"Until now, all 220 planets astronomers have found outside our solar system have had the "Goldilocks problem." They've been too hot, too cold or just plain too big and gaseous, like uninhabitable Jupiter.
The new planet seems just right - or at least that's what scientists think."
AP Article
Or, maybe not. A "response" to discoveries like this written by an astronomer.
In 1995, there were 43 known characteristics required for a planet to support life (the number now is larger). Some of these characteristics have a very narrow tolerance. That is depressing news for life hunters, and it rarely makes it into stories like the one I referenced at the top. Calling it a "goldilocks" problem is an understatement.
Nonetheless, if an extra solar planet is discovered today that has two or three boxes checked out of fifty, the discovery makes news around the world as a site for potential life.
Why is this?
One, like those of the Jesus Seminar fame, planet hunters and those at SETI have a little Barnum and Bailey in them. They know how to promote ... and the media eats it up.
Two, the discovery makes big news because of how many in Western culture answer worldview question #3.
Let me back up. What are the four worldview questions?
Q1. Where do we come from?
Q2. Why is the world in such a mess?
Q3. What can we do about it?
Q4. What is our purpose?
Some, like those influenced by Carl Sagan and his followers, are looking for help and redemption from "out there". Hope is found in finding another race of super beings from outer space who can use their advanced technology and wisdom to save us from our many woes.
I know. The funding for research flows in because this type of research is ostensibly to probe into our origins (i.e. Q1). Few are anxious to fund the search for little green men.
Still, I think it is fair to say that the search for life goes beyond mere science for many. It is their source of hope for the future.
Absolutely they're looking for hope. It would not only offer hope of rescue, but it would validate their "faith" in science and "prove" so many things that aren't true -- spacemen instead of angels, we weren't created by God, and whatever else comforts those who do not want to think about a personal God who might hold them accountable.
Posted by: Cynthia | April 27, 2007 at 01:01
Here we go with defining what life is again. I remember a few years ago with the martian rock that had a bacteria in it...they called it life. Really?
I am sure that sometime after Mr. Dawntreader, and probably myself have passed on into the dust we will launch a probe into this new planet in search of life. It will tkae them that much more time to realize that we are it.
If they find bacteria they will say that life has been found; after all we came from that primordial ooze as well.
The debate will be as loud and clear now as it is then...we will still be asking the age old question, what is life?
Posted by: Carl Holmes | April 27, 2007 at 12:21