Posted on 04/20/2014 3:08:56 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
[Illustration Credit: NASA Ames / SETI Institute / JPL-Caltech, Discovery: Elisa V. Quintana, et al.]
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
| Google news searches: exoplanet · exosolar · extrasolar · | ||
NASA will say anything to get money.
Well I wish someone would tell that to the UFO conspiracy theorists who think NASA is hiding aliens all over the place.
There is no way as yet to determine if an exoplanet has an atmosphere. Let alone if it has water or is capable of supporting life.
Good thing NASA didn’t make that claim then huh.
BTW there are ways to determine if there is an atmosphere but Kepler isn’t it.
Astronomy photo shop of the day.
That would require a spectrographic analysis. I don’t think we have the means yet.
Right now they use combined data from Hubble and Swift telescopes (which neither were designed for) to get an idea of exoplanet atmospheres. Its not very accurate and in the case of HD 189733b they can detect hydrogen because its being blown away into space.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/exoplanet-atmosphere.html
I know the next telescope is specifically designed to image smaller planets and should get better data on atmospheres.
If I lived there, I would be 205 years old.
And no wiser.
I had no idea the Kepler space telescope had that capability.
The magnification, the resolution, true color, amazing.
Of course that’s what the ‘planet’ looked like 500 years ago.
What with Galaxo Warming it might be a cinder today.
So, they come across these ‘exoplanets’ that are in some supposed (what kind of a?) zone that COULD be possible for water and then, of course, life. PLEASE, let me know if anyone has ever demonstrated, conclusively, the spontaneous development of a single amino acid, anywhere.
You see, a lot hangs on this. These ‘scientists’ are desperate to show that we are NOT unique because that helps the anti-theists.
When I was in medical school, our biochem prof said that the chances of life developing in the universe were iffy at best & at that time the estimated age was 17-22 billion years. It is now 13.7 billion + or - .7 billion. That makes the chances far less.
Controlled laboratory experiments have never, to my knowledge, ever been able to induce recombination of all known amino acids into even proteins, let alone RNA & DNA. The operative words here are ‘to my knowledge’.
I would like to know if anyone has contrary evidence.
Amino acids are readily produced in laboratories simulating early conditions on Earth. DNA or RNA, however, no. That requires a lot of evolution. The simple development of photosynthesis was a milestone in evolution. So was sex. However that does not preclude that intelligent life such as our own is not divinely inspired. There is no methodology in the theory of evolution that allows creatures to exceed only what is needed for basic survival.
True. And then use it for Islamic outreach programs. But consider that 2.5 years from now we won't have the zer0-my-peeps-comes-first administration (unless it slips into a dictatorship which is possible). If we have a conservative administration, we may want a strong NASA both for exploration AND the military.
It’s not a photo, according to the explanation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
