Scientists believe they’ve discovered a habitable world: ENCELLADUS

originally posted by: lostbook

originally posted by: LifeMode
I got the same result from my Ouija Board app. Not the dolphin part though. I have the free version.

Normally, I'd say not to trust an Ouija board App but if it's saying the same thing as the board I used then maybe there's some merit to it.

You should Notify NASA. This could save a lot of tax dollars. Why send probes and manned missions when we can get valid information from apps and Ouija boards.

a reply to: olaru12

Silly.
NASA and ESA must use probes to verify the Ouija board findings. Otherwise no one would believe them.

a reply to: lostbook

I know for a fact there is no life there because the U.S. would be sending foreign aid.

a reply to: lostbook

There might be long-term ones, but anything you park on a place like Encelladus would have to be self-sustaining, not merely long-term.

For one thing, there is the matter of the time involved in supply missions. For another, there is the risk those supply missions wouldn't make it.

So you would need a good degree of ability to self-sustain in case you missed a supply drop ... or two ... maybe even three. And at our current level of technology you are talking about half a year to a year to get to Mars alone', but this is a moon of Saturn. Any supply has to navigate not just to Mars, but also past Jupiter and through the asteroid belt to get there. So you are talking about trip of well over a year through lots of random obstacles + the rings.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: lostbook

There might be long-term ones, but anything you park on a place like Encelladus would have to be self-sustaining, not merely long-term.

For one thing, there is the matter of the time involved in supply missions. For another, there is the risk those supply missions wouldn't make it.

So you would need a good degree of ability to self-sustain in case you missed a supply drop ... or two ... maybe even three. And at our current level of technology you are talking about half a year to a year to get to Mars alone', but this is a moon of Saturn. Any supply has to navigate not just to Mars, but also past Jupiter and through the asteroid belt to get there. So you are talking about trip of well over a year through lots of random obstacles + the rings.

True, it's a long trip to Encelladus and supply missions would be tough to say the least..I think a round trip to Saturn is about 15yrs-ish.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: olaru12

Silly.
NASA and ESA must use probes to verify the Ouija board findings. Otherwise no one would believe them.

Oh the irony, eh Phage?

a reply to: lostbook
Isn't your OP about the possibility of life on (or perhaps more accurately, in) Enceladus, rather than people living there?

a reply to: olaru12

It's a simple and affordable solution...NASA should do it.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: lostbook
Isn't your OP about the possibility of life on (or perhaps more accurately, in) Enceladus, rather than people living there?

Yes, but I just had to point out the irony there when you said this:

Silly. NASA and ESA must use probes to verify the Ouija board findings. Otherwise no one would believe them.

However, you're right. I'm Back on topic, Phage!

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: lostbook
Isn't your OP about the possibility of life on (or perhaps more accurately, in) Enceladus, rather than people living there?

Besides measuring for organics from the vents which spew out into Space, isn't there a way to tell if there are lifeforms by the atmospheric content. I remember reading that scientists are looking for changes in Methane in the Martian atmosphere because that would mean there are active lifeforms...Would it be the same for Encelladus or would there be different organic signatures to look for.?

a reply to: lostbook

I feel like the word "habitable" is often misunderstood or misused in these discussions. "Habitable for life" or even "habitable for life as we know it" doesn't mean "habitable for humans" - at least not without isolating ourselves from the environment of such a planet.

It could mean "habitable for saline ocean dwelling bacteria which can withstand temperatures of 'x' using the same elemental building blocks of life as we know it." I think most scientists would describe a planet/moon conducive to human habitation as specifically "human habitable."

a reply to: lostbook

No but Quija boareds are toys, fake - not real.

And the fact that you brought it up as, what? Some for of potential evidence that life could be out there means, in my opinion, your entire post is invalid.

It was good to start but when you brought up that tripe, it died. Sorry fella.

a reply to: lostbook

Point of order:

Worlds considered habitable, are those which can support HUMAN life, without reliance on environmental regulatory equipment or infrastructure.

This moon could be chock full of the biggest, most impressive sea creatures ever seen in our solar system, but would not be considered habitable by human standards, and is therefore not an"habitable" world.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: lostbook

Point of order:

Worlds considered habitable, are those which can support HUMAN life, without reliance on environmental regulatory equipment or infrastructure.

This moon could be chock full of the biggest, most impressive sea creatures ever seen in our solar system, but would not be considered habitable by human standards, and is therefore not an"habitable" world.

Other life forms would disagree with you. en.wikipedia.org...

Planetary habitability is the measure of a planet's or a natural satellite's potential to have habitable environments hospitable to life.

Your defenition is too narrow and self-centered.

a reply to: wildespace

Well, by the definition you seem to favour, most of the solid surfaces in our solar system, and gas giants too, are potentially habitable then. Where do you stop with this?

a reply to: dogstar23

When I think habitable, I think habitable for human life. If we are talking about able to support life then, that's what it is - able to support life.

Just because a planet may be able to support life but not habitable doesn't mean that it may not carry quite complex life, even possibly intelligent life. All it means is that at our current level of ability, we can't go live there for various reasons.

In this case, the distance and the environment would make it prohibitive. That doesn't mean we couldn't one day live on Encelladus, making it habitable as well as able to support it's own life (assuming it exists which has yet to be proven).

So, yes, when I saw the title, that's what I expected in here - a discussion of whether or not we could live on Encelladus, why and how. Not a discussion of whether or not Encelladus carries and supports its own life which it can fully do without our ever being able to live there.

DP.

a reply to: lostbook

Ouija boards are interesting! I don't think they have found life there yet because there hasn't been any probe sent there yet. There probably is life in our solar system - no telling how advanced, but I think it would be similar to our simple ocean life.

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: lostbook

Ouija boards are interesting! I don't think they have found life there yet because there hasn't been any probe sent there yet. There probably is life in our solar system - no telling how advanced, but I think it would be similar to our simple ocean life.

Or maybe highly advanced ocean life......

Whether it holds life or not, some day, we will go ice-hiking across it.