Planets that can potentially support life... - Page 7

On September 13 2011 09:29 Endymion wrote:
I'm hoping for a planet inhabited by only female nekos. (who are all skinny and into me)

On September 13 2011 09:19 hotbreakfest wrote:
Currently we can see up to 42 billion light years into space. We are an insignificant speck dust on a speck of dust on a speck of dust on a speck of dust on a grain of sand in the Sahara Desert. I think that says just about enough.

On September 13 2011 13:18 askTeivospy wrote:


to call earth an insignificant speck of dust when you consider what has happened on earth since it was formed compared to other actual insignificant dust planets is highly highly highly ignorant. No matter who said it.

Anyways earth is pretty sweet, we evolved here so its better than that dumb fat poser earth planet

On September 13 2011 13:31 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:

You're right, Carl Sagan is an ignorant bitch.

On September 13 2011 05:59 zimz wrote:

it was my educated guess, because the size and vastness of the universe. i don't think i was close minded to predict there's a high probability there is many earth like planets. most astronomers and physicist had the same prediction as me at that time. so IT IS open-mindedness. and IT IS closed-mildness to assume we are probably the only one.

On September 13 2011 05:55 ampson wrote:
Now let's get to work on that faster-than light travel? Looks sweet. But why is it called SUPER EARTH?

On September 13 2011 14:00 Orcasgt24 wrote:

Scientists are like the single least creative group ever. All the names they give stuff in space are lame.

On September 13 2011 05:44 Tschis wrote:
I find it all amazing and awesome, the universe and it's size. But discoveries like this are just a matter of time, in my opinion, given the probability. And they don't really mean anything unless we start investing and working on space traveling technologies. 35 light years sounds so little when we compare it to all the several thousand light years distance to other places, but it is actually impossible for us (today) to travel at this speed. And I don't even think we'll have the technology needed to travel to a planet like this before we end up our resources or kill ourselves, unhappily...

My expectations are that we'll be able, at some point, to master some technology (maybe nuclear fusion power?) that can be virtually ilimited, and that it would allow us to travel during many thousand years to finally reach a place like that. Either this or some kind of worm-hole =P

On September 13 2011 07:01 zeMoose wrote:


It's because carbon is one of the few elements known to naturally produce complex molecules which are required for life and all carbon based life needs water to survive. Silicon is another chemical element that can create molecules large enough to carry biological information, but it doesn't have the ability to form chemical bonds with diverse types of atoms, which permits the chemical versatility necessary for metabolism.



I sure hope we've grown smart enough to completely discard such silly notions before meeting any intelligent alien races.

On September 13 2011 15:32 JesusOurSaviour wrote:
Probability of aliens = probability of anything which you can't prove. Tell me how you can prove existence of aliens without reproducible observations / interactions. You can't. So until the moment we find aliens, they don't exist. Same argument is used against any kind of afterlife - just because you don't know what happens after you die, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It does and there will be judgement.

On September 13 2011 15:39 Setev wrote:


What? No proof of aliens = aliens don't exist. No proof of afterlife = there is afterlife, and there will be judgment. (?)

Dude, you are contradicting yourself here.

Don't antagonize me yet, I'm DO believe there is a Creator, but why is it so hard to believe that the Creator also created other life forms? It doesn't diminish our status as sentient creatures. HE loves us just the same.