XPost: rec.arts.sf.science, rec.arts.sf.written   
   From: genew@telus.net   
      
   On Tue, 01 May 2018 11:18:43 -0700, 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.   
      
        What criticism did I make?   
      
   Sincerely,   
      
   Gene Wirchenko   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)