Water on Mars!

[Jimmy D]

Given our environment, if an answer was there, it should be pretty obvious.

No. I'm sorry to break this to you Skywriting but we haven't yet discovered everything about the many intricasies of the universe.

 

[Ophiolite]

We will find it hard for us to move forward ignoring what others publish.

That is self evident. I was only able to post what I did by not ignoring what others have published. Modifications and amendments to the Drake equation have been numerous, as you point out. I have my own version in a never-to be-published work on the equation's significance.

I confess, I am not quite sure what your underlying thesis is. Am I correct that your response to Dogma Hunter (post #60) is your general thesis? If so, I am still left in the dark as to what you are trying to say about the Drake equation. Perhaps you will clarify that for me.

As to the more general points, the "why" questions you are asking are relevant in philosophy, but not in science. I think you already know this.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Given our environment, if an answer was there, it should be pretty obvious.

Why should it be obvious?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Not reason, purpose or intention.

What causes life to form?
What causes life to continue?
What chemical properties suggest life should form?
What physical properties suggest life would form?
Why would life form from non-living matter?
For what reason might it form?
It seems to have infinite complexity and amazing adaptability.
What is pushing for that to happen?
Why does it fight against all efforts to kill it?
What is motivating life to keep on, keeping on?

Ok.

Science is working on the answer to these.

 

[SkyWriting]

Ok.

Science is working on the answer to these.

Yah...as hard as you are.

 

[SkyWriting]

↑
Given our environment, if an answer was there, it should be pretty obvious.

Why should it be obvious?

It should be pretty obvious.
We have plenty of working
material to form a theory.
Plus the entire history of
scientific investigation of
every scientist ever alive
since the dawn of time.

 

[DogmaHunter]

↑
Given our environment, if an answer was there, it should be pretty obvious.



It should be pretty obvious.
We have plenty of working
material to form a theory.
Plus the entire history of
scientific investigation of
every scientist ever alive
since the dawn of time.

So.... you're basically complaining that we don't know everything about everything?

 

[SkyWriting]

No. I'm sorry to break this to you Skywriting but we haven't yet discovered everything about the many intricasies of the universe.

There is no life out there.
I'm asking about earth.
That thing scientists
tend to stand on.

Earth's crust is made up of several elements: oxygen, 47 percent; silicon, 27 percent; aluminum, 8 percent; iron, 5 percent; calcium, 4 percent; magnesium, potassium and sodium, 2 percent.

Apart from bacteria, the
total live biomass on Earth is about 560 billion tonnes C,[1] and the
total annual primary production of biomass is just over 100 billion tonnes C/yr.[5]
The total live biomass of bacteria may be as much as that of plants and animals[6] or may be much less.[7]
The total amount of DNA base pairs on Earth, as a possible approximation of global biodiversity, is estimated at 5.0 x 1037, and weighs 50 billion tonnes.[8] In comparison,
the total mass of the biosphere has been estimated to be as much as 4 TtC (trillion tons of carbon).[9]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomass_(ecology)

 

[DogmaHunter]

Yah...as hard as you are.

At least they do more then simply read a bronze age book of legends and just believe whatever it says.

 

[SkyWriting]

At least they do more then simply read a bronze age book of legends and just believe whatever it says.

Counter failure with attack?
Very poor science methodology.
Let me help!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/?term=religion

 

[DogmaHunter]

Defence by attack? Poor science.

No. Just a one-liner in response of another one-liner.

 

[Jimmy D]

There is no life out there.
I'm asking about earth.
That thing scientists
tend to stand on.

Earth's crust is made up of several elements: oxygen, 47 percent; silicon, 27 percent; aluminum, 8 percent; iron, 5 percent; calcium, 4 percent; magnesium, potassium and sodium, 2 percent.

Apart from bacteria, the
total live biomass on Earth is about 560 billion tonnes C,[1] and the
total annual primary production of biomass is just over 100 billion tonnes C/yr.[5]
The total live biomass of bacteria may be as much as that of plants and animals[6] or may be much less.[7]
The total amount of DNA base pairs on Earth, as a possible approximation of global biodiversity, is estimated at 5.0 x 1037, and weighs 50 billion tonnes.[8] In comparison,
the total mass of the biosphere has been estimated to be as much as 4 TtC (trillion tons of carbon).[9]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomass_(ecology)

Are you saying that science will never make any significant new discoveries? That's what it seems like.

 

[SkyWriting]

Are you saying that science will never make any significant new discoveries? That's what it seems like.

Please, just use the quote function built into the forum.

 

[Jimmy D]

There is no life out there.

How do you know? I'm not saying there is, but it's not impossible.

I'm asking about earth.

Sorry, what are you asking again?

That thing scientists
tend to stand on.

Got it, the Earth.

Earth's crust is made up of several elements: oxygen, 47 percent; silicon, 27 percent; aluminum, 8 percent; iron, 5 percent; calcium, 4 percent; magnesium, potassium and sodium, 2 percent.

Apart from bacteria, the
total live biomass on Earth is about 560 billion tonnes C,[1] and the
total annual primary production of biomass is just over 100 billion tonnes C/yr.[5]
The total live biomass of bacteria may be as much as that of plants and animals[6] or may be much less.[7]
The total amount of DNA base pairs on Earth, as a possible approximation of global biodiversity, is estimated at 5.0 x 1037, and weighs 50 billion tonnes.[8] In comparison,
the total mass of the biosphere has been estimated to be as much as 4 TtC (trillion tons of carbon).[9]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomass_(ecology)

Why have you posted this?

Please, just use the quote function built into the forum.

No problem.

 

[SkyWriting]

How do you know? I'm not saying there is, but it's not impossible.

Point being there is ample time and materials
both living and not, in your back yard to investigate.

Apart from bacteria, the
total live biomass on Earth is about 560 billion tonnes C,[1] and the
total annual primary production of biomass is just over 100 billion tonnes C/yr.[5]
The total live biomass of bacteria may be as much as that of plants and animals[6] or may be much less.[7]
The total amount of DNA base pairs on Earth, as a possible approximation of global biodiversity, is estimated at 5.0 x 1037, and weighs 50 billion tonnes.[8] In comparison,
the total mass of the biosphere has been estimated to be as much as 4 TtC (trillion tons of carbon).[9]

Answers need not be looked for elsewhere.
New Project Plans To Send A Spacecraft To Alpha Centauri

 

[Ophiolite]

Answers need not be looked for elsewhere.
New Project Plans To Send A Spacecraft To Alpha Centauri

Since many are interested in the environment around Alpha Centauri, especially if it has planets, I am not sure how you expect us to get the detailed answers we would like without sending probes there. Would you care to explain? (I'd also appreciate a response to my post #62.)

 

[florida2]

↑
Given our environment, if an answer was there, it should be pretty obvious.


It should be pretty obvious.
We have plenty of working
material to form a theory.
Plus the entire history of
scientific investigation of
every scientist ever alive
since the dawn of time.

Why should anything in science be obvious? Quantum mechanics and atomic structure is certainly not obvious - we've only really begun to understand both in the last few decades - yet everything in the universe is made of atoms. Most of the time science is hard, messy, complicated and frustrating.