It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Active Volcxanoes Revealed on Venus

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 01:45 PM
link   
"Fresh off the press for ATS!"

Well, not really but I found this interesting bit of info on Space.com about how scientists are finding active volcanoes on Venus. Despite its run-away greenhouse gas effect and extreme heat could this find be a sign that life does exist there? This whole "Active Volcanoe" thing isn't really new just like the "Water on Mars" discovery isn't new but it has sparked new debate about Venus. I think this type of attention is to garner support for missions to Venus and what-not. This is the best place for answers so what say you, ATS?


"Scientists have long suspected that volcanoes played a huge role in the evolution of cloud-shrouded Venus, the second planet from the sun. Now, images from Europe's Venus Express orbiter are showing that volcanic eruptions may not just be a thing from the past. Scientists discovered four transient bright spots in a relatively young rift zone known as Ganiki Chasma, which was observed 36 times by the spacecraft's Venus Monitoring Camera"



www.space.com...
edit on 3/18/2014 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by lostbook
 



Despite its run-away greenhouse gas effect and extreme heat could this find be a sign that life does exist there?

Doubt it. Unless life can live in an 800 degree oven and breathe sulfuric acid air.

I think the air pressure is kind of high at ground level, too.

(Cue scientists that need money for Probes)



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by lostbook
 


Interesting, although not too surprising IMO: the Venera probes already found signs indicating ongoing volcanism in the 1970s.

However, I'm always glad to see Venus pop up in news items like that every once in a while. Apart from its size, it doesn't have a lot of similarities with Earth today, but we don't really know much about Venus' past, do we? Things might have been very different prior to the runaway green-house effect that dominates the atmosphere of Venus today. Nevertheless: interesting post & thanks for bringing this to our attention!




posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   

intrptr
reply to post by lostbook
 



Despite its run-away greenhouse gas effect and extreme heat could this find be a sign that life does exist there?

Doubt it. Unless life can live in an 800 degree oven and breathe sulfuric acid air.

I think the air pressure is kind of high at ground level, too.

(Cue scientists that need money for Probes)





We have life that lives in extreme environments here on Earth relative to their environment(s). Why wouldn't this same rule apply on Venus? Whatever the case, there's something going on with Venus.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 02:13 PM
link   

jeep3r
reply to post by lostbook
 


Interesting, although not too surprising IMO: the Venera probes already found signs indicating ongoing volcanism in the 1970s.

However, I'm always glad to see Venus pop up in news items like that every once in a while. Apart from its size, it doesn't have a lot of similarities with Earth today, but we don't really know much about Venus' past, do we? Things might have been very different prior to the runaway green-house effect that dominates the atmosphere of Venus today. Nevertheless: interesting post & thanks for bringing this to our attention!





Thanks!

Just doing my job...just doing my job.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by lostbook
 


Correct! Extremeophiles have been found living on the ocean floor around volcanic vents. These areas experience similar conditions to Venus (extreme temps, acidic conditions).

There may very well be some type of life on venus.

Do I think there is Intelligent life living there? Not unless they colonized the planet. I don't think complex organisms could evolve in such conditions.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by lostbook
 


Despite its run-away greenhouse gas effect
I have always had a problem with this statement. It’s not you but this statement that has been used as the reason for Venus’ high temperatures. Is there any evidence that a greenhouse gas effect can create 800-900° surface temperatures?

I've been waiting for evidence that Venus has active volcanoes for several years now. Could this be it? I have my doubts as this isn’t the first time this claim has been made.

reply to post by intrptr
 


Doubt it. Unless life can live in an 800 degree oven and breathe sulfuric acid air.
The theory is that life exists up in the clouds. Buoyancy would be much easier to obtain in such a dense atmosphere and there are signs of water in the upper clouds. It’s highly unlikely but not impossible.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by jeep3r
 


the Venera probes already found signs indicating ongoing volcanism in the 1970s.
Do you have a link? Keep in mind we are looking for evidence of ongoing volcanism not just volcanoes (dormant as they may be).



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by lostbook
 



We have life that lives in extreme environments here on Earth relative to their environment(s). Why wouldn't this same rule apply on Venus?

Because not even machines can survive there. The Russian lander lasted all of -- how many minutes before their instruments fried?

They're not planning to go back either that I know of. Whoops, scratch that. "Scientists" aren't happy to study life here, they want to look elsewhere. I say BS. They just want to be the first to have been here or there. Its a matter of pride and "oneupsmanship" amongst their fellow inflated egos.

That and another ton of gold.

Sorry all, my mood is Iconoclastic about "space". I don't have a problem with remote viewing instruments, just all the claims of life where none has ever been detected (except here). What, ain't you happy with your life?



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Devino
 


The theory is that life exists up in the clouds.

I thought the theory of life was that it can't exist outside the "Goldilocks zone"? Maybe thats an old theory.

It surely lightens the money available for probes…



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Devino
 


the Venera probes already found signs indicating ongoing volcanism in the 1970s.
Do you have a link? Keep in mind we are looking for evidence of ongoing volcanism not just volcanoes (dormant as they may be).

Here you go: Evidence of Lightning and Volcanic Activity on Venus. It's just an abstract, perhaps someone can locate the complete PDF without the need to get past a paywall?

Please note that I'm in no way a specialist in volcanism on Venus, but I've read about these early theories and indications here and there, always leaving me with the notion that present-day volcanism on Venus is not completely inconceivable ...



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Devino
 





I have always had a problem with this statement. It’s not you but this statement that has been used as the reason for Venus’ high temperatures. Is there any evidence that a greenhouse gas effect can create 800-900° surface temperatures?



Venus likely underwent a runaway or “moist greenhouse” phase associated with rapid water loss and very high temperatures. Once water is gone, silicate weathering reactions that draw down CO2 from the atmosphere are insignificant, and CO2 can then build up to very high values. Today, a dense CO2 atmosphere keeps Venus extremely hot.

The term runaway greenhouse refers to a specific process when discussed by planetary scientists, and simply having a very hot, high-CO2 atmosphere is not it. It is best thought of as a process that may have happened in Venus’ past rather than a circumstance it is currently in.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Well, I am not at all surprised by this result. I am surprised, that despite all the extremophile life forms we have discovered, that live on our own planet, in what we thought just a few years back, were conditions which make life impossible, that people STILL think that Venus could not support simple life forms.

Volcanic activity on the surface is a good positive confirmation though!



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 06:35 PM
link   

TrueBrit
Well, I am not at all surprised by this result. I am surprised, that despite all the extremophile life forms we have discovered, that live on our own planet, in what we thought just a few years back, were conditions which make life impossible, that people STILL think that Venus could not support simple life forms.

Volcanic activity on the surface is a good positive confirmation though!



I think the ones that are saying life could not exist have a different definition of life.
IMO that is the only way you could make a claim like that.
Been to much found here
We all know about the water bear right?
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by jeep3r
 


Please note that I'm in no way a specialist in volcanism on Venus,
The nice thing about ATS is that we don’t need to be a “specialist” to have a valued opinion.


I've read about these early theories and indications here and there, always leaving me with the notion that present-day volcanism on Venus is not completely inconceivable ...
Not inconceivable just lacking in any real evidence.

There was a time that I read everything I could find on Venus, especially the Russian Venera programs since these are the only missions that successfully landed on Venus. From what I remember there were only theories for active volcanism on Venus yet nothing conclusive.

The abstract you linked to doesn’t convince me especially since it doesn’t even address volcanism, just atmospheric lightning. Maybe there is something in the PDF but I am unable to read that. It is dated April 1988 so I would think if there was conclusive evidence for active volcanoes on Venus we would have read about it somewhere.

Thank you for the link though.

Addition;
I think this quote is telling.

In a synopsis of the research, lead author Eugene Shalygin, also with the Max-Planck Institute, wrote that the discovery of present-day volcanic activity on Venus would have “major implications” for understanding processes in the planet’s interior, surface and atmosphere.
Source
It appears that active volcanoes have yet to be discovered on Venus.
edit on 3/18/2014 by Devino because: added excerpt



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Venus likely underwent a runaway or “moist greenhouse” phase...
Today, a dense CO2 atmosphere keeps Venus extremely hot.
We can speculate all day long yet where is the real evidence? Is there any proof that CO2, or more importantly the Venusian atmosphere, can create the observed temperatures found on Venus from the Sun through a greenhouse effect?


The term runaway greenhouse refers to a specific process when discussed by planetary scientists, and simply having a very hot, high-CO2 atmosphere is not it. It is best thought of as a process that may have happened in Venus’ past rather than a circumstance it is currently in.
The temperature on Venus is very hot and the standing question is why. I am not convinced that this is a runaway greenhouse effect or even if a greenhouse effect could actually create temperatures close to that observed on Venus.

I think it is pure speculation that Venus’ temperatures are due to a greenhouse effect and this is why I have a problem with that statement. Where is the evidence?



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


I thought the theory of life was that it can't exist outside the "Goldilocks zone"? Maybe thats an old theory.
Yes, another catchy phrase that isn’t backed by any real evidence. The “goldilocks zone” idea doesn’t seem to take Extremeophiles into account, i.e. real evidence. I think this old term needs to be tossed out just like the term "runaway greenhouse effect".



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Devino
 


Surface temps on a planet depend upon a multitude of things:

1) Type of star the planet orbits.

2) Proximity of that star (the distance that it orbits).

3) Surface make up of the planet (IE how much sun light will be reflected back vs. how much is absorbed).

4) Composition of it's atmosphere (if any).

Carbon Dioxide properties are quite well known and have been tested through experiments many times over. It's ability to help trap heat is well known and not a "theory".

Venus has an atmosphere that consists of 96% Carbon Dioxide. The surface pressure is 92 times greater than sea level is here on Earth. Instead of just over 14 pounds per square inch, you'd have over 1,200 pounds of pressure per square inch applied to your body.

You'd be crushed.

Based upon what type of star our sun is, if the Earth were to be at the same distance as Venus, with our atmosphere as it is, global temps would rise to 38 deg C to 46 deg C. Very hot to be sure, but no where near as hot as Venus is with 462 deg C.

The reason Venus is so hot isn't a "theory", it's pretty well known.

The "theories" is how to got to be that way.

The "hottest microbe" can survive temps up to 130 deg C for 2 hours before it dies.

Venus is 3.5 times hotter than that.

So yes, even with these extreme life forms we have here on Earth, none of them would survive on the surface of Venus.

Perhaps Venus has a form of life that can exist in the hellish temps and pressure that is there. But it's not like any that we have here.

edit on 18-3-2014 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Devino
 


BTW - the Circumstellar Habitable Zone aka Goldilocks Zone, aka Green Zone is the distance a planetary body with enough atmosphere is from a star for liquid water to exist.

Not "where life can exist".

But where liquid water is possible.



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Devino
 



The “goldilocks zone” idea doesn’t seem to take Extremeophiles into account, i.e. real evidence.

Neither does the exhaustive search elsewhere. I'll call it an "old theory" when they discover life elsewhere in the Solar System..

To date… zip

As far as "extremophiles" (spelling?), all species any where on earth can be said to have moved to the extreme zone and adapted to it. But they were already on the planet elsewhere before then.

To actually form in an extreme environment is a lot less likely. Especially in an extreme environment such as any other planet or moon in the Solar System.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join