posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 12:19 PM
Originally posted by DerekJR321
I always find it ironic when some scientist claims something can, or can not have "life".
They should clarify their statement. They are assuming the ONLY form of life could be carbon-based life as we know it to exist on earth.
Not to mention, the entire range of space we have supposedly "searched" is equal to maybe .00000000000001% of the known universe.
Humans are so presumptuous.
You misinterpret and visit your own presumptions upon the subject.
There is no argument in the scientific community pushing an idea that carbon life, or any sort of specific life is or is not extent in the universe at
If anything, there's been sundry speculation based from a purely chemical, and even physical standpoint in proposing all sorts of different kinds of
For instance, we've stored data magnetically on tape and floppy disk. What's to say with the astounding complexity and strength of electromagnetic
fields around stars, and gas giants that there isn't a self organizing, self sustaining replicable life form made out of magnetic fields?
I think Cyanide and Arsenic have even been proposed as chemical bases for a DNA-like based organism that's less exotic than self organizing magnetic
In the search for life elsewhere in our neighboring observable space, we go with what we know.
We know for a fact that life thrives in conditions such as ours.
Thus, we think it's a fairly good bet that should we confirm on locating a planet harboring similar conditions, we will also thus find life.
There is no bias on what kinds of life could be possible.
There is, however, some bias in what sorts of life we're looking for, especially in consideration we might not even recognize any other sort of life
as being life if we bumped into it.
We therefore look for something we can at least identify as understandable.