NASA scientists say they're closer than ever to finding life beyond Earth

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: JadeStar

So true. NASA is probably the most open federal agency in the country. One has to wonder the motivation of people who pretend to want answers to the universe's greatest questions but attack an agency with a tiny budget because usually a) they don't understand what they are doing (uneducated), b) don't like what they are doing (for various reasons), c) are gullible and believe Youtube videos from the "woo woo" crowd.

Hmmm...so NASA don't facilitate and perform classified DoD missions then?

Thats United Launch Alliance, not NASA. If the DOD start using Space-X does that make Space X suddenly a super-secret company for the woo crowd?

I don't consider multiple billions per annum to be a 'tiny' budget..perhaps to a multi-billionaire it is, but to the average Joe struggling to pay the rent or mortgage, or raise money for a medical procedure, it is a HUGE budget.

In federal budget terms 17 billion dollars is not a huge amount of money. We are talking about the budget for agencies of the government, not your plumber.

a reply to: JadeStar

Or indeed hundreds of thousands of people looking for their next meal or a place to sleep...but hey, if you look straight ahead, you won't have to acknowledge they even exist.

Blimey.

I'm all for science and scientific exploration of space and neighbouring planets and so on, but while of course we are talking about an agency of the government and not an individual plumber, there are many thousands, hundreds of thousands that are going without while ironically living in the worlds wealthiest nation, that would quite rightly recognise a $17 Billion annual budget as not only huge, but an enormous amount of money...perhaps even an obscene amount.

Added scientific value, as valuable as that might actually be, doesn't change that when people are hungry or without a safe place to live, at a time when entire nations are tightening their collective belts, it begs the question are your countries spending priorities being handled properly?

In any case, my comment about NASA's TOTAL budget, the one you failed to read or comprehend properly in your haste to attack, was in reply to a comment that the discoveries made by NASA make it such that they ought not be criticised by another member who had the 'audacity' to do so...since the observation was made that the member commenting had not contibuted as much as NASA to scientific discovery...a little like your single plumber comment actually.

I made the argument that if any one of us had had access to the resources and personnel that NASA has had over the decades, we too would more than likely have made similar discoveries.

I noticed you are unwilling to acknowledge your error in comprehension of my previous post, and attack a different aspect...so i thought i'd mention it again...just in case you feel you are beyond such trivialities as imperfection and error.

Consider yourself reminded that you are not.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: JohnPhoenix

Show me the math equation you used to show life exists.

No math equation (not that there isn't any, I just don't know of one but I'm Sure someone has formulated one)

He's referencing my post on page 1 folks that says there are at least 100 billion galaxies in the known Universe with 2 to 3 trillion Planets in our Milky Way galaxy alone ( 100 billion x 3 trillion planets will give you an idea how many planets are in the known universe) and there are estimated Billions of Earth like planets. ( with links for each on page 1)

Occam as your name suggests says the simplest solution may be the correct one - it's just beyond me why people can think with all those galaxies planets and Earth like planets that we are Alone in the Universe - it makes no sense to me.

Tell you what.. I'll look up and try to find such an equation for ya.

originally posted by: tencap77
NASA "Scientists" have trouble finding they're butt with both hands!

SOmebody needs to take they're funding away. They are Useless and Arrogant. Closing NASA would be the smartest thing we could do! Turn it all over to the open market and the military were it belongs. We no one thing for SURE about NASA Scientists they LOVE to LIE. Just like they're Lord and Master, His Majesty, O-bun-wax !

You said "NASA" and "SCIENCE" in the same sentence. Shame on you ! !!!!!!!!!!!!

The military?

We would never see the light of day on anything it would all go into the black world!

NASA scientists are not the problem it there meager budget and meddling politicians and bureaucrats,

originally posted by: Wanderer777
You can throw wars out from the past all you want. Well let's talk about medicine first. Survival of the fittest. Done. Okay let's talk about eras. I don't care what era. After the roughly 200 years of the crusade about 500,000 people were killed. That's a lot no doubt but we killed more than half of that with ONE bomb in ONE day. I'm not saying there weren't wars back then but they weren't how they are now. Now it's the country with the best technology that win a war. Technology doesn't offend me and that was a ridiculous statement. I see why people like technology. It makes life so much easier for us lazy citizens of the world.

Like the dark ages so such go smash all you computers up, TV's ect and disconnect your gas and electricity now!

Hypocrite.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Rob48

What a ridiculous post.

You might want to take a look at all the things NASA has achieved in increasing our understanding of the universe. What have you ever achieved that has increased the sum total of human knowledge? I am going to guess not very much.

When we are done with NASA and the things they contributed maybe we can all get together at a later date to celebrate the things NAZI doctors did to advance our knowledge of medicine.

Extreme comparison aside NASA has done things to advance knowledge, and have done even more to thwart advancements. How many times since the Apollo missions has NASA stated a goal and stuck with it? NASA is stuck in low earth orbit and is to scared to send astronauts anywhere else.

If the European explorers back in the day had that mindset the new world never would have been discovered. Had the wright brothers had that mentality we never would be flying through the sky. We never would have developed submarines, rockets, etc etc etc.

The greater the risk the greater the reward. Stating a goal to go back to the moon, only to see it canceled time after time, only to hear an announcement we are going to Mars, to have it canceled...

NASA is lost in space.

We need a game plan, a long term game plan, and it should include any and all nations who wish to work with us to achieve the goal of putting differences aside and exploring space.

From 1958 up to 2011 NASA's total dollar amount allocated amounts to about $525+ Billion dollars. That is spread out over that time period, resulting in a budget on average of about 9-10 billion a year.

Maybe if we cut subsidies to mega corporations, close tax loopholes, and give NASA and private industries the needed support we might be able to get somewhere.

Absent that the only way the Us is going to get to the Moon or Mars is via catching a ride with China or Russia.

$9 billion a year... Obama just asked Congress for $4 billion for the flood of immigrant issues Obama created on the southern border. How can we take NASA seriously when our own government doesn't?

Again that not the poor sods working for NASA thats the admin and politicans.

It the monkeys in suits sitting in capital hill too scared to take risks. Look at the tizzy they got in when the last space shuttle went bang!

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: JadeStar


Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1953-1961 - Created NASA and put the infrastructure in place for a civilian space program.

John F. Kennedy, 1961-1963 - Announced plans to put a man on the moon - Success.

Lyndon B. Johnson, 1963-1969 - Refused to provide funding to large scale NASA operations to replace the Apollo program. NASA was placed into the bottle with a tight lid. NASA was never given a clear path for Space once Apollo was done.

Richard M. Nixon, 1969-1974 - Proud of NASA landing on the moon. Nixon then refused to support / provide funding for space stations, continued missions to the moon as well as a manned mission to Mars, which was supposed to be done in or about 1980. Nixon presided over the decrease in NASA's budget, resulting in NASA being forced to slow or completely stop some of their current space programs.

Gerald R. Ford, 1974-1977 - Failed to take an interest in NASA with the exception of the plans for Hubble and the Galileo missions.

Jimmy Carter, 1977-1981 - Had little to no interest in NASA. Reduced the number of Space shuttles NASA wanted to 4, with a 5th to be used as spare parts. He also researched shutting the shuttle program down.

Ronald W. Reagan, 1981-1989 - Gave NASA approval to construct a Space Station (now 15 years in the making from when NASA first wanted to do this). After Challenger Reagan stopped NASA from using the Shuttle for commercial satellite launches. Essentially removing the fees those companies paid to NASA to send their items into space.

George H.W. Bush, 1989-1993 - In 1989 he gave a speech in which he stated he wanted * - Space Station freedom / to go back to the moon / a manned mission to Mars. No funding provided for NASA to complete those goals. In 1990 Bush order a review of NASA goals. It noted again that NASA was over stretched with plans for major missions and no funding to achieve success.

Bill Clinton, 1993-2001 - NASA's budget decreased under Clinton. He wanted to focus on a program to replace the Shuttle program. When the microbe on the Mars meteorite occurred, Clinton pushed for a major space conference to direct NASA's focus. The conference occurred with nothing resulting from it.

George W. Bush, 2001-present - Delayed construction of the ISS, announced plans for increased manned and probe exploration of the Solar System, a manned moon mission to occur in 2020 which would be a lead in for a mission to Mars. Announced the Shuttle program would end in 2010 and directed a plan to replace the shuttle for manned missions.

Obama - Abandoned the plans put in place by the Bush administration, only to announce plans for a manned mission to a comet / asteroid / hunk of rock. He canceled plans that NASA invested money in, only to reinvent the wheel a few years later. He is discussing manned mission to the moon and to mars, which he aid could be completed by 2030.

See the issue yet?


Source

The last ten Presidents have set lofty goals for NASA while failing to provide a means to fulfill those goals. We have Presidents announcing plans, which are canceled by the next President, only to be reinvented by a succeeding President.

We reinvent the NASA wheel every other year / every election of a new President / incumbent President.

What had been planned from the start of NASA, and had those plans been funded and supported by the following Presidents, we would have large space stations in place, be on the moon and have men on Mars.

Instead, we have low earth orbit achievement for manned mission and probe missions for planets.

Yes - NASA is lost in space and each time we have an election the plan for NASA gets "reset".

Yeah I se ethe problem.

It not NASA its the political system.

Lost in this thread so far, is the main takeaway from the story in the original post: That with sufficient investment in a large space telescope (8 to 20 meters) and a starshade we as a human species are highly likely to find out DEFINITIVELY that we are not alone in the galaxy and they universe beyond.

All the investments in missions like the Hubble, Spitzer, Kepler and James Webb telescopes have built a solid logical foundation for such a bold statement by very measured, conservative people.

Now all we have to do is fund and built it. As I have long said on this forum, It's not a technological hurdle but a financial one.

For less than than a 1/10th of a cent more per American taxpayer per year (or borrowing sufficient funds from another branch of government) we could answer a question that has haunted us since the dawn of time, complete with pictures of their world(s).

We're basically living in a time not unlike that of Galileo, Magellan or Columbus. On the cusp of a discovery that may change our world in many ways for the better.

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: JadeStar

Or indeed hundreds of thousands of people looking for their next meal or a place to sleep...but hey, if you look straight ahead, you won't have to acknowledge they even exist.

NASA's job is not to solve their problem so I am not sure what your issue is. It's not a zero sum game. We could both feed, house them AND find ET if the political will were there to do either/both. In fact plenty of technologies developed for or by NASA science -HAVE- helped such people. Perhaps you are just woefully unaware of that fact?


One could argue that there have always been thousands of people looking for their next meal or place to sleep and yet, that is a pure consequence of an economy based upon scarcity of resources rather than the abundance of them which one only need to look up at night to see.

But hey, keep up with your myopic luddite vision of humanity, most of us will keep trying to broaden our horizons and in turn make things better.

Blimey.

I'm all for science and scientific exploration of space and neighbouring planets and so on, but while of course we are talking about an agency of the government and not an individual plumber, there are many thousands, hundreds of thousands that are going without while ironically living in the worlds wealthiest nation, that would quite rightly recognise a $17 Billion annual budget as not only huge, but an enormous amount of money...perhaps even an obscene amount.

Here's a clue, the US Military wastes more than that per year, about twice as much in fact and in the case of the Iraq war 28 times as much.

But hey, pick on a civilian agency which is furthering our knowledge about the universe and our place in it. That makes a lot more sense doesn't it?

a reply to: JadeStar
With the budget (and black budget) that your army has, who knows, maybe they already have some of that ultra giant scopes or starshade systems installed on other planets in our solar system.
I know you'll dismiss this Jade, but I had to say it.

Also, we need more transparency with space agencies.
I was reading yesterday about that "rubber duckie" asteroid, Gerasimenko something, that the info actually leaked, and that it was not meant to be published yesterday.
Talk about withelding crucial information and knowledge.

I suppose that if we find life on another planet a thousand years from now, we are indeed getting closer ever day to finding it, and are now closer than ever. I guess it all depends on whether or not we ever find it.

My ongoing guess as to the year when life of some kind is discovered: 2318

EDIT: Or not. Or never.

originally posted by: zilebeliveunknown
a reply to: JadeStar
With the budget (and black budget) that your army has, who knows, maybe they already have some of that ultra giant scopes or starshade systems installed on other planets in our solar system.
I know you'll dismiss this Jade, but I had to say it.

I don't dismiss that at all...

In fact I made a thread or two right here on ATS railing against it....

SEE:

ATS: Why the Black Budget is Bad for Science

and

ATS: DARPA Developing Telescope 8x Larger Than Hubble Which Could Look for Alien Life But Won't

The problem is, if what you said were true then it does nothing to benefit science or humanity so we still have to push on and duplicate whatever black budget 'scope they would have unless like the two NRO telescopes which were donated to NASA, they suddenly felt generous.

I'd not hold my breath.

a reply to: JadeStar
Oops, cool, we're in tune now.
I'll give it a look. Thanks

The problem is, if what you said were true then it does nothing to benefit science or humanity

Of course, but that's the sad truth about military minds.
They always need to have advantage to others.

And those two gift satellites was exactly what I had in my mind in my previous post.

For those interested in the original post I refer you to a very good document NASA put out last year:

The Future of NASA's Exoplanet Exploration Program

And this one:



Enduring Quests, Daring VIsions - NASA Astrophysics in the Next Three Decades

Which contains this...

originally posted by: zilebeliveunknown
a reply to: JadeStar
Oops, cool, we're in tune now.
I'll give it a look. Thanks

The problem is, if what you said were true then it does nothing to benefit science or humanity

Of course, but that's the sad truth about military minds.
They always need to have advantage to others.

And those two gift satellites was exactly what I had in my mind in my previous post.

Yes, its part of the reason I came to ATS in the first place. That conversation I had with a fairly well known (in astronomy circles) senior scientist which I refer to in the first link got me thinking, "well if we're all trying to duplicate something the military/intelligence sector already have in secret, what else are they perhaps hiding which could benefit us?"

Its something that is well known but goes unsaid in polite company among civilian scientists but I am a bit of a hellraiser and young enough that I can ask "Hey why does it have to be this way?"

Which I do. BTW: I'll be doing a summer program at NASA Ames starting next week so I won't be on these forums much until I get back in late August. Hopefully I'll have some good stuff to report.

originally posted by: zilebeliveunknown
a reply to: JadeStar

I was reading yesterday about that "rubber duckie" asteroid, Gerasimenko something, that the info actually leaked, and that it was not meant to be published yesterday.
Talk about withelding crucial information and knowledge.

I haven't heard about this one. Got a link?

originally posted by: Rob48

originally posted by: zilebeliveunknown
a reply to: JadeStar

I was reading yesterday about that "rubber duckie" asteroid, Gerasimenko something, that the info actually leaked, and that it was not meant to be published yesterday.

Talk about withelding crucial information and knowledge.

I haven't heard about this one. Got a link?

I'm wondering the same. I never heard of it, but then again NEOs aren't really my thing.

a reply to: Rob48
Here's Emily Lakdawalla blog page:
Quick Rosetta update: Churyumov-Gerasimenko is a contact binary!

And ESA's piece on "unscheduled release":
ACCESS TO ROSETTA DATA


And to clarify, it's a comet not an asteroid.

a reply to: zilebeliveunknown

Not sure what you find fishy about that. Nothing is withheld, it's just circulated to the people who need the data (and who did all the hard work that allowed it to be collected!) first.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
I suppose that if we find life on another planet a thousand years from now, we are indeed getting closer ever day to finding it, and are now closer than ever. I guess it all depends on whether or not we ever find it.

My ongoing guess as to the year when life of some kind is discovered: 2318

EDIT: Or not. Or never.

You've said this before, why do you think it would take so long?

With regards to finding alien life we're far closer than that (which is the point those scientists in the original post are trying to get across to the general public).

Based on everything we've learned over the last 30 years they can say with some degree of confidence that life, if it is out there is likely to be plentiful enough that we can spot signs of it with a large telescope.

It won't take until 2318 to build that. We could build it today if the money were there.

Basically the hunt for ET is similar to the hunt for exoplanets.

For over a century we looked with small telescopes and equipment which was not sensitive enough to detect these planets around other stars then in the 1980s that started to change due to miniaturized and more powerful electronics and better optic. So in the 1990s the first one was found (51 Pegasi b in 1995).

Now we know of thousands and plenty of them in orbits and sizes similar to that of our Earth.

So it's like we're in the 1980s, the time when the Kepler mission was first proposed. It could have been built with 1980s technology and it was turned down 5 times before it finally was launched. Had it been built back then and had subsequent followup missions been built and launched, we'd probably have found ET by now.