| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/02/2010 02:44:00 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
There is no prove of it (other planets) |
Sorry, but you're wrong. There is clear, scientific evidence of the existence of other planets, and not only that, but of the existence of earth-like planets. Feel free to refute the scientific evidence using that super-intelligent wristwatch you're sporting. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 02:46:22 PM · #27 |
All wrong.
They will announce that they are filing for bankruptcy.
;-) |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 02:47:04 PM · #28 |
I've never seen anyone get so fired up by NASA, other than in a positive sense. Did a booster rocket fall on your dog?
Message edited by author 2010-12-02 14:47:20. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 02:50:19 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
There is no prove of it (other planets) |
Sorry, but you're wrong. There is clear, scientific evidence of the existence of other planets, and not only that, but of the existence of earth-like planets. Feel free to refute the scientific evidence using that super-intelligent wristwatch you're sporting. |
All fine and nice, but there is no prove of anything other than nice colored spectrum...
Are you all out of your minds to think we credit NASA for that? I can look up at night and see the milky-way galaxy, oh my... what a big deal.
Here is what would excite me other than finding colored photos of a planet or a germ here on earth... an announcement that says "We will send man on Mars on 2020" or "We just found a bug on mars"
Those are the things "we the people" are expecting from "NASA"... the "SPACE" agency.
...geeesh |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 02:55:26 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
I've never seen anyone get so fired up by NASA, other than in a positive sense. Did a booster rocket fall on your dog? |
NASA is weak and getting weaker.
This is not the first time I am angry at them. My expectations from the largest space agency is not even getting close, but going backwards all the time since the 70s.
I know, I am not the only one... ask previous astronauts (even current ones) |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 03:05:16 PM · #31 |
| Did any of you watch the actual news conference on NASA TV? No comment from me on the science... but did that Dr. Felisa lady seem like she was out of her mind insane? Man... she was quite a trip to listen to. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 03:08:13 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by alanfreed:
Did any of you watch the actual news conference on NASA TV? No comment from me on the science... but did that Dr. Felisa lady seem like she was out of her mind insane? Man... she was quite a trip to listen to. |
I watched it from start... and that woman excited me as a Big-Mac at a drive-thru. Good for her... I just didn't need that kind of excitement though. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 03:26:02 PM · #33 |
I did not get to see the news conference, but I hope to be able to catch it this evening on the web.
The finding is certainly not a trivial thing; he organisms substituted a normally highly toxic chemical into the critical building blocks of their cell chemistry! This really does "change the game" as to what we can expect and therefore the kinds of things we need to look for when we search for signs of life on other worlds.
This kind of finding is exactly *why* NASA funds research on life on Earth in extreme environments. Kudos to this team on a fantastic find. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 03:46:42 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
I did not get to see the news conference, but I hope to be able to catch it this evening on the web.
The finding is certainly not a trivial thing; he organisms substituted a normally highly toxic chemical into the critical building blocks of their cell chemistry! This really does "change the game" as to what we can expect and therefore the kinds of things we need to look for when we search for signs of life on other worlds.
This kind of finding is exactly *why* NASA funds research on life on Earth in extreme environments. Kudos to this team on a fantastic find. |
Here is what i think as most of us think... This is the UNIVERSE we're talking about. Just like the answer of the question "Are we alone", of course we are not alone but where are the others?, finding a germ lives under extreme conditions and get excited about it as same. It is common "sense", Yes there are things living even in space that we don't know yet. Finding it HERE is my problem. We just can't get close to other places, that's my problem.
As I said, the "finding" is good or bad, I don't care, it is not as exciting as they said it is. There is life on earth already, including the ones we don't know yet. How about talking about "Space exploration" in shorter terms...
I don't want to look for a germ or environment that can hold the same or similar germs on other planets.
NASA found water on moon (fact), that's exciting, NASA find possible life forms on mars (fiction), that's exciting.
You guys are not seeing my point here, and that's normal because most of us new generation have no idea what happened in the past (most of us, not all of us)
NASA should NOT be where it is now. It has been dragged to sidewalls, crippled and damaged because of "fear" that they didn't have before.
so, I say screw their "earthly" findings. Do something that would really excites us.
bunch of people studying "earth"... that's new NASA for you... Change the name to "NESA"... E=Earth |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 04:42:22 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
so, I say screw their "earthly" findings. Do something that would really excites us. |
Would you feel better if they just made a bunch of shit up and offered it up to you like some form of entertainment? NASA is an agency of science, not infotainment. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 04:52:05 PM · #36 |
| I watched a programme on History channel? at the beginning of the week that was about alien life and strangely enough they visited a lake in California and took samples that were later studied in a lab, they found a form of life, a bacterium or something similar that survived in an arsenic environment. Is this the same story? Did it pre-empt the NASA new release? |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 04:52:47 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
so, I say screw their "earthly" findings. Do something that would really excites us. |
Would you feel better if they just made a bunch of shit up and offered it up to you like some form of entertainment? NASA is an agency of science, not infotainment. |
Going to the moon is not making bunch of shit up. NASA is a space agency not lab agency to study germs found here.
This is so funny, I can't believe some of you actually believe in it. NASA should have been pioneer for space exploration, enterprise to take us other worlds... which did once. NASA was a muscle man with very strong meaning and character... now, it's a cat with no hair... Watch little history and what they did in the past, and compare which very simple to do. Watch those people's eyes many years ago when they work, as they say they had "eye of tigers" to do things no one could. Now, bunch of loosers sitting on a desk talking, and trying to avoid a scratch, and any injuries, so government won't cut the funding.
NASA became Bull Shit. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 05:06:43 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
so, I say screw their "earthly" findings. Do something that would really excites us. |
Would you feel better if they just made a bunch of shit up and offered it up to you like some form of entertainment? NASA is an agency of science, not infotainment. |
Going to the moon is not making bunch of shit up. |
Oy. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 05:17:33 PM · #39 |
I didn't watch the press conference, but in my reading of the article this seems a bit overblown. It IS interesting that a bacteria can incorporate arsenic instead of phosphorus, but it has hardly appears to be doing this on a large level. By dry weight a typical bacteria is about 3% phosphorus. These bacteria, after growing on an arsenic rich media, are 0.19% arsenic by dry weight. It was noted that the bacteria also did not grow as quickly and had vacuoles present (which could represent "health" problems with the bacteria). So assuming that every arsenic atom in the bacteria was being incorporated (a big assumption), the bacteria have replaced 1 of 15 phosphorus atoms with arsenic and still survived.
Interesting, but only earth shattering for those looking for funding to continue their work...
Message edited by author 2010-12-02 17:17:50. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 05:28:21 PM · #40 |
| I'm so disappointed. When are they going to announce Warp Drive? - I mean, come on, it's supposed to be here by now. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 06:14:56 PM · #41 |
| Here is another NASA article on the subject. Note that it appears that NASA is a contributor to, but not the sole funder/sponsor of this research project, so perhaps they are making an effort to maximize their resources after all. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 06:27:43 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by JH:
I'm so disappointed. When are they going to announce Warp Drive? - I mean, come on, it's supposed to be here by now. |
right. how are we supposed to discover life with telescopes?
we need to go to these planets!
|
|
|
|
12/02/2010 06:41:40 PM · #43 |
It is an underwhelming story. It shows that life, once established, can adapt to very harsh conditions.
I say practical personal jet-packs should be the main goal of all science anyway :) |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 07:34:17 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
Here is what i think as most of us think... This is the UNIVERSE we're talking about. Just like the answer of the question "Are we alone", of course we are not alone but where are the others?, finding a germ lives under extreme conditions and get excited about it as same. It is common "sense", Yes there are things living even in space that we don't know yet. Finding it HERE is my problem. We just can't get close to other places, that's my problem.
As I said, the "finding" is good or bad, I don't care, it is not as exciting as they said it is. There is life on earth already, including the ones we don't know yet. How about talking about "Space exploration" in shorter terms...
I don't want to look for a germ or environment that can hold the same or similar germs on other planets.
NASA found water on moon (fact), that's exciting, NASA find possible life forms on mars (fiction), that's exciting.
You guys are not seeing my point here, and that's normal because most of us new generation have no idea what happened in the past (most of us, not all of us)
NASA should NOT be where it is now. It has been dragged to sidewalls, crippled and damaged because of "fear" that they didn't have before.
so, I say screw their "earthly" findings. Do something that would really excites us.
bunch of people studying "earth"... that's new NASA for you... Change the name to "NESA"... E=Earth |
I have to agree with you that NASA has been crippled, but not by "fear." It's simply budget and technical roadblocks, which are two sides of the same coin. With enough money you can overcome all but the tallest obstacles, but at some point your money is better spent on domestic issues.
I think we disagree on the usefulness of looking for "different" life here on Earth. My point is, it is relevant, because unless we know more about how life can behave than what we are familiar with, we will not know what to look for elsewhere. The *cheapest* place to look for other varieties of life is here, so let's learn what we can, and apply it. This is cost-effective research. It's *not* cost-effective to send a probe that is ill-equipped to find what it is looking for.
We also seem to disagree on what is exciting. For my money, some of the most exciting science news of the last decade has been made by observations of far-flung objects that don't yield near the traditional beauty of, say, the high-resolution Hubble ACS images of nearby spiral galaxies. Still, these more arcane discoveries are usually the ones that move our understanding forward. To me, this is true excitement.
Message edited by author 2010-12-02 19:34:48. |
|
|
|
12/02/2010 08:17:05 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
I have to agree with you that NASA has been crippled, but not by "fear." It's simply budget and technical roadblocks, which are two sides of the same coin. |
I think it's more then only budget and technical constraints...... Not sure fear is the right word but it's certainly part of it.... most of the big steps were taken in competition with the USSR... wrap in national pride, fear, risk taking, big thinking, balls to do something that might fail and obviously money and you can do great things.
I am very critical of NASA because of the small ideas more then anything.... I mean... seriously... another whack at the moon but unforgivable to me.... in the same damn way we did it in the 60's - big ass rocket with a pointy bit on the top.... Yawn yawn.....
There is a GREAT discussion over at TED from Burt Rutan about the lack of progress the government has made in aero/aerospace over the years - Well worth some time to watch. |
|
|
|
12/03/2010 09:48:14 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
Originally posted by David Ey:
Without further funding, 60 million jobs will be lost, more or less. |
Is this what you think all about... funding NASA? Why am I funding something finds me germs in this world?
(if that's what you mean of course) |
Can someone translate this for me? |
|
|
|
12/03/2010 11:30:18 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
Originally posted by David Ey:
Without further funding, 60 million jobs will be lost, more or less. |
Is this what you think all about... funding NASA? Why am I funding something finds me germs in this world?
(if that's what you mean of course) |
Can someone translate this for me? |
You explain yourself first what do you mean by 60 million lost jobs? |
|
|
|
12/03/2010 02:40:44 PM · #48 |
First, we were guessing what the announcement would be, and that was my guess. The truthfulness of the announcement was not intended, by me, to be accurate. However, with in the boundaries of "more or less", I do believe it to be an accurate statement.
Actually, it is likely understated.
Now, please explain your gobbledygook. |
|
|
|
12/03/2010 03:31:18 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
First, we were guessing what the announcement would be, and that was my guess. The truthfulness of the announcement was not intended, by me, to be accurate. However, with in the boundaries of "more or less", I do believe it to be an accurate statement.
Actually, it is likely understated.
Now, please explain your gobbledygook. |
Is your gobbledygook explaining this?
"Without further funding, 60 million jobs will be lost, more or less. "
Because your above statement it still is gobbledygook to me, and not explaining what are you talking about with 60 million lost jobs!
Message edited by author 2010-12-03 15:31:35. |
|
|
|
12/03/2010 08:51:12 PM · #50 |
First, we were guessing what the announcement would be, and that was my guess.(end of statement)
The truthfulness of the announcement was not intended, by me, to be accurate. (end of statement)
However, within the boundaries of "more or less", I do believe it to be an accurate statement. It could be more or, it could be less.
So, "Without further funding, 60 million jobs will be lost, more or less. " Was not meant to be a true or false statement made by myself but rather a guess of what the announcement made by NASA would be.
Your statement....."Is this what you think all about... funding NASA? Why am I funding something finds me germs in this world?
(if that's what you mean of course)"
...Is written in some kind of code I guess.
Message edited by author 2010-12-03 20:54:00. |
|
