• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

NASA predicts alien life will be found by 2025

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
This will be interesting. Watched many sci-fi movies and can't help noticing that certain alien species have a good command of English, some even are able to quote Shakespeare! Well, it is a far shot, a guess, but it is obvious that our species is expecting neighbours in our universe. Hopefully, we can live in peace and coexist with our space aliens better than we historically have with our Earth bound brothers.

Cheers!

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015...m_medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_480157

Signs of alien life will be found by 2025, NASA's chief scientist predicts

By Mike Wall
Published April 08, 2015

Humanity is on the verge of discovering alien life, high-ranking NASA scientists say.
"I think we're going to have strong indications of life beyond Earth within a decade, and I think we're going to have definitive evidence within 20 to 30 years," NASA chief scientist Ellen Stofan said Tuesday (April 7) during a panel discussion that focused on the space agency's efforts to search for habitable worlds and alien life.
"We know where to look. We know how to look," Stofan added during the event, which was webcast live. "In most cases we have the technology, and we're on a path to implementing it. And so I think we're definitely on the road." [5 Bold Claims of Alien Life]
Former astronaut John Grunsfeld, associate administrator for NASA's Science Mission Directorate, shared Stofan's optimism, predicting that signs of life will be found relatively soon both in our own solar system and beyond.
"I think we're one generation away in our solar system, whether it's on an icy moon or on Mars, and one generation [away] on a planet around a nearby star," Grunsfeld said during Tuesday's event.
Many habitable environments
Recent discoveries suggest that the solar system and broader Milky Way galaxy teem with environments that could support life as we know it, Grunsfeld said.
For example, oceans of liquid water slosh beneath the icy shells of the Jupiter moons Europa and Ganymede, as well as that of the Saturn satellite Enceladus. Oceans covered much of Mars in the ancient past, and seasonal dark streaks observed on the Red Planet's surface today may be caused by salty flowing water.
Further, NASA's Curiosity rover has found carbon-containing organic molecules and "fixed" nitrogen, basic ingredients necessary for Earth-like life, on the Martian surface.
Farther afield, observations by NASA's Kepler space telescope suggest that nearly every star in the sky hosts planets — and many of these worlds may be habitable. Indeed, Kepler's work has shown that rocky worlds like Earth and Mars are probably more common throughout the galaxy than gas giants such as Saturn and Jupiter.
And just as the solar system is awash in water, so is the greater galaxy, said Paul Hertz, director of NASA's Astrophysics Division.
The Milky Way is "a soggy place," Hertz said during Tuesday's event. "We can see water in the interstellar clouds from which planetary systems and stellar systems form. We can see water in the disks of debris that are going to become planetary systems around other stars, and we can even see comets being dissipated in other solar systems as [their] star evaporates them." [6 Most Likely Places for Alien Life in the Solar System]
Looking for life
Hunting for evidence of alien life is a much trickier proposition than identifying potentially habitable environments. But researchers are working steadily toward that more involved and ambitious goal, Stofan and others said.
For example, the agency's next Mars rover, scheduled to launch in 2020, will search for signs of past life and cache samples for a possible return to Earth for analysis. NASA also aims to land astronauts on Mars in the 2030s — a step Stofan regards as key to the search for Mars life.
"I'm a field geologist; I go out and break open rocks and look for fossils," Stofan said. "Those are hard to find. So I have a bias that it's eventually going to take humans on the surface of Mars — field geologists, astrobiologists, chemists — actually out there looking for that good evidence of life that we can bring back to Earth for all the scientists to argue about."
NASA is also planning out a mission to Europa, which may launch as early as 2022. The main goal of this $2.1 billion mission will be to shed light on the icy moon's potential habitability, but it could also search for signs of alien life: Agency officials are considering ways to sample and study the plumes of water vapor that apparently erupt from Europa's south polar region.
In the exoplanet realm, the agency's James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), an $8.8 billion instrument scheduled to launch in 2018, will scope out the atmospheres of nearby "super-Earth" alien planets, looking for gases that may have been produced by life.
JWST will scan the starlight that passes through the air of super-Earths, which are more massive than our own planet but significantly less so than gaseous worlds such as Uranus and Neptune. This method, called transit spectroscopy, will likely not work for potentially habitable Earth-size worlds, Hertz said.
Searching for biosignature gases on small, rocky exoplanets will instead probably require direct imaging of these worlds, using a "coronagraph" to block out the overwhelming glare of their parent stars, Hertz added.
NASA's potential Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope, which may launch in the mid-2020s if given the official go-ahead, would include a coronagraph for exoplanet observations.
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
It is also possible that they will still be saying the same thing 50 years into the future from today, but 50 years ago (the sixties) and now, although nothing has changed, our species has made new discoveries that we did not know then, or were only guessing then. We have discovered traces of water present in some planets and moons, have found some Earth-like planets, and have found lifeforms in places outside the "Goldilocks" (not too hot, not too cold) zone. These findings have given rise to more optimism that life could exist outside our planet, in forms we never imagined before, and that the universe could be teeming with life and not just a huge big void. Fifty years ago isn't a long time, but more people in society now are likely not to be too surprised if news broke out of some discovery of life in space. Back then, many held firmly to the belief that our planet is unique in the universe.

Cheers!

Thats what they said 50 years ago!
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
It is also possible that they will still be saying the same thing 50 years into the future from today, but 50 years ago (the sixties) and now, although nothing has changed, our species has made new discoveries that we did not know then, or were only guessing then. We have discovered traces of water present in some planets and moons, have found some Earth-like planets, and have found lifeforms in places outside the "Goldilocks" (not too hot, not too cold) zone. These findings have given rise to more optimism that life could exist outside our planet, in forms we never imagined before, and that the universe could be teeming with life and not just a huge big void. Fifty years ago isn't a long time, but more people in society now are likely not to be too surprised if news broke out of some discovery of life in space. Back then, many held firmly to the belief that our planet is unique in the universe.

Cheers!

They found lifeforms, or they BELIEVE (by faith alone) that there are lifeforms outside the narrow band of conditions necessary, but not sufficient, for life?:wink:
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
They look hard enough, they might find god and his angels, but are they lifeforms?

Cheers!

They found lifeforms, or they BELIEVE (by faith alone) that there are lifeforms outside the narrow band of conditions necessary, but not sufficient, for life?:wink:
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
They look hard enough, they might find god and his angels, but are they lifeforms?

Cheers!

Simple answer, is NO.

Can you give an intelligent guess why the right answer is that God and His angels are not lifeforms in the universe?:wink:
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
I do not know what God and his (or her?) angels are like, but from what I have read, nothing has been mentioned about what they eat, whether they poop or fart, and based on that, they are not lifeforms in the biological sense we know. From the Greek interpretations, they do have sexual urges though.

Cheers!

Simple answer, is NO.

Can you give an intelligent guess why the right answer is that God and His angels are not lifeforms in the universe?:wink:
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
I do not know what God and his (or her?) angels are like, but from what I have read, nothing has been mentioned about what they eat, whether they poop or fart, and based on that, they are not lifeforms in the biological sense we know. From the Greek interpretations, they do have sexual urges though.

Cheers!

Ignore the Greek interpretations and set that aside please, unless you think the God of the Bible is Zeus, which means you are either barking up the wrong tree, or trolling again.
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
You seem bent on pushing your concept of the "True God" as the version put forth by the Christian Bible. So, what makes you think that the Bible's version of God is the correct one? If this one God concept is true, then every other religion's description is wrong. The Hindus, Zorostrians, Mayans, Animists, are all hogwash then. So, what sets your Christian story apart from these other "myths?" What makes your Christian version correct?

Cheers!

Ignore the Greek interpretations and set that aside please, unless you think the God of the Bible is Zeus, which means you are either barking up the wrong tree, or trolling again.
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
You seem bent on pushing your concept of the "True God" as the version put forth by the Christian Bible. So, what makes you think that the Bible's version of God is the correct one? If this one God concept is true, then every other religion's description is wrong. The Hindus, Zorostrians, Mayans, Animists, are all hogwash then. So, what sets your Christian story apart from these other "myths?" What makes your Christian version correct?

Cheers!

Why are you so upset? Don't you know that it's a zero-sum game? You should know that because as an atheist you are declaring ALL religions as hogwash. So before you point the finger at me or Christians, you should really first see if you are equally guilty, if not more so.:wink:
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
Not upset at all. Just noticed that you are pushing your Christian Bible over the other beliefs. I do not believe in religion(s) because they are only based on what people want to believe, and for some, it brings comfort and solace, which I respect, and I therefore give equal respect to every religion, but myself do not believe they are actual events that took place. Whatever is there in the "heavens," I will take the time to listen, and if it makes sense, then I suppose I can accept it. Other faiths might be hogwash to Christians, but they have existed in those societies for ages and brought order and function to their communities, same goes for Christianity, so, as a human being on Earth, I try to be civil about the issue and give equal acknowledgement to all, even if I myself am a non-believer. As it stands, I lean towards science as something that was (and still is) developing together with us. It has improved our understanding of nature, ourselves, and given us improvement to our lives, comfort, well-being, and even entertainment. At this point, we have not solved all our problems (probably never will), but we are better off now than in the past because of this learning. To your comment, I am not guilty of anything. However, still curious as to why you feel your Christianity is superior to other religions?

Cheers!

Why are you so upset? Don't you know that it's a zero-sum game? You should know that because as an atheist you are declaring ALL religions as hogwash. So before you point the finger at me or Christians, you should really first see if you are equally guilty, if not more so.:wink:
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
Not upset at all. Just noticed that you are pushing your Christian Bible over the other beliefs. I do not believe in religion(s) because they are only based on what people want to believe, and for some, it brings comfort and solace, which I respect, and I therefore give equal respect to every religion, but myself do not believe they are actual events that took place. Whatever is there in the "heavens," I will take the time to listen, and if it makes sense, then I suppose I can accept it. Other faiths might be hogwash to Christians, but they have existed in those societies for ages and brought order and function to their communities, same goes for Christianity, so, as a human being on Earth, I try to be civil about the issue and give equal acknowledgement to all, even if I myself am a non-believer. As it stands, I lean towards science as something that was (and still is) developing together with us. It has improved our understanding of nature, ourselves, and given us improvement to our lives, comfort, well-being, and even entertainment. At this point, we have not solved all our problems (probably never will), but we are better off now than in the past because of this learning. To your comment, I am not guilty of anything. However, still curious as to why you feel your Christianity is superior to other religions?

Cheers!

The fact is that I am no more pushing my beliefs over others than you are doing so, with your dismissal of all religions as mere man-made fiction, invented for self-comfort and self-delusions. It therefore seems awfully patronising of you to say that you would say you would listen and accept the religions that made sense when you have already from the start treated them as pulp fiction or worst.:rolleyes:

Am I any less a science guy than you? Not at all. I like science, though I never majored in it during school or university. I enjoy the benefits and progress that science has brought to us. So if you think that as a believer I must be anti-science, then you are wrong many times over. I am not anti-science, I am anti-scientism. I am also anti-naturalism. I am also anti-materialism. I am also anti-evolutionism. Oh, and you definitely know by now that I am anti-atheism:wink: But hang on, my "anti" is not expressed in warmongering or any threats of violence, but in refuting the arguments and objections brought about by these "isms" or the likes of DIVA that openly challenges, mocks, derides, and undermine the Christian faith. :wink:
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
Fine. The reason I said what I said was because you pushed aside Zeus and his gang and placed the Christian story in its place. But it doesn't bother me.

Yes, I will listen to whatever story one wishes to tell, provided the time is conducive and does not eat into something I am doing, and it has to make sense to me. Where the Bible is concerned, there are stories which are true (eg. King David ruled the Jewish tribes, King Solomon built the temple, etc.) but there are also stories which are make belief (eg. Jonah and that creature that swallowed him): I view all other religions that way too, they are compiled from, mythology and legends, and there could be persons in their stories who did exist, and for some reason, became famous. I "accept" religions as one of society's "customs and practices" and they vary depending on that society's history and circumstances. All modern societies at one time or another adopted some kind of religion and practiced and believed its teachings. As we moved forward, questions were raised, discoveries made, and we relied less and less on an "authority" to tell us what is right and wrong as we take more and more control of our lives. Our present day laws were mostly derived from what was considered righteous taught to us from religious laws. Others can have their own views, I don't care. As long as they don't impose their beliefs onto society and other individuals, they have a right to believe whatever they choose.

Cheers!

The fact is that I am no more pushing my beliefs over others than you are doing so, with your dismissal of all religions as mere man-made fiction, invented for self-comfort and self-delusions. It therefore seems awfully patronising of you to say that you would say you would listen and accept the religions that made sense when you have already from the start treated them as pulp fiction or worst.:rolleyes:

Am I any less a science guy than you? Not at all. I like science, though I never majored in it during school or university. I enjoy the benefits and progress that science has brought to us. So if you think that as a believer I must be anti-science, then you are wrong many times over. I am not anti-science, I am anti-scientism. I am also anti-naturalism. I am also anti-materialism. I am also anti-evolutionism. Oh, and you definitely know by now that I am anti-atheism:wink: But hang on, my "anti" is not expressed in warmongering or any threats of violence, but in refuting the arguments and objections brought about by these "isms" or the likes of DIVA that openly challenges, mocks, derides, and undermine the Christian faith. :wink:
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
Fine. The reason I said what I said was because you pushed aside Zeus and his gang and placed the Christian story in its place. But it doesn't bother me.

Yes, I will listen to whatever story one wishes to tell, provided the time is conducive and does not eat into something I am doing, and it has to make sense to me. Where the Bible is concerned, there are stories which are true (eg. King David ruled the Jewish tribes, King Solomon built the temple, etc.) but there are also stories which are make belief (eg. Jonah and that creature that swallowed him): I view all other religions that way too, they are compiled from, mythology and legends, and there could be persons in their stories who did exist, and for some reason, became famous. I "accept" religions as one of society's "customs and practices" and they vary depending on that society's history and circumstances. All modern societies at one time or another adopted some kind of religion and practiced and believed its teachings. As we moved forward, questions were raised, discoveries made, and we relied less and less on an "authority" to tell us what is right and wrong as we take more and more control of our lives. Our present day laws were mostly derived from what was considered righteous taught to us from religious laws. Others can have their own views, I don't care. As long as they don't impose their beliefs onto society and other individuals, they have a right to believe whatever they choose.

Cheers!

Put it this way, between debaters we can set aside things we do not believe in or which we have no interest to defend or promote. So unless you are Zeus believer, I suggest not placing irrelevant things on the track to derail the train, otherwise waste time and effort.

You said there are things in the Bible that are true and that are make belief, how do you come to such a conclusion? What's your operating criteria? Who do you listen to? Why do you place reliance on them? As for authority, it's not that people rely less on authority but that they merely exchanged one for another. For you, your authority is science, and your religion could well be scientism.

Let's face reality, in this world a lot of things are imposed on us, whether we like it or not, religious or not. But what do people really mean when they complain that beliefs are imposed upon them or shoved down their throat? IMO unless there is some threat (legal or illegal) that is present it is not appropriate to say that they are being imposed upon. If you don't like what I say, you can always just walk away.
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
I'm a simple person. I go by what I can comprehend, by my simple logic. Authority? To some, they may be, to others, might be garbage. For example, the Sai Baba is a guiding light to some, to others, a joke. Same for any other "authority." Science, if I can understand it, yes, why not? If not (too advanced? too complex?), it doesn't mean diddly to me.

To that last statement, it depends on where one is. To us in the "free world" have a choice, without fear or constraints to what we wish to believe. Some people live in societies which are more restricted. Yes, we can avoid what we don't agree with, mostly.

Cheers!

.......................

You said there are things in the Bible that are true and that are make belief, how do you come to such a conclusion? What's your operating criteria? Who do you listen to? Why do you place reliance on them? As for authority, it's not that people rely less on authority but that they merely exchanged one for another. For you, your authority is science, and your religion could well be scientism.

Let's face reality, in this world a lot of things are imposed on us, whether we like it or not, religious or not. But what do people really mean when they complain that beliefs are imposed upon them or shoved down their throat? IMO unless there is some threat (legal or illegal) that is present it is not appropriate to say that they are being imposed upon. If you don't like what I say, you can always just walk away.
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
I'm a simple person. I go by what I can comprehend, by my simple logic. Authority? To some, they may be, to others, might be garbage. For example, the Sai Baba is a guiding light to some, to others, a joke. Same for any other "authority." Science, if I can understand it, yes, why not? If not (too advanced? too complex?), it doesn't mean diddly to me.

To that last statement, it depends on where one is. To us in the "free world" have a choice, without fear or constraints to what we wish to believe. Some people live in societies which are more restricted. Yes, we can avoid what we don't agree with, mostly.

Cheers!

The point I wished to make is that everyone has their authority. Whether that authority is reliable or not is another matteer.

You said you employ logic, but how do you account for the existence of the laws of logic? I believe I have asked you this before, but you probably evaded that. I believe the atheist is uncomfortable thinking about where the laws of logic come from because he knows they point to God. Even for science, the very fact that the universe we live in is intelligible and discoverable points only to a Mind as a cause. Naturalism fails to answer for anything.
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
I have not ruled out an entity(s), or thing(s), or whatever, that is more intelligent and superior to us humans that may/could have designed us, and/or other life on Earth. It is just that we do not know, and are still searching. As it stands currently, the Bible's description just doesn't cut it with our present society as that superior "being." Whether that being expects us to behave in any way or not, we do not know. It is easier and somewhat convenient to allocate all things existing to "god," but for many of us, that leaves many questions unanswered, which is why we are still looking, asking, exploring. Our knowledge in this area has changed through time because of new things learnt, when we look back at our earlier societies, we realize that it has only been very recent that we opened our minds to ask, question, and are less and less afraid to do so. This is the reason why I have yet to accept religion as the answer. The stories in the bible have been repeated so often, that some people take them as true, but this doesn't apply to everybody.

Cheers!

The point I wished to make is that everyone has their authority. Whether that authority is reliable or not is another matteer.

You said you employ logic, but how do you account for the existence of the laws of logic? I believe I have asked you this before, but you probably evaded that. I believe the atheist is uncomfortable thinking about where the laws of logic come from because he knows they point to God. Even for science, the very fact that the universe we live in is intelligible and discoverable points only to a Mind as a cause. Naturalism fails to answer for anything.
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
I have not ruled out an entity(s), or thing(s), or whatever, that is more intelligent and superior to us humans that may/could have designed us, and/or other life on Earth. It is just that we do not know, and are still searching. As it stands currently, the Bible's description just doesn't cut it with our present society as that superior "being." Whether that being expects us to behave in any way or not, we do not know. It is easier and somewhat convenient to allocate all things existing to "god," but for many of us, that leaves many questions unanswered, which is why we are still looking, asking, exploring. Our knowledge in this area has changed through time because of new things learnt, when we look back at our earlier societies, we realize that it has only been very recent that we opened our minds to ask, question, and are less and less afraid to do so. This is the reason why I have yet to accept religion as the answer. The stories in the bible have been repeated so often, that some people take them as true, but this doesn't apply to everybody.

Cheers!

Are you sure that there nothing we can know about the Creator from what has been made? Absolutely nothing? BTW, a lot of things we know now only serve to make the Bible look even better than before. In fact, the more we know the more atheism seems false.:wink:
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
We know that God was on the side of the Jewish people. Everyone else are the enemy, and God helps the Jewish people to destroy them, until the New Testament when St. Paul reaches out to the Gentiles, who feared Rome's authority, and united under Christianity till Caesar himself became Christian. That united the world, (the "known: world) for a while, then Christianity became corrupted and Islam appealed to the masses and started to grow. Now the children of God are divided by their belief in God(s). To become united as one people again, humanity needs a common enemy, it's time aliens attacked us.

Coming back on track, many stories in the bible are merely tales, told to us when our societies were much simpler. These stories are unable to hold up to straight questions by logic or common sense. Those who belief just choose to do so, and attribute their occurrences to divine intervention, which does not need logic to explain, but faith.

Cheers!

Are you sure that there nothing we can know about the Creator from what has been made? Absolutely nothing? BTW, a lot of things we know now only serve to make the Bible look even better than before. In fact, the more we know the more atheism seems false.:wink:
 
Top