XPost: rec.arts.sf.movies, rec.arts.sf.written
From: YourName@YourISP.com
On 2018-05-02 23:16:37 +0000, J. Clarke said:
> On Wed, 2 May 2018 07:45:32 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/1/2018 11:21 PM, Your Name wrote:
>>> On 2018-05-01 22:30:24 +0000, Dimensional Traveler said:
>>>
>>>> On 5/1/2018 11:18 AM, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>>>>> Gene Wirchenko wrote in
>>>>> news:88bhed578t3ec2ujs5ajnsgdk85tabsr48@4ax.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 20:48:49 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:29:59 -0700, Gene Wirchenko
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 18:57:24 -0500, Cryptoengineer
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We have limited resources for searching. We do know one type
>>>>>>>>> of environment where life can arise, and its not a rare one.
>>>>>>>>> Can you present an argument for looking elsewhere, and suggest
>>>>>>>>> what we should look for?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We already know about that one.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thinking about how *else* life could arise can help us
>>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>> our case. (Just as knowing more than one language helps one
>>>>>>>> understand one's own language better.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One idea of mine is to look for systems that have
>>>>>>>> chemicals
>>>>>>>> converting back and forth. (As with the oxygen - carbon
>>>>>>>> dioxide cycle in Earth's biosphere.) This is, of course, no
>>>>>>>> guarantee of life, but it is a start.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you know of a method that will let us tell that "chemicals
>>>>>>> are converting back and forth" at interstellar distances?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course not. I am no expert in the area.
>>>>>
>>>>> And yet, you criticize those who are for doing it wrong.
>>>>
>>>> I think you are conflating Gene with 'Your Name' who has been bitching
>>>> about scientists spending money on stupid things and why are they only
>>>> looking for life like us.
>>>
>>> It's what some scientists are paid to do ... I'm not. The fact that they
>>> lazily take the easiest route isn't my fault.
>>
>> And you still haven't made ANY kind of suggestion for how to look for
>> other life with the technology and knowledge we have.
>
> He's one of those idiots to whom any job that they don't know how to
> do is trivially easy.
It's amazing how many morons on the internet have reading comprehension
issues. :-\
I never ever said that it was "easy".
I never ever said I know how to do it ... I'm not being paid to come up
with such ideas, the scientists in that specific area are.
Simply a plain and simple *fact* that looking for life ONLY where water
is, or thinking life can ONLY exist where water is, or believing all
life in the universe is the same chemistry / structure / requirements /
etc. as life on Earth is stupidly blinkered.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
