Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

FleetingSentience t1_j85xghe wrote

> That’s why it always annoys me when “scientists” always want to find a planet in a “habitable zone” to search for life, but that doesn’t make any sense,

Imagine no-one had ever seen crabs before, then imagine we went to the beach and discovered crabs. Then one of us says, "I wonder if crabs exist anywhere else on the planet?"

Where would you look first?

Do you check the centre of an active volcano on the off chance that some crabs have properties that allows them to live in lava, despite the fact we have no idea what properties they would need or whether it's possible for those properties to exist?

Would you look in clouds in case gas crabs exist in clouds. Again no idea what a cloud crab would look like, if it even looked like anything and no idea how we would detect such a thing is even there. Solid demonstration of thinking outside the box though.

Or... do you go to another beach and look there?

54

Its_Just_A_Typo t1_j85yyjx wrote

Interesting that you use crabs here, and I think crab-like creatures are likely in any life-producing world with actual fauna we may someday find, being that they evolved independently at least three different times here on earth. Seems to be a particularly efficient form that life keeps finding.

14

alexxerth t1_j86a467 wrote

I also expect we'd find tubes.

Ferrets, snakes, worms, eels, caterpillars. Tubes are a good shape.

3

Its_Just_A_Typo t1_j86bg4u wrote

Ah yes. We are all tubes when you get right down to the core of the matter.

3

jalepinocheezit t1_j8666pw wrote

I like that thought - that how can we even be sure we're capable of DETECTING creatures that live off of vastly different means of sustenance. Never even crossed the front of my mind

3