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.

 

Extraterrestrial Life is Everywhere!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 11:53 PM
link   
Over the last few years, our view of the solar system has changed drastically. We now know Mars was once a wet planet; and perhaps it still is. We know Cassini's mission ended with a loud "splat" on the wet surface of Titan. We know Europa has liquid under it's icy surface. We know life exists in some of Earth's most hostile places.

So has anybody else started to lean toward the opinion that we're going to soon discover that extraterrestrial life is everywhere? From Earth experience we can say, anywhere you give germs a chance to grow, they will.

I'm really leaning towards the idea that when we finally mount our very first manned mission to Mars, the astronauts are going to discover simple life. And it's going to be the beginning of a new era, where science is forced to admit that life is much more hardy than we think... or as one of my favorite movie actors, Jeff Goldblum, once said... "Life finds a way."




posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlphaMail
I'm really leaning towards the idea that when we finally mount our very first manned mission to Mars, the astronauts are going to discover simple life.


If there was any kind of 'simple life' on Mars, or any kind of life at all, we would have found it by now. Currently, there are 2 rovers on the ground and 2 (i believe) orbiting satellites.

I know a lot of people want to believe that life is everwhere because it's a very exciting thought. Heck, it's even the mission statement of NASA. But realistically--I know, I know, it's boring to be realistic--it doesn't look like there is anything within the solar system at the very least. Certainly not anything that could be considered 'intelligent'--including most humans.


[EDIT: that last comment was meant to be humorous. relax now.]

[edit on 10-6-2005 by backtoreality]



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Or at least in our solar system I would think that Europa is alot more likely to have life than Mars, it is just going to be harder to reach.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 12:21 AM
link   
I would not be surprised if life existed else where in our solar system, I suspect that life might exist on Mars, Europa or Venus.

Maybe there is simple cellular life in the gas of the gas giants to, its not impossible.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 01:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by backtoreality


If there was any kind of 'simple life' on Mars, or any kind of life at all, we would have found it by now. Currently, there are 2 rovers on the ground and 2 (i believe) orbiting satellites.


We have just barely begun to look for life on Mars. And that's the only place we have even tried to detect signs of life in our solar system.
All the hardware that is sent to other parts of the system are looking at the rocks, atmosphere and stuff like that.
The two rovers on Mars are not even designed to do any serious search for life, they are just tools for geologists.

Mars has about the same land area as Earth, so it's a big place. I don't think you can look at a few rocks, sniff the air and come to the conclusion that it's a dead world.

But the search goes on, who knows what we will find when probes are sent with the sole purpose of looking for life.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 01:48 AM
link   
If we were really serious about finding life on foreign worlds, we would have shipped those rovers off with a pound of seeds, and some instructions for planting them. Then we would see if anything at all could grow there. If you look at a desert from 1,000 feet up its "dead", but if you go digging around you find lizards, snakes, scorpions, camel spiders, etc.

I wouldn't suggest sending those up there...damn...they might take over the place and then come back for revenge!



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 08:19 AM
link   
There would have to be hardcore life forms living on Mars or Venus. They're both rather extreme places. I'm not one to rule out the possibilities of anything, but it's highly unlikely.

There'd be some pretty tough life forms to stand the pressure on Venus.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by backtoreality

Originally posted by AlphaMail
I'm really leaning towards the idea that when we finally mount our very first manned mission to Mars, the astronauts are going to discover simple life.


If there was any kind of 'simple life' on Mars, or any kind of life at all, we would have found it by now. Currently, there are 2 rovers on the ground and 2 (i believe) orbiting satellites.

I know a lot of people want to believe that life is everwhere because it's a very exciting thought. Heck, it's even the mission statement of NASA. But realistically--I know, I know, it's boring to be realistic--it doesn't look like there is anything within the solar system at the very least. Certainly not anything that could be considered 'intelligent'--including most humans.


[EDIT: that last comment was meant to be humorous. relax now.]


Sorry but I like to remind you that the satelites and the rovers have no test equipment for organic matter or life .. and we have only searched the surface and not 1 m under the soil. wait for phoenix lander or the mars science lab. 2007 and 2009. and wait for the results of the ground penetration radar or the maris on board the esa space satelites orbiting mars.

stay open minded life will be different than life as we know first ask what is life..! life as we know it? or maybe it is so different we dont see it . like to say can you see a small bug with the camoflage of the surrounding from space ?? or with a rover ?

[edit on 10-6-2005 by backtoreality]

[edit on 25/6/05 by JAK]



posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Why are you so desparate to find bioligical life? something that has mechanical parts, something that moves, reproduces. The all singing all dancing life. Has it ever occured to you that it can be non biological?



posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 10:14 AM
link   
I for one believe that we will find life where ever it is possible for it to exist.

Mars at one time could have harbored life, but probably not now. The atmosphere is too thin to reduce the solar radiation. But that doesn't mean it wasn't there in the past. We may still find fossils or remnants, but the previous rovers and probes are not equipped to detect it.

Venus is very unlikely to support life of any sort, the pressure and chemical makeup of the atmosphere are too extreme.

I think the best chance for living extraterrestrial biological life forms is under the ice sheet on Europa. But getting to it will be a challenge. In a documentary on Lake Vostok, they plan to try to detect life that has been isolated for thousands of years. They are designing a probe to melt through the ice and release a submersible probe into the lake. This would be similar to what is needed on Europa.



posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 02:43 PM
link   
THere is really no point in sending a "life detector" to another planet if we have no clue what kind of life is there. Often scientists are on the look out for "smoking guns" of the indirect evidance there is life while in the process of other discoveries.

btw, I dont think the Titan probe went "splat" where there was ice rocks nearby. And were dont know of any lifeform that lives with liquid methene.

And just becasue Auther C Clake wrote about life on Europa, does not mean there is life there. Yes it is possible, but no one has bothered to find the benifit in send ing a probe there yet when we are trying to get the funds for a manned mission ot Mars and earths moon.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jehosephat
Yes it is possible, but no one has bothered to find the benifit in send ing a probe there yet when we are trying to get the funds for a manned mission ot Mars and earths moon.

Well I wouldn't put it that way, the benifit would be purely scientific, same as a mission to the Moon or Mars. I think it is a matter of priority. I think NASA's highest priority is replacing the shuttle with the new CEV. Plus the technology needed to build a probe to melt through the ice without contamination will take time to develope. When they have something, they will first try it on Lake Vostok, which in itself will be exciting to see what they find.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by backtoreality

Originally posted by AlphaMail
I'm really leaning towards the idea that when we finally mount our very first manned mission to Mars, the astronauts are going to discover simple life.


If there was any kind of 'simple life' on Mars, or any kind of life at all, we would have found it by now. Currently, there are 2 rovers on the ground and 2 (i believe) orbiting satellites.

[


That is incorrect, none of the current rovers have the equipment to look for single celled organisms and the probes in space have little chance of finding it. There is nothing concrete either way about the things that look like fossils either in some of the close up Rover shots because it does not have the means to analyse them.
The latest probe that was capable of finding life was BEagle 2 which of course crashed.

Actually one of the early viking probes had an experiment to look for life and it came up positive, but they decided they were still not sure. Also the current probes are sensing elevated levels of Methane in the atmosphere, which also could be signs of at least bacterial life.

So really with the capabilities of the equipment we have it tends to lean more towards there being life, if anything. But until we have a specially developed probe or preferably a manned mission, we won't know for sure.
You have to remember that the current rovers equipped for geological analysis.

With regards to Titan, looking at the esa site here:

[lurl]http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Cassini-Huygens/SEM696HHZTD_0.html[/url]

As you can see the atmosphere is rich in organic compounds and there is a constantly replenished source of Methane. However as the article says on the whole the planetoid is too cold. I would have thought that if there is any volcanic activity, then it may harbour life in the warm pools that would result.

So we really can't rule life out in our own solar system, and we havn't even analysed the other planets and moons in as much detail.
We are looking at nothing more than a brief snapshot in time in a tiny little area with limited technology, but even so with these new discoveries in such a short space of time, I wholeheartedly believe that the universe MUST be teeming with life.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jehosephat
btw, I dont think the Titan probe went "splat" where there was ice rocks nearby. And were dont know of any lifeform that lives with liquid methene.


Please see this link:

saturn.jpl.nasa.gov...

and then tell me Huygens didn't go splat when it landed on Titan.

Furthermore, because we don't know of any lifeform that lives in a methane environment, does that mean there aren't any? I would be terribly disappointed if the only kind of life we discover is life that thrives in predictable environments.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:50 PM
link   
If we look at the Earth as an example, anywhere there is liquid water they have found life. From the deepest oceans to the most minimal of caves they have found life flourishing. From the hottest of temperatures to the coldest of places, as long as there was water, there was life.

(Excluding ice) I have no doubt that if they find water on some distant shore then it is there that they will find life. Or atleast life as we know it.

This is just my opinion though,

Wupy



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:58 PM
link   
For one sending humans to the mars or the moon would just be more expensive and fragile than what we can do now with rovers. Humans need time, food, water, air, exercise and more for a trip to mars excluding the scientific resources. Rovers only need a solar panel and a push in the right direction and they a mobile laboratory, and rovers can stay their indefinitly. Sending humans to mars is just a waste



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Life doesnt have to have water, I remember reading an article somewhere about microbial life being found deep in the Earth, there was no water there.

Also, life is'nt confind to just being carbon based, and definition of life depends on the person, if we found a race of androids, who had intelligence and emotion, and reproduced, would that be considered life, as I said, the definition depends on who's defining it.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Has anyone thought about that we only think about life that could live on Earth? Whose to say that different lifeforms who have adapted and evolved differently couldn't survive in different and sometimes harsh enviroments? A fish cant survive on dry land but that doesnt mean that there is no life on dry land. Life is actually quite abundent. So maybe a lifeform could have adapted to live on venus, or another harsh planet. Lets not be stupid and say that if we can't live there no other life forms can. To an alein from a different planet, Earth might look like a harsh place for life to excist.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 08:56 PM
link   
This is a VERY cool thread AlphaMail!


I also think that once other forms of life are found to exist beyong the carbon base.........views on 'LIFEFORM' could radically change.

Great discussion going on here! Keep it up!



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by backtoreality

If there was any kind of 'simple life' on Mars, or any kind of life at all, we would have found it by now. Currently, there are 2 rovers on the ground and 2 (i believe) orbiting satellites.

[edit on 10-6-2005 by backtoreality]


isnt that kind of arrogant? since no one is availiable to physically take the samples on mars it is an incredibly slow process.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join