Scientists Have Discovered Another Earth With Probable Life!

a reply to: OnionHead
You probably should have read this post by By Gerry Harp, Director of Center for SETI Research, before your imaginary trip.

Looking for signs of life on Kepler 186-F

By my reckoning, even the most optimistic assumptions indicate a probability of "much less than" 1/1000.

ATS didn't want to display the double less than symbol, so I had to type out my guess at what it meant, "much less than", and put that in quotes. There are other opinions, but I can't prove Gerry Harp's is wrong.

But is it really a class M Planet ?
Do we know for a fact ?
Or do we just think it might be a "M" class?

If you have not read the "Rare Earth Hypothesis", it's an interesting read.

Rare Earth Hypothesis

originally posted by: BlackProject

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

I don't see were the "probable" life comes in.

There are still many factors apart form being in the Goldilocks zones and being the right size.


Its a candidate for life. Sure enough.

But unless we get data on exact chemical composition of its atmosphere ect there no way to know.


It could just be a large barren rock, a volcanic hell hole or a irradiated mess.

I do not understand why so many posters here are so bitter and blunt to put down exciting new findings.

It is an obvious that for life to exist exactly like ours, then the world would have to be exactly like ours. However, it does not have to be exactly like ours for life like ours to exist, just the outcomes would be different. This notion that we must find or should find a planet exactly like ours with very similar compositions is absurd, life exsists elsewhere and I can gurantee its intelligent, if I was a millionaire id bet it all away on the notion we will find such life in the coming 20 years or so.

This is a beautiful finding and I can gurantee there has been very siilar findings swept under the rug. We still think as humans we are special, lucky or somehow important. We are just one of the many variations.

Good post.

Im not putting down the findings.

Nor am I saying there is no extraterrestrial life out there somewhere. In fact its almost a certainty.


BUT

On this planet?


WE DO NOT KNOW.

All we no it we found a rock in space in the habitable zone the same size as us.

We do not know what its atmosphere is made of or what the planets chemical composition, its volcanic or weather activity is or any in detail facts about the area it resides in space.

Yes it is a existing discovery.

But no proof of life YET.

a reply to: SheopleNation

Then read your own post? it was in response to your own statement. I asked for clarity and you came back confused? where's your head it? here now there? or spinning everywhere? stop drop and roll. Deny ignorance or else you're a troll. I bow to ewoks.

a reply to: wmd_2008

With a bomb like that? Add a K and K.I.S.S.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

"Why is it depicted as being dry and dusty when it's possible that it has water and a thick atmosphere?" Very good question... as sources come in? Change is inevitable some prefer to keep their diaper full from past abuse. Pangaea, is one hell of a state.

Mars once had an ocean... news or something a Viking once said?

a reply to: flice

Supposed to be no, we make it that way though.

originally posted by: Hugomax
Seems the time is obviously getting closer... Ref to dulce and what's already known by the government. Get prepared folks... Within the next 14 yrs for something big is about to happen. This is just a way of gradually letting us in to the secret that has been around since 1950's. That we are not alone. In fact they're already here. Select few are already trying to buy their way in to the bunkers. 2029 sticks in my mind? The deal is over then. Hmmm ... Kepler.. Yeh, Just a way of announcing the time is nearing.. We are not alone!

Relativity is a monster Einstein plucked an eye from, Mel Brooks made the Abbey Normal normal.

a reply to: Xterrain

Touching new planets inappropriately around a yet to be born star is dangerous business.

a reply to: BlackProject

It's just a debate, nothing to argue about just keeps the ball rolling as the earth keeps turning and a single star warming our sky for now.

a reply to: Phage

Finally glad to hear your voice sorry for all the raps on your head for feeding a fish to a friend I once had.

originally posted by: pauljs75
It's neat to know there's a planet out there that seems to be the right size at the right distance. But even in our own system both Mars and Venus fall within the bounds of the "goldilocks zone", but as we know neither is "just right". There's only one Earth with us critters living on it.

Earth being the one out the three also has to do with other factors such as atmospheric density, an active lithosphere, and magnetic fields which you can't really tell from interstellar distances. However the atmosphere's chemistry still tells that life is here, whether that life is smart enough to use radio or not.

So now that we can tell when one major criteria is crossed, what we need is to find if any of those candidates may pass between their stars and us with just enough information to do a spectograpy anaysis on its atmosphere. Ozone or other chemistry showing presence of free oxygen would be a pretty big one. Only thing bigger than finding that would be something like various flourocarbons or other chemicals that we only know to have synthetic non-natural origins.

Indeed! it may be a case of us looking at them and them looking at us and having the same thought at the same time through a vast distance where we both meet in the middle... our twin? Or a time capsule mirror? Depends on where the looking meets...

originally posted by: OnionHead

originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: crazyewok

Who said anything about high or low probability?

The title of the op

I believe your lack of comprehension is at fault evidence for this? your usage of percents beyond 100%
.

Based on the thread title and the probability of there being life on Kepler 186-f, I've purchased both a spaceship and a time machine. I travelled for 500 years at the speed of light to reach the planet, although unfortunately its just a baron rock.

On a plus though, my spaceship cost 10 billions and when I returned home I sold it to an old lady for 30 billions, 30 billions!!! That's 200% profit

I'm probably talking crap

originally posted by: JadeStar
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness


You realize this story is not news right? Did you do a search for Kepler 186f before you posted? I think not.

Hello and welcome to LAST SPRING:

NASA Announces First Earth Twin in Habitable Zone Discovered by Kepler - posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 01:10 PM

Try reading the whole thread...

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Class M? Beam me up Scotty...

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: BlackProject

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

I don't see were the "probable" life comes in.

There are still many factors apart form being in the Goldilocks zones and being the right size.


Its a candidate for life. Sure enough.

But unless we get data on exact chemical composition of its atmosphere ect there no way to know.


It could just be a large barren rock, a volcanic hell hole or a irradiated mess.

I do not understand why so many posters here are so bitter and blunt to put down exciting new findings.

It is an obvious that for life to exist exactly like ours, then the world would have to be exactly like ours. However, it does not have to be exactly like ours for life like ours to exist, just the outcomes would be different. This notion that we must find or should find a planet exactly like ours with very similar compositions is absurd, life exsists elsewhere and I can gurantee its intelligent, if I was a millionaire id bet it all away on the notion we will find such life in the coming 20 years or so.

This is a beautiful finding and I can gurantee there has been very siilar findings swept under the rug. We still think as humans we are special, lucky or somehow important. We are just one of the many variations.

Good post.

Im not putting down the findings.

Nor am I saying there is no extraterrestrial life out there somewhere. In fact its almost a certainty.


BUT

On this planet?


WE DO NOT KNOW.

All we no it we found a rock in space in the habitable zone the same size as us.

We do not know what its atmosphere is made of or what the planets chemical composition, its volcanic or weather activity is or any in detail facts about the area it resides in space.

Yes it is a existing discovery.

But no proof of life YET.

On this planet? Intelligence is subjective... insulting others is objective. Combine the two for a compliment.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yeah that's the problem, more probable to be a wasted trip than not.

What's the guestimations at the minute in the World of Science regarding just how many Earth like planets in the Milkyway , 20 Billion? There's at-least a 1 in 20 billion chance then of intelligent life (Us ). It's a pity because in reality I don't think we'll ever find it out there. Of course I believe it's out there, but the distances are just so vast that I'm not hopeful. I genuinely hope I'm wrong. I'd love to meet one of these extraterrestrials, I'd even by them a beer.

Saying that many believe they're already here flying about and crashing in the desert, running the World, and having space battles and all that other jazz. Yeah

originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness

originally posted by: JadeStar
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness


You realize this story is not news right? Did you do a search for Kepler 186f before you posted? I think not.

Hello and welcome to LAST SPRING:

NASA Announces First Earth Twin in Habitable Zone Discovered by Kepler - posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 01:10 PM

Try reading the whole thread...

Did you try reading this year old Kepler 186f thread created when it was ACTUALLY discovered before creating yours?

I have read this thread and the whole thread is still based on your laughable premise that:

A) Kepler 186f is a NEW discovery when in reality it's a year old.

B) That Kepler 186f probably has life when in reality we do not know that and have no way to know that in the near term due to it's distance.


So just how is your thread different from the one I started a year ago or any of the other threads on ATS talking about Kepler 186f?

Try using the SEARCH function before starting threads.

Kepler 186f is an exciting world but it is not news. Just news to you.

originally posted by: OnionHead
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yeah that's the problem, more probable to be a wasted trip than not.

What's the guestimations at the minute in the World of Science regarding just how many Earth like planets in the Milkyway , 20 Billion?

Between 100-200 billion. Most conservative estimates put the figure at between 40-50 billion:




Within our local neighborhood that's around 160-190 habitable worlds:



This is because: 1 in 5 stars like our Sun has a habitable planet based on data from NASA's Kepler mission.



That's what the conservative estimates are based on however we also know that stars smaller than our Sun produce even more habitable zone planets. Almost half of M-class (red dwarf) stars have a habitable zone planet:



And as you can see, the closest of these has a 94 percent probability of being within 10 light years of Earth.

originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

"Why is it depicted as being dry and dusty when it's possible that it has water and a thick atmosphere?" Very good question... as sources come in? Change is inevitable some prefer to keep their diaper full from past abuse. Pangaea, is one hell of a state.

Mars once had an ocean... news or something a Viking once said?

I really don't get your point. Sure -- It seems likely from the data collected over the years that Mars was once a very wet planet. For example, the rover Curiosity has found signs of ancient stream beds and ancient lake beds, and the rover Opportunity has found gypsum, which is thought to only form in wet environments.

However, what does that have to do with what I said? I was only replying to the person who asked "why are they showing Kepler 186F as being Earth-like when it could possibly look Mars-like?" My answer was that if they showed it as being mars-like, then people would ask "Why are they showing it as Mars-like when it could be Earth-like".

My point was that no matter how they showed it, someone would complain that we don't know enough about it to be sure it looks that way.