NASA basically announced there's no doubt life exist on other planets Kepler 452-b

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: TheChrome
Sorry my friend there is no life on other Planets. Humans are the first creation, the other planets are for us to inhabit when we "get right." If you think I am wrong, prove there is life on other Planets lol.

20 years ago there were people who said the same thing about planets around other stars like our Sun. In october of that year (same year i was born) the first one was discovered.

No kidding? I would have guessed you were older than that. You're truly wise beyond your years...

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: TheChrome
a reply to: JadeStar

I love the new discoveries, they are very interesting. Beyond that science has zero evidence of life other than our own. As a believer in the Bible, there is evidence within it that Humans are the only life in the universe. Unless science finds anything to the contrary, the bible stands to tell us the truth. Anything else is conjecture.

The Bible is a STORY BOOK written by man.

How do you know? Have you read it cover to cover? If not how can you say what you say without being a ^%%&&

NASA announced that, basically, there's no doubt life exists on other planets... >syntax

Also, 'basically' is a word often used by unintelligent people in an attempt sound more intelligent. Just sayin'...

originally posted by: neoholographic
Basically there's no doubt that life exists on other planets. This is like finding a needle in a haystack because we're basically looking for planets that can have life like we have on earth but we don't know how life forms. If Panspermia life can evolve in all sorts of different ways and on planets very different from earth.

The universe is fine tuned to produce life just like it's fine tuned to produce stars, planets and solar systems. Where this fine tuning comes from is another debate but like I said this is like finding a needle in a haystack based on our VERY LIMITED view of life and how life forms.

A great day indeed!

NO. What NASA said was it found an ancient world, about 60% bigger orbiting a star older than our. The star is a billion years older than our. Already getting really "hot". Even though the planet lies in the "Goldilocks Zone", it losing water vapor. If there was any, at the time of observance.

originally posted by: TheChrome
I love the new discoveries, they are very interesting.

Agreed.

Beyond that science has zero evidence of life other than our own.

Correct.

As a believer in the Bible, there is evidence within it that Humans are the only life in the universe.

Uh, what? Care to tell me where in the Bible it says anything of the sort? Apparently, in my many readings of the Bible, I've managed to miss that passage; Every time.

John 14:2
In my Father's house are many mansions...

Unless science finds anything to the contrary, the bible stands to tell us the truth.

You're kidding, right? How exactly do you figure that a 2,000 year old book of fables (half of which were appropriated from earlier pagan religions), that has been edited, and censored, and mis-translated countless times, is going to 'tell us' any truth? Especially when, given your false statement of Biblical support for the notion that we are the only life in the universe, it would appear that you haven't even read the thing...

originally posted by: TheChrome

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: TheChrome
a reply to: JadeStar

I love the new discoveries, they are very interesting. Beyond that science has zero evidence of life other than our own. As a believer in the Bible, there is evidence within it that Humans are the only life in the universe. Unless science finds anything to the contrary, the bible stands to tell us the truth. Anything else is conjecture.

The Bible is a STORY BOOK written by man.

How do you know? Have you read it cover to cover? If not how can you say what you say without being a ^%%&&

Well from a bible thumpers site

Many people contributed to the writing of the Bible. In fact, the Bible is a diverse collection of writings from about 40 main contributors—30 in the Old Testament and 10 in the New Testament.

That was over a period of 1500 years so

If you want to discuss it start a thread

I think the OP started a great thread.

Whilst there has been a lot of discussion and arguing of who is right and who is wrong, I think the simple facts make a lot of sense.

Yes, there is nothing concrete to say life exists here. However, for I think the first time ever, Nasa has been compelled to come out with a news conference to say this planet we have discovered is very special indeed. Just the fact that Nasa have mentioned such words and statements like "Another Earth", "This is the first step to find out the answer to see if we're alone" and "The closest twin to Earth so far" along with facts like it being in the Goldilocks zone, is rocky and could have water, plus a 385 day year cycle, suggests to me that they believe this to be a discovery of huge importance. And lets face it, when have they ever actually said key words like this before in public? I can't recall, if ever.

Regardless of what the conspiracy theorists say, the people at Nasa are amongst the cleverest in the world. And they are telling us this information. That speaks volumes to me.

originally posted by: jonblade
And lets face it, when have they ever actually said key words like this before in public? I can't recall, if ever.

April of last year, when they announced Kepler-186f, another rocky, Earth-sized planet that lies in the 'habitable zone' of its' star.
source

originally posted by: TheChrome
How do you know? Have you read it cover to cover? If not how can you say what you say without being a ^%%&&

On a sidenote: I've read many books from cover to cover but their contents aren't true because of it

About Kepler: we all kinda knew this was coming. Haven't any of you noticed how we were being prepared for this? It now is totally completely accepted that there is life out there. Up to the point that it isn't even mainstream news (not here, anyway). Even the Pope now says it's a possibility and it does NOT conflict with RC religion. Now, that's flexibility for ya..

I just sat here a few moments ago, stunned while I realized how odd and amazing it is that in just half a century - one that I vividly recall - we came all the way from putting up the first modern artificial satellite to this.

Well, next station will probably be that we "discover" traces of intelligent life somewhere. Such exciting times!

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

Good spot, but I don't remember this one getting its own news conference and so many press outlets running the story. I could be wrong, however.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: TheChrome
I love the new discoveries, they are very interesting.

Agreed.

Beyond that science has zero evidence of life other than our own.

Correct.

As a believer in the Bible, there is evidence within it that Humans are the only life in the universe.

Uh, what? Care to tell me where in the Bible it says anything of the sort? Apparently, in my many readings of the Bible, I've managed to miss that passage; Every time.

John 14:2
In my Father's house are many mansions...

Unless science finds anything to the contrary, the bible stands to tell us the truth.

You're kidding, right? How exactly do you figure that a 2,000 year old book of fables (half of which were appropriated from earlier pagan religions), that has been edited, and censored, and mis-translated countless times, is going to 'tell us' any truth? Especially when, given your false statement of Biblical support for the notion that we are the only life in the universe, it would appear that you haven't even read the thing...

You are not correct. The bible was not appropriated from earlier pagan religion, however the majority of those who claim to use the bible in their faith, have beliefs tantamount to pagan religion. There are only a few who know the bible as it is meant to be understood. This is in line with Matthew 7:14 " Small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

God created man in his image (Genesis 1:26)
Satan challenged God and his right to rule the earth (Genesis 3:1-7)

-If God created other life elsewhere in the universe, likely they would be created in his image also.
-If he created another race in his image before us, who remained faithful, then when Adam & Eve sinned he would not have needed to allow the suffering of our earth, because the other race was faithful. Since God has let the human plight to run it's course, and allowed Satan to govern the planet for the last 6000+ years, we know we are a testing ground. There was no race before us, and any race after us will know the truth about God once things are corrected.

And FYI, I have read the Bible Many times, and the Koran, and the Book of Morman. Most Christians I motion have not read the Bible, and neither have their Ministers.

originally posted by: TheChrome

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: TheChrome
I love the new discoveries, they are very interesting.

Agreed.

Beyond that science has zero evidence of life other than our own.

Correct.

As a believer in the Bible, there is evidence within it that Humans are the only life in the universe.

Uh, what? Care to tell me where in the Bible it says anything of the sort? Apparently, in my many readings of the Bible, I've managed to miss that passage; Every time.

John 14:2
In my Father's house are many mansions...

Unless science finds anything to the contrary, the bible stands to tell us the truth.

You're kidding, right? How exactly do you figure that a 2,000 year old book of fables (half of which were appropriated from earlier pagan religions), that has been edited, and censored, and mis-translated countless times, is going to 'tell us' any truth? Especially when, given your false statement of Biblical support for the notion that we are the only life in the universe, it would appear that you haven't even read the thing...

You are not correct. The bible was not appropriated from earlier pagan religion,

Yes, much of it was appropriated. The story of Noah did not originate with the Bible. Easter was not originally a Christian Holiday (neither was Christmas, for that matter), etc, etc...

I'm not going to go into it any further, as it's completely off-topic to this thread, but if you actually believe that the Bible (and the Old Testament in particular) was a wholly original work, well....I won't finish that sentence.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: TheChrome

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: TheChrome
I love the new discoveries, they are very interesting.

Agreed.

Beyond that science has zero evidence of life other than our own.

Correct.

As a believer in the Bible, there is evidence within it that Humans are the only life in the universe.

Uh, what? Care to tell me where in the Bible it says anything of the sort? Apparently, in my many readings of the Bible, I've managed to miss that passage; Every time.

John 14:2
In my Father's house are many mansions...

Unless science finds anything to the contrary, the bible stands to tell us the truth.

You're kidding, right? How exactly do you figure that a 2,000 year old book of fables (half of which were appropriated from earlier pagan religions), that has been edited, and censored, and mis-translated countless times, is going to 'tell us' any truth? Especially when, given your false statement of Biblical support for the notion that we are the only life in the universe, it would appear that you haven't even read the thing...

You are not correct. The bible was not appropriated from earlier pagan religion,

Yes, much of it was appropriated. The story of Noah did not originate with the Bible. Easter was not originally a Christian Holiday (neither was Christmas, for that matter), etc, etc...

I'm not going to go into it any further, as it's completely off-topic to this thread, but if you actually believe that the Bible (and the Old Testament in particular) was a wholly original work, well....I won't finish that sentence.

Yes it is off topic, but I agree with you that Christmas and Easter are not in the bible. I don't celebrate them. Neither is the cross, Jesus died on a tree or stake according the bible.

a reply to: neoholographic

Is that your statement...or NASAs?
Second line because I had fried chicken from Popeyes tonight.

Reminds me of Deception Point, where ONI create a find for NASA in order to maintain support for NASA and the current presidential regime. In short, a publicity stunt. Not saying that's what it is, but it made me ponder.

I hate to be a cynic here, but I'm not impressed. I wouldn't call Kepler 452b a "habitable" planet because humans could never live there. It has 5 times the mass of earth - which means 5 times the gravity (if you weigh 200 pounds on earth, you would weigh 1,000 pounds on Kepler 452b). It also probably has a much thicker atmosphere, and the atmospheric pressure could be crushingly heavy.

If it does have life, it won't be using muscles to move limbs to get around. Maybe lichen growing on rocks. Even trees as we understand them would be a stretch.

I will be impressed if they find a candidate for future colonization.

originally posted by: blackmetalmist
I've always had this crazy idea that one day we find a planet like this and everyone that has passed away (ok, maybe not since beginning of time ) is there...

I agree with the 'crazy idea' part.

a reply to: JadeStar

I take it, that by evidence in the atmospheres of these planets, you are referring to methanes and volatile organic compounds? Basically products of some respiratory process?

How would these be distinguished from volcanic and other geological expulsions? Furthermore, how can we confirm anything without setting foot on these worlds? I firmly believe that although astronomy is one of the most appealing and important sciences, that landing human beings on these worlds should be the focus of as many dollars and pounds as can possibly be spared, or taken from other areas.

We know there are places to go, and we need to come up with ways of getting to these places!

a reply to: Thebel

Well, we're looking at a planet that looked like that ... 1400 years ago. So, my question is ... what ARE we looking at?

As I stated earlier, the only information I read from this ... is the scientists admission to their "lack of knowledge".

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

Paul Simon wrote that; it's a line from The Boxer. A line never more apt in the case of neoholographic.