that explains all known data without any contradicting data. That is not a guess. The big bang theory is not a guess, it is a well-supported scientific theory that explains all available data. If you drop a pen do you doubt that it will fall to the ground because gravity is “just a theory” ? If you stick your hand in a jar of influenza do you doubt that you will get sick because “germ theory” is “just a theory” ? Do you doubt that the Earth orbits the sun just because Heliocentrism is “just a theory” ? These theories are actually considered scientific fact. Just because you don’t understand how the word theory is used in science doesn’t make any of it untrue or unreliable.
Many theories change over time as new data emerges, and if the theory can not account for the new data it must be changed or discarded. That is how science works. That is why, when the extraordinarily few scientific hoaxes have occurred it was actually other scientists who exposed them. But do not be confused, there is a huge difference between a hoax or junk science claim that can legitimately be “debunked” and the large number of legitimate theories that have been modified over time to account for new information (such as evolution, that knew absolutely nothing about genetics when it was proposed). Theories that are amended over time are still legitimate and reliable explanations of the mechanisms of nature.
As for your contention that only science that is observable can be considered fact .... that just displays such a kindergarten level of misunderstanding of how science works that it is not even worth going through a lengthy explanation to make it clear to you how deeply and thoroughly wrong you are about that. Just go read a few science books and you will figure it out.
As for your last statement about the big bang theory, you asked me to give you a demonstration of how it can be scientifically supported, and yet you say this after I just gave you at least two examples of how we know it is correct. Maybe you should read more slowly to aid your comprehension.
You did say one interesting thing though. You implied that it is impossible for something to appear out of nothing, as if that is the stupidest thing that you can imagine, and yet you are clearly unaware of the recent discovery of particles that seem to pop in and out of existence without an apparent cause. Your attitude also seems very strange for a guy that seems to support the idea of a christian god. This is the same god, of course, that literally spoke some magic words and made the universe appear, out of NOTHING !
Maybe you need to sit down and think through your positions a little more carefully.

Dude, face the facts. God first planted dinosaur bones to test his follower's faith and now he's planted gas on another planet to do the same thing. The creator is just a really good trickster.

#greenfont

[GREATPURPLESHARK]

Good one TRik ! I’m confused though. Did Satan bury the dinosaur bones to trick humanity, or were the dinosaurs on Noah’s ark along with all the other animals ? Christians really have to get their stories straight on that one.

[TRik]

Good one TRik ! I’m confused though. Did Satan bury the dinosaur bones to trick humanity, or were the dinosaurs on Noah’s ark along with all the other animals ? Christians really have to get their stories straight on that one.

Creationists commenting on space science is also a little humorous. The christian bible teaches its followers that the Earth is only about 6000 years old. The mere existence of stars shows this is laughably wrong. We can prove the science behind light speed and light years. This means if the Earth was only 6000 years old the night sky would be sheer black and basically have no stars.

#carlsagan

[TRik]

Get that garbage outta here!!!!!

[GREATPURPLESHARK]

True ! And the fact that many people were jailed or even killed for promoting the theory of heliocentrism over the course of more than a century kind of reminds of the fact of religion’s eternal opposition to scientific progress and highlights that other guy’s question about what harm does religion do.