posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 12:13 PM
I am not trying to argue that there IS life on/in a gas giant in our system.
BUT ... I will not close my mind to the fact that an intelligent life, and a technological life could exist in both a gas planet and in an underwater
environment. It is a rather limited view to limit technology and intelligent life to 'air breathing' societies. Again, anything being said is
purely speculation, but so is the thought that life must be like us to advance to our level or beyond.
I would argue that, appendages such as those of some marine life (squid, octopus, etc.) have more agile gripping abilities than we do, and, if they
advanced in such a way that made them think and build in a superior manner, why could they not develop a power system based on their environments,
since that would be all they were used to, and, in turn, think that development in air would be less likely because of their limited scope on life
based on their own experiences and knowledge.
There may not be any other life in our solar system, I would not assume either way actually. To me, that is a failure to science to assume a negative
instead of be open to both possibilities with as little as we actually KNOW compared to as much as we think we know from the information gathered thus
The interplanetary war was, I thought, an obvious exaggeration of an extreme plausibility of reality beyond the normal train of thinking our societies
and sciences currently find to be so-called 'fact'.
I think we really need to be cautious when playing and visiting other worlds. We need a very benevolent point of view in case we do find life ... we
need to also not think we 'own' everything we come in contact with. I honestly find it quite disturbing we already plan on strip mining worlds for
supplies to travel further through our own system. We are taking huge leaps in assumptions that mining the moon for water, H3, titanium, other
minerals will not have an effect. We also assume that mining resources from other planets and moons will have no effect on their development and
stasis. It is a large leap of 'faith' in their ideas and theories.
This also relates to the gas giants. We assume that, our little contamination of nuclear waste and explosions are not going to have a semi-permanent
effect on these worlds. We assume, since the concept of life is hard for us to understand, intelligent or not, that it doesn't exist, so we are
doing no harm. I would have to say, until we have first-hand knowledge, any assumptions are quite illogical and immature. Unless we build an
exploration vehicle that can withstand the gaseous atmosphere, the temps, and the pressures ... we don't know what is below the surface no matter
how much we analyze the information sent back to us from our 'probes'.
The fact is, we make a lot of leaps of 'faith' based on information that is sent back or recorded ... but ... our analysis is somewhat biased as
to what we understand from our lives on this planet, and a little experimentation in LEO and a few lunar expeditions. I still find it to be delusions
of grandeur to make things sound so cut and dry about these concepts based on information which only is supported because we look at ways to deny or
support based on our current concepts of reality. The whole estimation of the universe expanding, dating of the universe, even estimating the
distance of things is based on not much more than guesses based on science that is assumed from what we know and learned so far ... which is
constantly changing, being updated, or being inconsistent.
With the effects just gravity has on light, add to it magnetism, black matter, and these are just things we know about ... this doesn't include what
we don't know about. The cycles of space are in time frames beyond what most could fathom in their deepest thoughts. I personally look at all
things with a bit of skepticism, because, as humans we are quite biased, and our science comes from biased people, except for the very rare person
once in a blue moon. I keep an open mind to a lot of possibilities since our science is really in the fetus stage of its knowledge and development.
We have a very long way to go, to think otherwise is more than arrogant.
We assume that the balance of everything isn't very delicate, as to our manipulation will not have an effect. Leaving the point out of removing
resources ... what if just by wild chance, our nuclear radiation actually mutated a current life into something harmful? Like a B movie but
honestly, can we fully rule it out? Since we don't know or understand other possible forms of life, we cannot know the effects of our influences.
We could in theory create something that ends up destroying us on accident! It doesn't have to be a sustainable second sun ... or the temporary
ignition of the gas giants until they extinguish quickly and change the mass distribution of the solar system and gravitational stability ... it
could be a 'virus/bacteria' we create ... like the vampiric entity from Star Trek TOS
I always liked the Edgar Allan Poe story of the asteroid that was headed towards earth ... people panicked, but then thought nothing of it when it
was found to be gaseous and would pass through the earth without a traditional 'impact' ... but once it hit the earth's atmosphere, it interacted
and changed the composition of our air, suffocating, igniting, burning ... causing a mass extinction without a physically destructive force. I fully
see it as the way the average person thinks. They see things as they are taught to see them, or as they are told. We forget that things aren't
always as they appear and our ideas need to be challenged to a new level of thinking.
I think it is disgusting that scientists would crash nuclear powered craft into planets, regardless of their composition ... and they shouldn't have
even considered launching such devices unless they planned for them to be run indefinitely. How much nuclear material runs our subs? and for how
long? it would seem to me that these space craft should have had a MUCH longer service life and were destroyed prematurely ... if not for a
'purpose'. I think it is a disgusting act by scientists that think they have become above the law and opinion of the people of the world. The same
as those who bet if the atom bomb's first ignition would destroy the world or not ... and the future use of a facility that may create a black hole.