Sociopath Community

Xena said: 

https://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/index.php/Bacterial_Fossils_in_Meteorites

It was a hot topic back in the 90s.

 

Scientists have also discovered a planet that may support everything we know and love here at home. Early telescope images indicate a strong possibility that there are large bodies of liquid that look a lot like water on the surface.

The research is only a year or two (?) old, so it may yet be debunked. But dammit we need a new planet if we kill this one. I truly hope that one is habitable, and that humanity can get there someday if we (they... bc Earth will survive longer than I will, even in the toxic state she's in rn) have to evacuate this planet.

I'm hopeful about that planet.

The only thing that dashes that hope a bit is the size of the planet. It's more than twice the size of earth, so the gravitational pull might make things a bit awkward for us. Then again, I'm not a physicist. I can't remember off the top of my head if weaker or stronger gravity happens bc of other factors besides the size of the planet.

 

 There’s been a lot of these false hope planets that end up being debunked. 

Regardless, they’re all too far for it to be humanly possible to get to (so far) unless we used anti-matter to propel us, which is not really dont before with humans so. We may not even withstand that kind of speed. 

Whoever volunteers to get on board of that ship would have to also accept guaranteed, one-way ticket into deep space, and no, return flight. Even if they did manage to get there without dying first, it would take so many years, they would not be able to, return alive just due to the length of their life span.   

That and propulsion with anti-matter requires some pretty nifty take off shit, that takes a long time to engineer and then set up, and they would need that propulsion dock on the other end, in order to come back to earth (most likely). So yeah, right now it’s, pretty impossible. 

Even if everything did go well on that trip and all of this was somehow possible. Lol 

one teaspoon of anti-matter will brankrupt the entire planet by the way. So it’s not feasible to produce, and it’s extremely, extremely tedious to work with when it comes to propelling an object. 

Blanc said: 

Who’s to say that something alive hadn’t made it into the atmosphere, or perhaps even some space junk/ space pollution that wound up getting destroyed by the atmosphere’s heat and velocity, resulting in the ultimate creation of the gas they’re so excited about? 

The gas they're excited about is being destroyed by Venus' atmosphere. So whatever gas they're measuring is being regenerated. Even if the gas originates from a non-life origin, the origin should be capable of regenerating the gas.

But what I do know is, movement, and heat, are wonderful proprietors in the creation of life, and are key catalysts in every single theoretical model on how primordial life began on Earth. 

So, the atmosphere actually could be conducive to forming other molecules from, other molecules. Gas is often strictly a by product of change in chemical state of a molecular structure. So it makes sense that something was put into this shredding vortex, ripped apart the molecules and in then in combination with xyz molecules already on the planet, it resulted in this gas. 

You're right, some unknown process could've created it. However, at least for now, science has not provided any other plausible explanation for the phosphine's presence besides life.

So it doesn’t really make sense to me that this scientist is sitting here scratching their head, saying this gas is impossible, and yet, we don’t even know all the chemical compounds present on the planet in the first place (or even how they got there lol) 

But they do know something about Venus, its atmosphere, temperatures, and acidity. The acidity is actively destroying phosphine. There could be some unknown process that creates more phosphine via non-life channels.

However, they're not saying it's impossible. They're saying that living microbes could create the phosphine, from what I understand. That is currently the only viable explanation science has come up with.

Meteors are a convenient scape goat, but you have to remember that these rocks have been considered not fit to sustain life due to their very extreme conditions, and the speed which they travel (30,000mph) There is always the microbe that doesn’t require oxygen or sunlight and consumes only rock material. But, they’d need to be able to withstand extreme temperatures... (1,648 degrees Celsius) lol

https://boingboing.net/2018/04/25/terrifically-chaotic-gif-of-a.html

this is what the surface of a comet looks like in space 

Cool vid.

for life on earth there is the meteor theory, but it’s more about the collision of heat, that the meteor created in the RNA of the clay on earth at that time, or the molecular structures in primordial stew. That perhaps created the “god protein” which is literally not, possible to recreate or reengineer with human means and the most advanced technology. But the potential for life to be on the meteor itself is, kinda, wild but. I mean. Space is wild so. *shrugs* 

The other two largest standing theories is the deep vent theory, which came from these super hot heat vents deep in the fucking ocean, and the red clay theory, which goes on about the RNA in clay a bit more. 

These are fun discussions. I find some of these questions absolutely fascinating.

Xena said: 

https://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/index.php/Bacterial_Fossils_in_Meteorites

It was a hot topic back in the 90s.

 

 I once played that card in a debate and I got swarmed by angry self proclaimed science followers calling it a hoax. 

.

As for the traces of phosphine gas. I think it's because Venus was once filled with life a very long time ago.