Nasa's Mars Curiosity Rover has discovered possible evidence of life on Mars...

Forums › Off topic › Nasa's Mars Curiosity Rover has discovered possible evidence of life on Mars...

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#159939 17-Dec-2014 21:46

I couldn't spot this on any NZ sites (may just have been looking in the wrong place!) so thought I would share.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1199545 17-Dec-2014 22:13

A slightly less optimistic version, straight from the horse's mouth.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1199565 17-Dec-2014 22:51

life as in a couple of harmless RNA viruses - so names because of some acids joining together - with no identity or some guardians of some galaxies?

they are quite different entities ...

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1199579 17-Dec-2014 23:51

Methane to the max on Titan:

http://news.sciencemag.org/space/2014/12/spacecraft-spots-probable-waves-titan-s-seas

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1199589 18-Dec-2014 00:14

It would be so cool if they actually found life. No matter how tiny it was.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1199657 18-Dec-2014 08:26

Geektastic: It would be so cool if they actually found life. No matter how tiny it was.

It sure would be.
It seems so tantalisingly close. The unexplained variation in methane level was observed a decade ago.
The Curiosity CH4 reading peaked at 7ppb. So can Curiosity actually perform accurate enough isotope analysis with samples that small?
If that analysis matches "biogenic origin" is that proof?
If what created the CH4 was simple life then would that be good evidence that abiogenesis happened on Mars as it may have done on Earth, or abiogenesis on either Mars or Earth followed by local panspermia - which is not evidence of life elsewhere in the universe, unless there was proof that panspermia - not abiogenesis - was the origin of life on both Earth and Mars.

I'm pinning my hopes that we'll see a message from LGM, knowing for sure that we're not the only conscious being who has ever, or will ever ask the question "is there life elsewhere in the universe".

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1200293 19-Dec-2014 07:19

might not happen

- for non intelligent micro "life" - looking for virus on a planet is harder than looking for a needle in the haystack. but I'm no rocket scientist so what would I know
- for intelligent life asking questions: it's been 13.7 billion light years they say. 1 decade in 13.7 billion light years to find your distant cousin - hmmm we'd be extinct before finding anything. our world's resources are about to come to an end. (in the context of the 13.7 billion light years timeline, not in my lifetime)

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1200308 19-Dec-2014 08:17

joker97: might not happen

- for non intelligent micro "life" - looking for virus on a planet is harder than looking for a needle in the haystack. but I'm no rocket scientist so what would I know
- for intelligent life asking questions: it's been 13.7 billion light years they say. 1 decade in 13.7 billion light years to find your distant cousin - hmmm we'd be extinct before finding anything. our world's resources are about to come to an end. (in the context of the 13.7 billion light years timeline, not in my lifetime)

It would be tragic if we became extinct before finding an answer. It's a rather bleak thought - to go out believing that we might be the only life-form in the universe to ever ask the question.
If we do manage to snuff ourselves out, what happens to "God"? I hope for his sake there's a generous termination clause in his contract.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1200360 19-Dec-2014 09:46

Look there are so many things humans don't know Inc whether there is a god. Seriously, existence of matter is still not scientifically understood. So in my opinion anythingis possible. Most clever scientists belief in a god that has controlover physics, not necessarily a god that's been preached by missionaries, but definitely one of some kind or form.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1201089 20-Dec-2014 15:10

joker97: Look there are so many things humans don't know Inc whether there is a god. Seriously, existence of matter is still not scientifically understood. So in my opinion anythingis possible. Most clever scientists belief in a god that has controlover physics, not necessarily a god that's been preached by missionaries, but definitely one of some kind or form.

I'm skeptical about "most clever scientists" believing in god. Some do for sure, and some don't. I wouldn't want to put a figure on it or say "most"either way, even if it was possible to have some kind of standard definition of god.
For sure cosmology/physics seems to get weirder and weirder as more is known, as if something designed "reality", with layer upon layer of discoveries to be made, each one exposing something even weirder than the one just unwrapped.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1201097 20-Dec-2014 16:00

They need to send the Rover to Westfield to see if they can find intelligent life

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1201112 20-Dec-2014 16:29

Sorry Fred99 I meant theoretical physicists ... Even then I might have to revise that to "some"

I am beginning to think astronomy, theoretical physics and philosophy are the same thing

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1201114 20-Dec-2014 16:32

Fred99:
joker97: Look there are so many things humans don't know Inc whether there is a god. Seriously, existence of matter is still not scientifically understood. So in my opinion anythingis possible. Most clever scientists belief in a god that has controlover physics, not necessarily a god that's been preached by missionaries, but definitely one of some kind or form.

I'm skeptical about "most clever scientists" believing in god. Some do for sure, and some don't. I wouldn't want to put a figure on it or say "most"either way, even if it was possible to have some kind of standard definition of god.
For sure cosmology/physics seems to get weirder and weirder as more is known, as if something designed "reality", with layer upon layer of discoveries to be made, each one exposing something even weirder than the one just unwrapped.

If it helps them get through life I have no issue with scientists or anyone believing in a God.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1201409 21-Dec-2014 11:29

KiwiNZ:
Fred99:
joker97: Look there are so many things humans don't know Inc whether there is a god. Seriously, existence of matter is still not scientifically understood. So in my opinion anythingis possible. Most clever scientists belief in a god that has controlover physics, not necessarily a god that's been preached by missionaries, but definitely one of some kind or form.

I'm skeptical about "most clever scientists" believing in god. Some do for sure, and some don't. I wouldn't want to put a figure on it or say "most"either way, even if it was possible to have some kind of standard definition of god.
For sure cosmology/physics seems to get weirder and weirder as more is known, as if something designed "reality", with layer upon layer of discoveries to be made, each one exposing something even weirder than the one just unwrapped.

If it helps them get through life I have no issue with scientists or anyone believing in a God.

I don't care if they believe in Santa-Claus - so long as it doesn't influence their work.
But I do have some concern about theists involved in any area of research where discoveries they might make could undermine their fundamental theology. I suspect that it could very well influence their work, bias not limited to corruption of the scientific process, but influencing selection of the subject of research, then how it's used. The churches don't have a good record on this whole matter.
A bit of particle physics/cosmology etc (for which very few have more than even a basic grasp) thrown in with the mumbo-jumbo of religion makes for an interesting "modern mysticism" believed by some people perhaps... However nothing is really new here, the churches have been hi-jacking scientific discovery for centuries - at best using it to create untestable theological hypothesis, and at worst suppressing it - when they had that right - and using it as justification to burn people alive etc.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1201452 21-Dec-2014 12:29

lol i think you view of a god is quite different to a soccer fanatic's view of a god quite different to a north korean's view of a god quite different from a beatle's fan's view of a god quite different from a scientist's view of a god ...

anyway, here are some links for those who want to read what i mean by NOT the god that the crusaders preach (hint: don't read the ones that are obviously from christian websites ok, selective reading)

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=which+scientists+believe+in+a+god&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-GB:IE-Address&ie=&oe=&gfe_rd=cr&ei=fAWWVKT9EK3u8wfi5oLABg&gws_rd=ssl

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1201549 21-Dec-2014 16:45

It's not my view of "god" - I call myself an athiest as a matter of convenience. It's hard to have a "view" about the nature of something you don't believe in - a bit like having a view on why Sasquatch wants to remain undiscovered, or whether the Loch Ness Monster has scales or skin.
There can be worse things to worship than the invisible man in the sky, and worse moral codes than most mainstream religions try to teach.