Skip to comments.
Scientists detect signature of life on a distant planet, study suggests
CNN ^
| 4/17/25
| Ashley Strickland
Posted on 04/17/2025 3:17:37 PM PDT by hardspunned
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 last
41
posted on
04/17/2025 6:50:31 PM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(Putin should skip ahead to where he kills himself in the bunker.)
To: SunkenCiv
“May” …. “Possibly” …. Blah blah blah … always signs of “great research”
42
posted on
04/17/2025 8:28:28 PM PDT
by
Nabber
To: dragnet2
124 light years away from Earth?
Someone(s) making SWAGs with literally no evidence.
43
posted on
04/17/2025 8:37:45 PM PDT
by
WASCWatch
( WASC)
To: Nabber
Of course, because they deal with evidence, not ex cathedra statements.
44
posted on
04/17/2025 9:23:45 PM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(Putin should skip ahead to where he kills himself in the bunker.)
To: WASCWatch
Yep. James Webb Space Telescope is bad azz. It simply allowed them to see possible signs of life in chemical signatures within that planet’s atmospheric halo. It may or may not mean life forms exist there. I don’t know.
45
posted on
04/17/2025 9:54:04 PM PDT
by
dragnet2
(Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
To: Right_Wing_Madman
Irrelevant.
The 2000 Mars story was based on limited, ambiguous data.
The James Webb Telescope (JWST) is a completely different game: 100x more powerful than Hubble in the infrared, capable of detecting atmospheric chemistry on exoplanets 100+ light-years away. We're not talking about a blurry rock in a Martian meteorite—we’re talking full-spectrum chemical analysis from deep space.
46
posted on
04/18/2025 2:34:17 AM PDT
by
RoosterRedux
(A person who seeks the truth with a bias will never find it. He will only confirm his bias.)
To: RoosterRedux
Irrelevant...We're not talking about a blurry rock in a Martian meteorite
You're jumping on the bandwagon way to early on this one. Most astrophysicists aren't as excited as you are, to include the director of this study.
Eddie Schwieterman, assistant professor of astrobiology at the University of California, Riverside, is “somewhat skeptical"
"I think this is one of those situations where extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," says Laura Kreidberg, an astronomer at the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy in Germany
Still, he (Madhusudhan) said, "we're not currently claiming that it is due to life."
To: Right_Wing_Madman
I didn't say I think the JWST finding is correct or material.
I just said comparing it to something that Hubble discovered is irrelevant because JWST is a significant improvement.
And I'm not the least bit excited. Discovering a chemical signature from a vast difference isn't something to get excited about IMHO.
48
posted on
04/18/2025 3:09:49 AM PDT
by
RoosterRedux
(A person who seeks the truth with a bias will never find it. He will only confirm his bias.)
To: Right_Wing_Madman
Vast distance, not difference. Still in caffeine deficit here.;-)
49
posted on
04/18/2025 3:17:05 AM PDT
by
RoosterRedux
(A person who seeks the truth with a bias will never find it. He will only confirm his bias.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson