←back to thread

NASA finds Titan's lakes may be creating vesicles with primitive cell walls

(www.sciencedaily.com)
277 points Gaishan | 3 comments | 10 Sep 25 00:10 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
dash2 ◴[10 Sep 25 06:50 UTC] No.45194159[source]▶
This feels very cynical, but what incentive does NASA have to do research showing alien life is not very likely in our solar system?
replies(3): >>45194306 #>>45194669 #>>45202418 #
robbomacrae ◴[10 Sep 25 08:03 UTC] No.45194669[source]▶
Regardless of incentives I think this is some of the most important research they should be doing. As a species we need to get a better understanding of the probability of life on other planets and therefore a better understanding of fermi's paradox in case the dark forest theory is correct. So if NASA has an incentive to discover potential pathways for extraterrestrial life... great!
replies(3): >>45195413 #>>45197707 #>>45197740 #
catigula ◴[10 Sep 25 13:54 UTC] No.45197740[source]▶
A non-trivial faction of our government has been teasing knowledge of some sort of non-human intelligent lifeform (that word isn't considered precisely accurate) on EARTH.

This isn't some crackpot theory, they've been having congressional hearings about it and congresspeople say it's real. You can think they are or aren't credible or being lied to, but, if congresspeople are part of or victims of some sort of psy-op with vague parameters and goals, our entire system of government is basically forfeit.

I realize this is difficult to deal with but it's a pretty well-established fact at this point.

We don't need to go anywhere for this information.

replies(5): >>45198240 #>>45198317 #>>45198847 #>>45199286 #>>45199369 #
Dilettante_ ◴[10 Sep 25 14:33 UTC] No.45198317[source]▶
>if congresspeople are part of or victims of some sort of psy-op [...] our entire system of government is basically forfeit.

And you're asserting that this cannot possibly be the case? "For that which must not be, cannot be"?

replies(1): >>45198633 #
1. catigula ◴[10 Sep 25 14:51 UTC] No.45198633[source]▶
No, I'm just asserting that I don't find that theory tenable.

I'd love to know more (even your mundane explanation of "there's a psy-op on congresspeople for some reason" - if so, why?) but it's been decided that we're not allowed.

replies(2): >>45199340 #>>45200007 #
2. IAmBroom ◴[10 Sep 25 15:41 UTC] No.45199340[source]▶
One needn't posit a "psy-op".

We already know major GOP leaders court votes by pushing absurd ideas that are rejected by the scientific establishment. "Injecting bleach can cure Covid" is one from the highest-ranking GOP elected official. "No vaccines are safe" is from a top health official.

3. Dilettante_ ◴[10 Sep 25 16:25 UTC] No.45200007[source]▶
If we take "psy-ops exist"(In my head, "propaganda" is a type of psy-op, but I would not disagree if you drew the circle tighter than that) as a prior, I would have to ask why in the world congresspeople would not be subject to them, both to those that target a broader population, which they are still undeniably part of, and to those that target policy-makers specifically, because if you had the power to influence people, it seems obvious to me that you would target those that gave you great leverage.