Phosphine gas detected in Venusian atmosphere (Now with Poll!)

[AV1611VET]

Please explain your 'massive disagreement'.
No .. I don't care what you choose to believe because it demonstrably makes no difference whatsoever, once science is on the track of actually finding out about life, (or otherwise), on Mars/Venus.

You're not making any sense.

Either Venus has a population on it, or it does not.

I believe it does.

If, however, it doesn't, then I'm wrong.

Put me before a firing squad.

But if that population is of angels, then science isn't going to find it, unless said population wants it to.

Science is myopic.

 

[SelfSim]

You're not making any sense.

I am making consistent scientific sense.
The problem is that you live inside a context created by your beliefs and thus you are unable to visualise the scientific context (objective reality).

Either Venus has a population on it, or it does not.

No.
We don't know any of what you say there in advance of executing any test of that particular model (or idea). The model (a belief in this case) is completely irrelevant when we are exploring what is unknown.

I believe it does.

So there ..you admit your opening premise was nothing more than a belief.
Do you now see that you were being led by that belief .. and not by the honest fact that the presence or absence of any population there, is unknown.

If, however, it doesn't, then I'm wrong.

Who cares whether you're 'right' or 'wrong'?
What really matters is finding out .. and how we go about doing that!

Put me before a firing squad.

.. and you set yourself up for ending up in front of one .. and it has nothing at all to do with anything I've done to you .. you did that by choosing to commence investigations into the rightness or wrongness of your belief ... as opposed to simply 'finding out'.

But if that population is of angels, then science isn't going to find it, unless said population wants it to.

Your problem is you want to believe angels exist there .. Science can't test that .. but it can test for familiar forms of life .. which is the key issue at stake here.

Science is myopic.

Science is perfectly positioned to explore what is unknown. What will you do if you find there are no angels there? Oh hang on .. you said you were willing to throw yourself in front of a firing squad .. like: as if that will resolve the matter .. (Err not)!

Why is this all so difficult for believers? Can't (aware or unaware) believers just suspend preconceived beliefs for just a minute, in order to understand the concept of: 'unknown', and then how science proceeds in: 'finding out'?
I mean this is exactly what we do every time we watch some fictional movie (or read a book) etc .. So why is it all so difficult (and evidently unfamiliar) when the principle is applied in this particular instance?

 

[AV1611VET]

I mean this is exactly what we do every time we watch some fictional movie (or read a book) etc .. So why is it all so difficult (and evidently unfamiliar) when the principle is applied in this particular instance?

Because if I'm wrong ... and I highly doubt it ... but if I'm wrong, I am more than willing to err on the side of giving credit to a population of angels being on the planet Venus, than Venus being off-limits to them for some reason.

 

[Strathos]

Because if I'm wrong ... and I highly doubt it ... but if I'm wrong, I am more than willing to err on the side of giving credit to a population of angels being on the planet Venus, than Venus being off-limits to them for some reason.

Maybe they just don't go there because it's a dump.

 

[AV1611VET]

Maybe they just don't go there because it's a dump.

As I said, I'm willing to err on the side of a population there.

 

[Shemjaza]

As I said, I'm willing to err on the side of a population there.

If there are enough angels to make use of all the stars and planets of the universe... and there are no new humans being born/created after the whole revelation thing... this scenario creates a universe with so many more angels then there are humans.

 

[AV1611VET]

If there are enough angels to make use of all the stars and planets of the universe... and there are no new humans being born/created after the whole revelation thing... this scenario creates a universe with so many more angels then there are humans.

You mean like during the Creation Week, when there were billions of angels, but just one man?

God told Adam and Eve to replenish the earth, not the universe.

 

[Shemjaza]

You mean like during the Creation Week, when there were billions of angels, but just one man?

God told Adam and Eve to replenish the earth, not the universe.

Well I goes they aren't called a host for nothing.

 

[Tom 1]

LINK

An international team of astronomers, led by Professor Jane Greaves of Cardiff University, today announced the discovery of a rare molecule – phosphine – in the clouds of Venus. On Earth, this gas is only made industrially, or by microbes that thrive in oxygen-free environments.

Astronomers have speculated for decades that high clouds on Venus could offer a home for microbes – floating free of the scorching surface, but still needing to tolerate very high acidity. The detection of phosphine molecules, which consist of hydrogen and phosphorus, could point to this extra-terrestrial ‘aerial’ life. The new discovery is described in a paper in Nature Astronomy.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology scientist Dr William Bains led the work on assessing natural ways to make phosphine. Some ideas included sunlight, minerals blown upwards from the surface, volcanoes, or lightning, but none of these could make anywhere near enough of it. Natural sources were found to make at most one ten thousandth of the amount of phosphine that the telescopes saw.

No doubt many different experts will kick the tires on this, but the basic result seems sound, while attributing it to life on Venus is a larger stretch that will likely require some kind of independent verification for it to really catch on.

The presence of gas is a useful proof of life for my oldest dog, perhaps NASA would be interested in coming over to run some tests, if they’re not too busy faking another moon landing.

 

[sjastro]

You learn something new every day.
Where as human flatulence is composed of nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, carbon dioxide and methane; angel flatulence is phosphine.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

You learn something new every day.
Where as human flatulence is composed of nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, carbon dioxide and methane; angel flatulence is phosphine.

It fits the 'fart form' - it tends to have an unpleasant smell and is flammable.

 

[ViaCrucis]

This thread got weird.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Ophiolite]

This thread got weird.

Remember where you are.

 

[sjastro]

In the meantime a storm has been unfolding over the discovery.
The IAU (International Astronomy Union) have taken the discovery team to task, the IAU are under attack from many quarters and now the discovery itself is very much in question.

Controversy erupts among astronomers over whether phosphine really was discovered on Venus – Physics World

 

[SelfSim]

In the meantime a storm has been unfolding over the discovery.
The IAU (International Astronomy Union) have taken the discovery team to task, the IAU are under attack from many quarters and now the discovery itself is very much in question.

Controversy erupts among astronomers over whether phosphine really was discovered on Venus – Physics World

Hmm .. Interesting!
Possible parasitic effects ensuing from Greaves etal using a 12 order polynomial to remove the background continuum of thermal emission from Venus, (albeit for good reasons, ie: 'instrumental artefacts') ... With this idea being put forward by two independent teams, now.

This also looks like it might be yet another classic example of peer review doing its job!

And it might also reach a solid conclusion what's more .. ie: on the validity of the original announcement, with there being a way to resolve it using high altitude (airborne) observational measurements.

Great stuff! Thanks for posting the update!

 

[Ophiolite]

In the meantime a storm has been unfolding over the discovery.
The IAU (International Astronomy Union) have taken the discovery team to task, the IAU are under attack from many quarters and now the discovery itself is very much in question.

Controversy erupts among astronomers over whether phosphine really was discovered on Venus – Physics World

Shock! Horror! Elements of the IAU discover the popular press has two characteristics: (very) limited understanding of science; a commercial interest in attracting readers.

The Physics World article notes, "If, after all that, the results are still in dispute, then it may be that new observations at different frequencies are required." Really? The Cardiff team already recommended in their paper a search for other transitions in order to confirm, or refute the detection.

Other examples of their caution: they talked about the apparent presence of phosphine, rather than the more definitive "the presence of phosphine". They went into elaborate detail about their methodology, implicitly inviting criticism. They made an exhaustive search for other chemicals that might have given the signal. And they concluded "Even if confirmed, we emphasize that the detection of PH3 is not robust evidence for life, only for anomalous and unexplained chemistry."

As you can see, I've been disappointed by the way some have addressed the Cardiff team. What are your thoughts sjastro?

 

[Lost4words]

Life certainly exists on Pluto. I have evidence as i get regular postcards from relatives who live there. Woof!

 

[Speedwell]

Life certainly exists on Pluto. I have evidence as i get regular postcards from relatives who live there. Woof!

The only life that exists on Pluto is fleas.

 

[Lost4words]

The only life that exists on Pluto is fleas.

Noooooo, we had the whole 'planet' fumigated!

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

This also looks like it might be yet another classic example of peer review doing its job!

Yes - as I understand it independent analyses of the original data failed to replicate phosphine, as did an analysis of historic data.

It would seem that if there was phosphine (which now seems increasingly unlikely), it's the kind of discovery that requires independent replication before any media announcements. This looks like the triumph of enthusiasm over caution - however cautiously an announcement is worded, the media will hype it.