• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Prospect of life in deep space as Nasa probe finds hundreds of new planets

As long as everyone is aware that space belongs to the U.S. It's already our moon.
It is not our moon. We have not done **** with the moon that any other country cannot do in a year if it wanted to.
 
What could possibly make abiogenesis "only able to happen once?" What, the moment the first proteins formed they sent out some sort of magical disruption signal to the entire rest of the universe that ends the same process elsewhere?

Frankly, Deuce, it is attitudes like that that hold back scientific progress. If there was something about abiogenesis that made it so it could only happen once, there wouldn't be anything magical about it. What you're doing is ruling out a potential natural hypothesis without any evidence whatsoever, and this, my friend, is magical thinking.

You said it yourself, we don't know that there's other life out there. More to the point, we don't have any evidence to think it is probable or even possible. What information do you have that, in principle, abiogenesis must be able to happen elsewhere? What information do you have that, if it is possible to occur elsewhere, the degree of likelihood is less than the number of stars?

What those "simple laws of probability" you talk about actually tell us is that if we can't fill in the variables then we can't know what the probability is. Do you know what the likelihood of abiogenesis occurring on an Earthlike planet is? If you do, please stop holding out on us and go claim your Nobel prize. If you don't, then it is unscientific to speculate, you're just guessing.
 
Last edited:
Why haven't we heard anything from the realtors yet?
 
Hundreds of new planets have been discovered by Nasa's new space probe, sparking new hope of life outside our solar system.

Up to 140 of the newly-found planets are rocky and Earth-like containing both land and water, conditions which could allow simple lifeforms to develop.

The Kepler probe - which constantly monitors more than 150,000 stars for tell-tale signs of planets orbiting them - also may have found five new solar systems, Nasa said.

I'd feel nothing but sympathy for any other alien species that will have to come into contact with the human race in the future.
I would bet money that if we ever did find another life, even if it was intelligent but not as advanced. Exploitation would most likely soon follow.
We can barely control ourselves on Earth, imagine us in space. o_O

Saying that, find other planets that are similar to Earth. Gotta have an escape plan for when we really **** up.
 
Last edited:
Frankly, Deuce, it is attitudes like that that hold back scientific progress. If there was something about abiogenesis that made it so it could only happen once, there wouldn't be anything magical about it. What you're doing is ruling out a potential natural hypothesis without any evidence whatsoever, and this, my friend, is magical thinking.

You said it yourself, we don't know that there's other life out there. More to the point, we don't have any evidence to think it is probable or even possible. What information do you have that, in principle, abiogenesis must be able to happen elsewhere? What information do you have that, if it is possible to occur elsewhere, the degree of likelihood is less than the number of stars?

What those "simple laws of probability" you talk about actually tell us is that if we can't fill in the variables then we can't know what the probability is. Do you know what the likelihood of abiogenesis occurring on an Earthlike planet is? If you do, please stop holding out on us and go claim your Nobel prize. If you don't, then it is unscientific to speculate, you're just guessing.
I think I'd fall somewhere between the two of you.

It's immensely unlikely that there is any reason why abiogenesis could only happen once - after all, deterministic mechanics (and pretty much quantum, too) says that any act can on principle always be repeated. However, we don't know the probability that abiogenesis has only happened once. It could be we're a one-in-a-googolplex lucky chance, or it could be theres at least one form of life per star. I'd tend closer towards the latter, but it's impossible to tell.
 
It is not our moon. We have not done **** with the moon that any other country cannot do in a year if it wanted to.

I believe our flag got posted first. It's ours and we should set up toll stations for anyone wishing to go beyond it. By the way, you implied that "any other country" can go to the moon "in a year?" I think you are probably wrong about that. Perhaps not though. Surely the NASA of Rwanda is about to make a breakthrough.
 
Last edited:
Saying that, find other planets that are similar to Earth. Gotta have an escape plan for when we really **** up.

On the backs of American Space Shuttles and Space Stations. I hope they put me in charge of filtering the rift raft. I'd have to personally interview every Frenchman for a start.
 
It is not our moon. We have not done **** with the moon that any other country cannot do in a year if it wanted to.


Granted that we haven't necessarily done anything giving us a reasonable claim to the whole moon, BUT...

There isn't a country on Earth INCLUDING the US that could go to the moon within one year. There is definately no country on earth that could send as many men to the moon as we did within the next ten years other than the USA itself, and if we did it would require a new and serious committment to space exploration.

Heck, 3/4'ths of the world couldn't even get a small satellite in orbit if you gave them the next ten years to do it in, let alone put an unmanned probe on the moon, let alone send a manned vessel... let alone send several as we did.

But if we don't get off our asses and get busy, in 2100 the Chinese are going to be mining radioactives and rare metals from the asteroids, and scooping He3 from Saturn's atmosphere, and telling us to buzz off 'cuz it's their solar system...
 
Granted that we haven't necessarily done anything giving us a reasonable claim to the whole moon, BUT...

There isn't a country on Earth INCLUDING the US that could go to the moon within one year. There is definately no country on earth that could send as many men to the moon as we did within the next ten years other than the USA itself, and if we did it would require a new and serious committment to space exploration.

Heck, 3/4'ths of the world couldn't even get a small satellite in orbit if you gave them the next ten years to do it in, let alone put an unmanned probe on the moon, let alone send a manned vessel... let alone send several as we did.

But if we don't get off our asses and get busy, in 2100 the Chinese are going to be mining radioactives and rare metals from the asteroids, and scooping He3 from Saturn's atmosphere, and telling us to buzz off 'cuz it's their solar system...

There are a lot of private enterprises developing this stuff here.
You don't hear about it as much because the Chinese still use a state funded agency to get their junk off the ground.
 
On the backs of American Space Shuttles and Space Stations. I hope they put me in charge of filtering the rift raft. I'd have to personally interview every Frenchman for a start.

Last time I checked, major space efforts like the ISS were international operations with joint science teams.

They will be on the moon too. Sorry to rain on your Euro-hate parade.
 
We are NOT alone in the Universe, but we might as well be.

What!!?? Holy **** man

*grabs guns*
*Fires randomly into the air*

Take that you damned alien bastards! You won't be taking this planet!
 
What!!?? Holy **** man

*grabs guns*
*Fires randomly into the air*

Take that you damned alien bastards! You won't be taking this planet!

Better watch out those aliens (aka Jedi) will get ya.

th_JediFootballtogroin.gif
 
Last time I checked, major space efforts like the ISS were international operations with joint science teams.

They will be on the moon too. Sorry to rain on your Euro-hate parade.

Like NATO right? Without NASA, what do you call the ISS?

It is what it is. Nobody does anything of substance without NASA's hand in it. The ISS is just another example of 85 percent American and 15 percent the rest. But it allows the little people to feel important and as contributors, right? Tell you what...I'll supply all the tools and manpower to build a house and you bring 100 nails. We'll call it a joint venture.
 
Last edited:
Like NATO right? Without NASA, what do you call the ISS?

It is what it is. Nobody does anything of substance without NASA's hand in it. The ISS is just another example of 85 percent American and 15 percent the rest. But it allows the little people to feel important and as contributors, right? Tell you what...I'll supply all the tools and manpower to build a house and you bring 100 nails. We'll call it a joint venture.

To be perfectly honest, a lot of the "international contributors" to the ISS weren't much more than a source of technical problems. Not all of them, no... but several. One of my chief beefs about the ISS is that it's like a Frankenstein monster, built by a committee of whom half haven't learned how to cut lumber in straight lines yet. Furthermore it was an "economy model" that was repeatedly scaled back.

Space is the future, and the nation that controls the resources there will be the nation that dominates the next century. We need to get busy if we don't want to be left behind.
 
To be perfectly honest, a lot of the "international contributors" to the ISS weren't much more than a source of technical problems. Not all of them, no... but several. One of my chief beefs about the ISS is that it's like a Frankenstein monster, built by a committee of whom half haven't learned how to cut lumber in straight lines yet. Furthermore it was an "economy model" that was repeatedly scaled back.

Space is the future, and the nation that controls the resources there will be the nation that dominates the next century. We need to get busy if we don't want to be left behind.

Absolutely.
 
Like NATO right? Without NASA, what do you call the ISS?

It is what it is. Nobody does anything of substance without NASA's hand in it. The ISS is just another example of 85 percent American and 15 percent the rest. But it allows the little people to feel important and as contributors, right? Tell you what...I'll supply all the tools and manpower to build a house and you bring 100 nails. We'll call it a joint venture.

Why do you always turn every thread you touch into a macho pissing contest between the U.S. and the rest of the world? We were having a nice quaint discussion about alien life before you came along.
 
Why do you always turn every thread you touch into a macho pissing contest between the U.S. and the rest of the world? We were having a nice quaint discussion about alien life before you came along.

To get back on topic, I'm pretty sure some sort of alien life exists.

The Drake equation shows this and even the Fermi paradox doesn't disprove it.
 
To get back on topic, I'm pretty sure some sort of alien life exists.

The Drake equation shows this and even the Fermi paradox doesn't disprove it.
The Drake equation should not be taken seriously, even if many scientists do take it seriously. There are many scientists who are true believers and they believe in alien life. So that guy Drake ending near his end of his science career decides to come up with something ingenious that will make him remembered until someone can come along and prove him wrong, which trust me it will happen. And do you know why? Because we do not understand as much as we pretend to do. We have not been to a planet on foot and the prospect of that happening to a star nearby is not likely to happen within the next thousand years. We are not even sure if the size of the galaxy is accurate or that we have taken enough pictures of the galaxy to see the end of it. We do not know what each galaxy looks like with all its stars and planets. If ours has over a billion stars just imagine that there are more than a thousand galaxies out there with each with their own billion stars. Now is there life? Of course! But we do not know the age, the structure, the society, where it is. So like I said we do not know enough of space to make assumptions like the Drake equation or that just because another planet resembles ours means that there will be life on it.
 
The Drake equation should not be taken seriously, even if many scientists do take it seriously. There are many scientists who are true believers and they believe in alien life. So that guy Drake ending near his end of his science career decides to come up with something ingenious that will make him remembered until someone can come along and prove him wrong, which trust me it will happen. And do you know why? Because we do not understand as much as we pretend to do. We have not been to a planet on foot and the prospect of that happening to a star nearby is not likely to happen within the next thousand years. We are not even sure if the size of the galaxy is accurate or that we have taken enough pictures of the galaxy to see the end of it. We do not know what each galaxy looks like with all its stars and planets. If ours has over a billion stars just imagine that there are more than a thousand galaxies out there with each with their own billion stars. Now is there life? Of course! But we do not know the age, the structure, the society, where it is. So like I said we do not know enough of space to make assumptions like the Drake equation or that just because another planet resembles ours means that there will be life on it.

I guess the point is, that the amount of planets and the amount of potential situations that life could exist are so great that there has to be at least one other life form in the universe.

Maybe not something we recognize easily, but something.
 
We have not been to a planet on foot and the prospect of that happening to a star nearby is not likely to happen within the next thousand years.

It's all speculation on all sides. We may never get off out of our own solar system, because the costs involved may simply be too high. Or, we could come up with a method of FTL travel in the next 100 years. 150 years ago, who would have thought we'd be flying, much less setting foot on the moon and creating our own little miniature stars, all within the last century? Statistically speaking, it's highly likely that there is more intelligent life in the universe because, as far as we know, the universe is infinite. But we don't really even know that, so, everything is ultimately mere speculation.

And, Orion, I'm still curious - what are these utopian societies you spoke of earlier? So far, that's been the subject in this thread that has most fascinated me.

Cheers,

The Black Sheep
 
Ironically enough, the quote in my signature is a comment on this very subject.

\/ What he said. \/
 
Why do you always turn every thread you touch into a macho pissing contest between the U.S. and the rest of the world? We were having a nice quaint discussion about alien life before you came along.

Ha...a "nice quaint discussion on alien life." How does something like that go?

Settle yourself Canadian. Just enjoying my abilities to be an ass. ....stay off our American moon, by the way.
 
Back
Top Bottom