• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Life on Venus?

I haven't seen any artist's impressions of the Venusians, the media aren't doing their jobs.
 
grmcdorman said:
According to what I read, the detection was at altitude - pretty much in this zone (which yes, does exist, according to multiple sources I've read).



Apparently the biggest two caveats are that they only detected one type of signature for phosphine, and the data needs to be heavily processed to find it. This substantially increases the probability that it's a false signal. They were planning to look for a different signature, but COVID-19 interfered with that.

I don't have the article to hand, but I can search for it if there is demand.
Click to expand...

The polar regions don't have the phosphine signature which controls for a false signal. This was observed in 2019 initially and has taken some time to get another telescope to agree to repeat the analysis which they have done. Very compelling.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000mmjk/the-sky-at-night-life-on-venus
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
What the scientists said:

1. We found something unexpected and curious.

2. We have looked at a number of possible explanations but none of them seem to explain what we have observed.

3. One possible explanation of what we have observed is that the something is a result of a living process.

4. This appears to be very controversial and very possibly wrong.

5. We'll keep looking for other explanations.

6. Stand by.

What the press says:

Aliens invading from Venus.
Click to expand...

All the press coverage I’ve seen has pretty exactly followed your first six steps.
 
Puppycow said:
In the presence of oxygen it breaks down, but the atmosphere of Venus lacks O2. I'm skeptical.
Click to expand...

They analyse the methods of PH3 breakdown and its lifetime in the atmosphere in their paper:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-020-1174-4

Photochemical model

Within the atmosphere of Venus, PH3 is destroyed by photochemically generated radical species, by near-surface thermal decomposition and by photodissociation within/above the clouds. Since PH3 itself scavenges chemically reactive radicals and atoms, for example, OH, H, O and Cl, the presence of PH3 suppresses these species, increasing its lifetime. Previously published models of Venus’s atmosphere did not include the scavenging effect of PH3, so we developed our own model.
Click to expand...
 
ohms said:
They analyse the methods of PH3 breakdown and its lifetime in the atmosphere in their paper:

Photochemical model

Within the atmosphere of Venus, PH3 is destroyed by photochemically generated radical species, by near-surface thermal decomposition and by photodissociation within/above the clouds. Since PH3 itself scavenges chemically reactive radicals and atoms, for example, OH, H, O and Cl, the presence of PH3 suppresses these species, increasing its lifetime. Previously published models of Venus’s atmosphere did not include the scavenging effect of PH3, so we developed our own model.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-020-1174-4
Click to expand...


So, totally NOT Aliens just some radical species.
 
If I can indulge in a little thread necromancy here, I asked this question about 16 years ago and the thread didn't go very far. It seems quite relevant to this thread. Any thoughts?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26379

Now, if we take "life as we know it Jim" to be not only carbon-based, but based on the same biochemistry of nucleic acids and proteins and lipids and so on, what is the likelihood of a system evolving independently being similar to the one we're familiar with? I mean the same molecules doing the same jobs at the cellular level. Is this a question which can be answered in any sensible way? I'm particularly interested in the likelihood of the genetic code being the same. Does anyone know if the coding of each individual triplet for a particular amino acid is logical, based on anything about the shapes of the molecules, or is it just an arbitrary relationship?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
If I can indulge in a little thread necromancy here, I asked this question about 16 years ago and the thread didn't go very far. It seems quite relevant to this thread. Any thoughts?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26379
Click to expand...

It seems plausible to me, (not with respect to Venus in particular) because we know that the molecules of DNA and RNA work. If there are other possible self-replicating molecules capable of evolving some kind of lifeform, they are as yet unknown, so I wouldn't be surprised if extraterrestrial life also uses DNA/RNA. Because it works.
 
That wasn't entirely what I meant though. I was speculating as to whether there's any reason to imagine that life that arose independently from terrestrial life would use the same genetic code.
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
To be completely accurate that is only one Venusian. The rest all looked different and more like us. Though the Treens were green. And the Therons brown.

Personally I prefer Asimov's Lucky Starr and the Oceans of Venus.
Click to expand...
I'll get the axle grease ready.
 
Kind of a put-off, though, isn't it? The first sign we get of the (hopefully) charming ETs of Venus is by effectively smelling their farts? An affair that starts like this doesn't seem very promising.
 
Chanakya said:
Kind of a put-off, though, isn't it? The first sign we get of the (hopefully) charming ETs of Venus is by effectively smelling their farts? An affair that starts like this doesn't seem very promising.
Click to expand...

Just don't pull the Mekon's finger?
 
Rolfe said:
If I can indulge in a little thread necromancy here, I asked this question about 16 years ago and the thread didn't go very far. It seems quite relevant to this thread. Any thoughts?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26379
Click to expand...


It is impossible to say as long as we have no examples of ET life. I think that the closest we can come to basing speculations about this in the real world are examples like this one:

The most important of master control genes implicated in making eyes is called Pax6. The ancestral Pax6 gene probably orchestrated the formation of a very simple eye – merely a collection of light-sensing cells working together to inform a primitive organism of when it was out in the open versus in the dark, or in the shade.
Today the legacy of that early Pax6 gene lives on in an incredible diversity of organisms, from birds and bees, to shellfish and whales, from squid to you and me. This means the Pax6 gene predates the evolutionary diversification of these lineages – during the Cambrian period, some 500m years ago.
Humans and squid evolved same eyes using same genes (Conversation, May 6, 2014)
Click to expand...


But as different from each other shellfish and people may be, they still had that one gene in common from the beginning, of course.
 
dann said:
It is impossible to say as long as we have no examples of ET life. I think that the closest we can come to basing speculations about this in the real world are examples like this one:




But as different from each other shellfish and people may be, they still had that one gene in common from the beginning, of course.
Click to expand...


dann said:
It is impossible to say as long as we have no examples of ET life. I think that the closest we can come to basing speculations about this in the real world are examples like this one:




But as different from each other shellfish and people may be, they still had that one gene in common from the beginning, of course.
Click to expand...


The protein kinases are common to all living organisms. Although viruses share no genes across the families?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom