3 ms·

no. we already theorized that, we didn't know. we didn't have proof. now we do; now we know. the actual tangible differences are likely going to be in fundi

by noodle 16y ago

no. we already theorized that, we didn't know. we didn't have proof. now we do; now we know. the actual tangible differences are likely going to be in funding, research direction, and scope of effort on the topic. who knows what future research will generate off of this? no, the world hasn't changed. sorry. not yet, at least. but its kind of like watching the moon landing in '69 and scoffing at it because you knew it was coming, you've been reading about NASA working on it for years in the paper.

jerf 16y ago
You're badly misunderstanding my point. I'm not saying this isn't interesting. I'm saying this isn't actually all that interesting when it comes to the Great Questions. It doesn't significantly expand where we already thought life could be. It has not yet established that it is anything other than another evolution of Earth life, which would be a big deal, and from the sounds of it that's still what it is, an adaptation. This isn't some amazing announcement with profoundly unsettling implications for life in the Universe. It's another in a long series of announcements about how our understanding was limited about how far Earth life could travel. It's roughly similar to how we found non-photosynthetic life around the ocean vents [1], or the recent discoveries of strange life several miles underground [2], or the sky bacteria [3]. I think quite a few people here are not understanding just how many similar discoveries have already been made, we moved on from "all life in the universe will look just like the standard sun-powered ecosystem we live in" quite a while ago. I guess you could say to the extent this is amazing, we've already been amazed this way. It's cool, but it's a discovery that fits quite comfortably with a number of other interesting discoveries. We're not going to be talking about this in another year. (Except possibly because once people start looking for more examples of this sort of thing I'd lay money they find them.) [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent#Biological_communities http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent#Biological_co... [2]: http://www.livescience.com/animals/061019_otherworldly_bacteria.html http://www.livescience.com/animals/061019_otherworldly_bacte... [3]: http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2008/02/bacteria_clouds http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2008/02/bacter...

by noodle 16y ago

jerf 16y ago

You're badly misunderstanding my point. I'm not saying this isn't interesting. I'm saying this isn't actually all that interesting when it comes to the Great Questions. It doesn't significantly expand where we already thought life could be. It has not yet established that it is anything other than another evolution of Earth life, which would be a big deal, and from the sounds of it that's still what it is, an adaptation. This isn't some amazing announcement with profoundly unsettling implications for life in the Universe. It's another in a long series of announcements about how our understanding was limited about how far Earth life could travel. It's roughly similar to how we found non-photosynthetic life around the ocean vents [1], or the recent discoveries of strange life several miles underground [2], or the sky bacteria [3]. I think quite a few people here are not understanding just how many similar discoveries have already been made, we moved on from "all life in the universe will look just like the standard sun-powered ecosystem we live in" quite a while ago. I guess you could say to the extent this is amazing, we've already been amazed this way. It's cool, but it's a discovery that fits quite comfortably with a number of other interesting discoveries. We're not going to be talking about this in another year. (Except possibly because once people start looking for more examples of this sort of thing I'd lay money they find them.) [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent#Biological_communities http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent#Biological_co... [2]: http://www.livescience.com/animals/061019_otherworldly_bacteria.html http://www.livescience.com/animals/061019_otherworldly_bacte... [3]: http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2008/02/bacteria_clouds http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2008/02/bacter...