XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.paranormal, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.alien.research   
   From: Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com   
      
   On 8/4/2025 12:06 AM, JTEM wrote:   
   > On 8/3/25 11:55 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:   
   >   
   >> Dimethyl sulfide has been detected in comets   
   >   
   > Lol!  Been on a lot of comets, huh?   
   >   
   > This comet theory is fascinating for a number of reasons.   
   > The first is that Dimethyl sulfide does not stay in an   
   > atmosphere for long, so if it came from a comet it would   
   > have to be recent. It would also have to be a BIG comet,   
   > absolutely huge...   
   >   
   > This claim of finding it in a comet though mirrors other   
   > claims. For instance, there was a 100% fool proof test   
   > for settling all arguments over whether or not 3 billlion   
   > year old plus structures inside of rocks are fossils or   
   > just rocks. And they found that they were indeed fossils!   
   > Until the famous Mar's Rock passed the same test. Oh,   
   > the test on the earth rocks in still fool proof though...   
   >   
   > But it's just stupid. Nobody would have a problem with   
   > the idea of Dimethyl sulfide being found in comets, the   
   > same way our water is, but, again, it would need to be   
   > VERY recent and it would need to be HUGE.   
   >   
   >> [24] IT HAS ALSO BEEN SYNTHESIZED ABIOTICALLY IN THE LABORATORY.   
   >   
   > Which requires biology. This is something you would already know   
   > if you had reading comprehension:  A human, a living thing is   
   > what synthesized it!   
   >   
   >> [25] For comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, the European Space Agency   
   >> sampled the cloud of dust and gas shed from the comet.   
   >   
   > This is just repeating the same claim you made earlier.   
   >   
   > It's padding...   
   >   
   >> [24] [26] DIMETHYL SULFIDE HAS ALSO BEEN MADE ABIOTICALLY IN LABORATORIES   
   >   
   > And this was the second claim that you made.   
   >   
   > You're pretending to have made four points when you didn't.   
   >   
   >> [27] These comet-based discoveries contradict the suggestion that   
   >> dimethyl sulfide is an indicator of life on other planets.[28][25][29]   
   >> [30]   
   >   
   > No they don't. They can't. For starters, if they meant that much   
   > you wouldn't have repeated them, pretending you have four points.   
   > Secondly, it is a biosignature, it is evidence for life. And what's   
   > more, together with other biosignatures it's very good evidence.   
   > Being retarded, you think something all by itself has to be rock   
   > solid proof or it isn't evidence. Well it is evidence. And it's   
   > very strong evidence.   
   >   
   >> The James Webb Space Telescope has possibly detected evidence of DMS   
   >> in the atmosphere of the exoplanet K2-18b.[31][32][33][34]   
   >   
   > Several reviews have confirmed it, and even NASA in it's denial   
   > doesn't exclude it.   
   >   
   > Which means it was found three times, at least.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
      
   I didn't write that paragraph or contribute to the Wiki article in any way.   
      
   Point is that dimethyl sulfide can have a NON-BIOLOGICAL origin.  Here's   
   the definition of abiotically:   
      
      
   https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abiotic   
      
   Or, per Google AI:   
      
   "Abiotically" means in a way that does not involve living organisms or   
   that is not associated with life. It describes processes, conditions, or   
   materials that are not alive or derived from living things.   
      
   Get it now??   
      
   Dawn   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)