For those who think Aliens are fake, think about this statement.

You've digressed; I have merely justified my position. Besides, no one can "walk on water" despite it's physical state. eg. Even when one snowshoes, they are not walking completely on top of the snow.

If you've actually read my original post, I was only clarifying that, despite its multiple physical states, water is still chemically water. You have said that water is only water in it's liquid state, when it's not.
Why do you think scientist's are looking for (microbial) life on Mars when the only traces of water are in its solidified form? It is because micro organisms are able to survive in the harshest of climate. Which is what the poster that you quoted was trying to say, before you gave him a falsified "science lesson".

EDIT: Oh and if you're trying to sound intelligent in a scientific debate, never bring up religion. There's a life lesson for you.

 

I didn't bring up religion, I brought up a man that lived years ago who had allegedly walked on water. My source was a book entitled The Bible.
You didn't dispute the fact that things are named in accordance to their physical and chemical states and compounds, among other things. Not just their chemical structure.
Therefore my comments still stand, undisputed.

Reply to this if you wish to digress some more.

 

Of course I did not dispute the fact that water is named according to its physical state, I was only disputing your claim that

. I assumed that you did not know the chemical similarity of ice, steam, and liquefied water.

This was the post I rebutted to:

You replied to Farcast who stated that Titan held liquid pools of water and Europa also had liquid water. I then stated what Farcast had said earlier, but in more detail. Your following statement made it seem that you did not know that ice and steam were still chemically water. Unless I misinterpreted your intentions with your quote, there's my justification for you.

 

Understood =]

 

I'm glad we settled this .

To get this thread back in order:
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/first-alien-planet-photographed-confirmed-100629.html

 

I think someone needs to understand that Earth is a really unique planet. The way that life has been developing may be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from any other planet. Every planet is definitely habitable. Give me proof that I'm wrong.

 

You'd be a moron to dispute that, but we're asking IF other planets are sustaining life. Not if they're capable.

 

You're actually right. There's more chance that there is a planet with square-shaped beings with eyes on their legs than there being another human-like species. I don't remember the exact scientist's name, but he said pretty much the same thing in response to the Avatar craze.

 

THANK YOU. There's no proof that planets like Saturn, Jupiter, or even Pluto can't support life. Just because it's not Earth life, doesn't mean it's not life.

If they're capable, it's a pretty decent chance that if it took 3.8 billion years for life to appear on Earth, other planets have mustered up some form of life in the ~14.8 billion years the universe has existed. How would I be such a moron so dispute such a claim? It's completely possible. As in the reply above, Just because it's not life that would be found on Earth, it doesn't mean it's not life. Hell, cloud-beings could live on Jupiter eating the solid core of the planet and live for 300+ years, even under that pressure. As I said, that may not be Earth life but it's still a living organism.

Look, Earth life has basic characteristics that define a living organism, such as, it's needs, and it's requirements to be living. To understand life on another planet, you must erase those from your mind.

From wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life#Conditions_for_life

Exactly what I said.

 

The universe is constantly expanding and getting bigger. If you think about it, there could be an identical planet to earth that we don't even know about, along with the many other planets that could support life that is very strange to us.

 

"Aliens" and other things of this matter is another "You gotta see it to believe it" kinda thing. We can only make assumptions based on what we already know but we can't prove anything unless there is solid fact that there is life on other planets. I don't doubt that there is, actually, you'd have to be stupid to think there isn't, but we just haven't seen it yet.

 

Not this old crap again.

For a start, there is no 'cure for cancer', the same way there is no cure for a broken arm. There is no condition called 'cancer', it is a common term for hundreds of afflictions.

You obviously don't even know the difference between HIV and AIDS.

So if 'they' (here they are again) also invented AIDS (HIV, you stupid fool), then why did 'they' bother creating a cure only to conceal it? You seem to be confusing yourself my friend.

 

I think there is life out there somewhere but i dont think there" aliens" since no one ever seen them, but there could be somethings els

 

You want to know what really happened? There are different planets with different races. Black people are from 1 planet. White people are from 1 planet. Mexican people are from 1 planet. Asian people are from 1 planet. Etc. Then, they got bored 1 day and each of the people from their own planets sent 5 people to wander another world and ended up on earth. They spreaded out and had babies. That's why there are different races on Earth.

 

I would appreciate it if you would not spam in the SFA forum, especially in this thread I've been watching.

 

Saying every planet is habitable would be irrational to think as this is not true. The reason why Earth is habitable is because our own Sun's size/mass.

Earth is located within our stars habitable zone, this being where water is in liquid form. If the Sun were to grow bigger, the habitable zone would be pushed our further into our solar system, thus bringing us closer to the Sun, making it much hotter and inhabitable.

However this would make planets further out have the capability for life.

====

Life developed on Earth because of the atmosphere surrounding us and just the right distance between us and the Sun. Not because we are "special" and "unique." If any of these properties were present on planets in different solar systems, life would develop in exactly the same way.

 

His argument is that we only describe life as we know it (i.e. oxygen to breathe, water to live, etc.), instead of visiting the possibility that life may exist on different factors (i.e. surviving on gaseous Nitrogen rather than liquefied water - just an example).
Who are we to say that, just because we survived on certain elements in our Earth, that other forms of life could not survive on certain elements from their host planet?

 

Obviously we can't say that life can only arise with liquid water, but it's impossible to have any debate if we say 'life is possible anywhere, because it could have arisen completely differently'. There has to be some grounding in observable fact; the only time we have ever known life to emerge happened because of liquid water, a temperature controlling atmosphere and so on.

 

But that's the only and first time we've known life to emerge. It's not like that's the only way, do you believe that? Observable fact tells us that life emerged in "liquid water", and a "temperature controlling atmosphere", with "evolution over time", and a "way of reproducing". So let's take those observable facts, and say they only apply to Earth. Earth is a unique planet, but ever other planet is just as unique. You have to observe the chances, also. There is an extremely high chance that there is life that lives off of liquid methane that lives in Titan's methane lakes, at -419 degrees. Or maybe life that lives on Mars that eats the minerals in rocks. You have to understand that:

1. Water is a requirement for an Earth being to be alive.
2. Water must not be needed to support life on other planets.
3. And last but not least, all other Earthly life-y requirements may not be needed. At all.

Put that in your head. Try to understand that if water is on Earth, it's not needed on Mars. If rock-minerals are needed on Mars, it's not needed on Jupiter. Each planet has different needs and different abilities to support different life. That's all I'm saying.

 

That is exacly RIGHT! Everybody just assumes that this 'universe' is this big massive thing in the sky, it could be any size nobody knows.

Also i was watching Inside the universe with steven hawking apparantly he knows how the 'world will end' Nobody can predict that no matter how smart they are.

The world will end whenever it wants and however it wants steven hawking doesent know shit about that XD

Let me hear your views on this aswell.