New solar system near by with 7 planets, three habitable.

[Roy]

and bam, you have just admitted what I have said. Science doesn't know, it is guessing based on very limited data, and while it could be true it might not be. So being overly optimistic is not a valid viewpoint until we have more data.

Mmmm. Being overly pessimistic is equally invalid.

We know there is life on Earth. We know nothing about any other planet other than Venus/Mercury/Mars, and we've only scratched the surface for them.

At this point the only sensible conclusion is "we don't know, but if these premises are valid the probability is x".

[Sparko]

Mmmm. Being overly pessimistic is equally invalid.

really? I thought you atheists valued skepticism? I guess not.

But I am not pessimistic. I am neutral on the matter. I am "let's wait and see. Maybe our science will get better and we will be able to find out for sure." Perhaps we will be able to detect chlorophyll in the atmosphere? Perhaps we could even get actual images of planets with a better space telescope? Right now we just don't know.

We know there is life on Earth. We know nothing about any other planet other than Venus/Mercury/Mars, and we've only scratched the surface for them.

That's what I have been saying.

At this point the only sensible conclusion is "we don't know, but if these premises are valid the probability is x".

Correct.

[Roy]

really? I thought you atheists valued skepticism? I guess not.

No, I value scepticism. If some-one claims there is life on other planets and doesn't provide anything to support that view, I'll reject it. But if they back that claim up with probabilistic arguments based on empirical data, I'll examine the arguments and data.

But I am not pessimistic. I am neutral on the matter. I am "let's wait and see.

I don't want to wait and see. I want to get going and look!

[Sparko]

No, I value scepticism. If some-one claims there is life on other planets and doesn't provide anything to support that view, I'll reject it. But if they back that claim up with probabilistic arguments based on empirical data, I'll examine the arguments and data.
I don't want to wait and see. I want to get going and look!

I agree. Let's go!

[Tassman]

and bam, you have just admitted what I have said. Science doesn't know, it is guessing based on very limited data, and while it could be true it might not be. So being overly optimistic is not a valid viewpoint until we have more data.

But you just want to believe the pop science version that the media puts out there, like on the Science Channel where they make up most of the stuff based on pure guesswork and interviews with celebrity scientist who love to talk in generalities and pie in the sky. Because you have FAITH!

You seem determined to minimise the value of scientific methodology and the very real possibility of extra terrestrial life. Why? Does it cause problems with the Genesis Creation scenario for you?

And at the same time you want to characterize me and other theists as antiscience luddites. You could not be further from the truth. I am a realist. Once science has the evidence and verified it then I believe it. Until then it is just guesswork.

Provisional scientific conjecture based upon existing knowledge to guide investigations, is more than “just guesswork”.

[Sparko]

You seem determined to minimise the value of scientific methodology and the very real possibility of extra terrestrial life. Why? Does it cause problems with the Genesis Creation scenario for you?

no. I actually believe there is life out there somewhere. I just get fed up with the overreaching statements by "pop" science. You seem to eat up every tidbit as gospel. Which is so ironic considering your avowed distaste for "faith" and "religion" -- science is your religion and you believe everything hypothesized as fact without any actual evidence. That's hilarious. If you want to be a skeptic, then be a skeptic. In all things. Skeptic doesn't mean disbelieving everything, just being careful not to be taken in by empty promises, scams, and such. Like "science" claiming things it can't possibly know and you believing it as facts.

[Adrift]

You seem determined to minimise the value of scientific methodology and the very real possibility of extra terrestrial life. Why? Does it cause problems with the Genesis Creation scenario for you?

Sparko has stated time and again that he's curious and excited about the possibility of alien life, but of course, the question could be thrown back at you. You seem to be overestimating the predictive power of groups like NASA and SETI as it concerns the very real possibility of extraterrestrial life. Why? Does the thought of being absolutely alone in the universe fill you with a bit anxiety? Maybe the idea of aliens subconsciously fills some God shaped hole in your life. Does the idea that we may never find extraterrestrial life dash your hopes that we're non-unique, and you'll be forced to consider that we're specially created?

You do realize that there are scientists, astrophysicists, biologists and the like, who are not so optimistic about the existence of extraterrestrial life, or of our ever finding any, right? Astrophysicist, Edwin Turner, and organic chemist David Spiegel, both at Princeton University believe that life on other planets is more optimism than actual science. Other scientists who do believe that extraterrestrial life may exist point out that the constant churning out of pop-science articles on the subject by those who have a vested interest (like NASA) are mostly sensationalistic.

[Sparko]

Sparko has stated time and again that he's curious and excited about the possibility of alien life, but of course, the question could be thrown back at you. You seem to be overestimating the predictive power of groups like NASA and SETI as it concerns the very real possibility of extraterrestrial life. Why? Does the thought of being absolutely alone in the universe fill you with a bit anxiety? Maybe the idea of aliens subconsciously fills some God shaped hole in your life. Does the idea that we may never find extraterrestrial life dash your hopes that we're non-unique, and you'll be forced to consider that we're specially created?

You do realize that there are scientists, astrophysicists, biologists and the like, who are not so optimistic about the existence of extraterrestrial life, or of our ever finding any, right? Astrophysicist, Edwin Turner, and organic chemist David Spiegel, both at Princeton University believe that life on other planets is more optimism than actual science. Other scientists who do believe that extraterrestrial life may exist point out that the constant churning out of pop-science articles on the subject by those who have a vested interest (like NASA) are mostly sensationalistic.

Like routinely using terms like "Earthlike planet" to mean any rocky world around the size of earth. It gives the impression that we have found other worlds that have or can support life. We haven't. At least we have no evidence of it. Or like the title of this thread "three habitable" - um no, we have no idea if they are habitable or not.

[TheLurch]

Like routinely using terms like "Earthlike planet" to mean any rocky world around the size of earth. It gives the impression that we have found other worlds that have or can support life. We haven't.

This is actually one you can blame astronomers for. They've adopted comparisons with things in our own solar system to describe everything elsewhere. Gas giants close to their star? Hot Jupiters. Intermediate sized planets? Either super-Earths or mini-Neptunes. Etc. etc.

I get why it happened, but it'll be nice when we figure out a system for describing these things on their own terms. It's become very clear that the solar system doesn't have anywhere close to the full range of planets possible. Insisting on trying to shoehorn everything we find into a solar-system-like description just isn't, well, very descriptive.

[Sparko]

This is actually one you can blame astronomers for. They've adopted comparisons with things in our own solar system to describe everything elsewhere. Gas giants close to their star? Hot Jupiters. Intermediate sized planets? Either super-Earths or mini-Neptunes. Etc. etc.

I get why it happened, but it'll be nice when we figure out a system for describing these things on their own terms. It's become very clear that the solar system doesn't have anywhere close to the full range of planets possible. Insisting on trying to shoehorn everything we find into a solar-system-like description just isn't, well, very descriptive.

They could call them rocky planets, earth-sized planets. Or maybe they need to start a classification system like on Star Trek (Class M planets) but I think we would need to be able to glean a lot more details from a planet before we could do that.

[Bisto]

This is actually one you can blame astronomers for. They've adopted comparisons with things in our own solar system to describe everything elsewhere. Gas giants close to their star? Hot Jupiters. Intermediate sized planets? Either super-Earths or mini-Neptunes. Etc. etc.

I get why it happened, but it'll be nice when we figure out a system for describing these things on their own terms. It's become very clear that the solar system doesn't have anywhere close to the full range of planets possible. Insisting on trying to shoehorn everything we find into a solar-system-like description just isn't, well, very descriptive.

They could call them rocky planets, earth-sized planets. Or maybe they need to start a classification system like on Star Trek (Class M planets) but I think we would need to be able to glean a lot more details from a planet before we could do that.

Mix the above two and compare them to fictional planets. That should widen the tool box.

[Tassman]

no. I actually believe there is life out there somewhere.

Good, then we’re in agreement that there’s likely to be extraterrestrial life.

I just get fed up with the overreaching statements by "pop" science. You seem to eat up every tidbit as gospel. Which is so ironic considering your avowed distaste for "faith" and "religion" -- science is your religion and you believe everything hypothesized as fact without any actual evidence. That's hilarious. If you want to be a skeptic, then be a skeptic. In all things. Skeptic doesn't mean disbelieving everything, just being careful not to be taken in by empty promises, scams, and such. Like "science" claiming things it can't possibly know and you believing it as facts.

The only person talking about “pop science” here is you.

[Tassman]

Sparko has stated time and again that he's curious and excited about the possibility of alien life,

Sparko’s sneering references to “guessing based on very limited data" and “waiting to see what happens”, don't sound very “curious and excited” to me.

but of course, the question could be thrown back at you. You seem to be overestimating the predictive power of groups like NASA and SETI as it concerns the very real possibility of extraterrestrial life. Why? Does the thought of being absolutely alone in the universe fill you with a bit anxiety? Maybe the idea of aliens subconsciously fills some God shaped hole in your life. Does the idea that we may never find extraterrestrial life dash your hopes that we're non-unique, and you'll be forced to consider that we're specially created?

So you believe that "we're specially created"...why? The notion of being “specially created” is “guessing based on very limited data”. In fact there’s no credible data at all. Double standards much!

You do realize that there are scientists, astrophysicists, biologists and the like, who are not so optimistic about the existence of extraterrestrial life, or of our ever finding any, right? Astrophysicist, Edwin Turner, and organic chemist David Spiegel, both at Princeton University believe that life on other planets is more optimism than actual science. Other scientists who do believe that extraterrestrial life may exist point out that the constant churning out of pop-science articles on the subject by those who have a vested interest (like NASA) are mostly sensationalistic.

Most scientists agree the odds of life existing on a planet besides Earth are pretty high. Even those whom you favour (for obvious reasons) who are not so certain, acknowledge the possibility it may exist and that scientists should continue to search for life on other planets.

[Sparko]

Good, then we’re in agreement that there’s likely to be extraterrestrial life.



The only person talking about “pop science” here is you.

I was reacting to shuny's title and article in the OP. which does exactly what I have been complaining about. keep up.

[shunyadragon]

I was reacting to shuny's title and article in the OP. which does exactly what I have been complaining about. keep up.

Your over stating and warping the conclusions of the article, as usual.