Catskul writes "Telescopes atop Mauna Kea have recorded for the first time clouds floating over Saturn's biggest moon. Astronomers used telescopes at the Keck and Gemini observatories atop the dormant volcano on the Big Island to photograph methane clouds near the south pole of the moon Titan."
Anybody know if it's active, with volcanoes, or just a lump of cold rock? If there is any source of heat like that, it seems to me the possibility of life could not be completely ruled out. Obviously nothing too complicated, but maybe something like the bacteria in the hydrothermal vent communities. Is it impossible to see through the clouds to be able to tell?
--
Brevity is the soul of wit
-- Polonius
...could not support life...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
> The distant moon could not support life. It has an atmosphere of methane, ethane and hydrogen cyanide with no oxygen. It would also be too cold: minus 297 degrees Fahrenheit on the surface.
Why, why, why, do they always do this? It should say "could not support life AS WE KNOW IT."
Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with Cassini-Huygens
If it takes 6 years to get there, you want to be able to do as much as possible, rather then do the equivilant of 'You know, we should have brought that metric set of spanners' when you get there.
Cheap, low cost is OK for scouting and test missions, where the turnaround time is short. Say the Moon, Mars, Venus and testing engine designs
Saturn is a bloody long way away. Cassini is the orbiter, and Huygens is going to go way beyond 'Pretty Picutres' - it's going to enter Titan's atmosphere, land in the ocean and perform spectral analysis on anything it can find.
Low Cost is a waste of time here - you want it to work first time, keep working and not break, otherwise it'll be 10 years before we build another one and get back there.
I see no reason at all to 'Scoot around taking pictures' - Been ThereDone That. Let's try something new and risky for a change.
That should read "why do [scientists sometimes] do this?"
I think you mean "Why do (so-called science) journalists so often do this?"
My speculation:
An education system which doesn't teach science worth a damn.
Journalism schools and editors who don't care about accuracy in science reporting, in no small part because they are writing for a public which failed to learn science in the education system and wouldn't know the difference.
An intelligentsia which doesn't hold either of the previous two to account.
Slashdot Mirror
Anybody know if it's active, with volcanoes, or just a lump of cold rock? If there is any source of heat like that, it seems to me the possibility of life could not be completely ruled out. Obviously nothing too complicated, but maybe something like the bacteria in the hydrothermal vent communities. Is it impossible to see through the clouds to be able to tell?
Brevity is the soul of wit
-- Polonius
Why, why, why, do they always do this? It should say "could not support life AS WE KNOW IT."
Yes I know its a joke ... but ... There is no oxygen so no boom :(
Thoughts on tech, Software Engineering, and stuff
Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with Cassini-Huygens
If it takes 6 years to get there, you want to be able to do as much as possible, rather then do the equivilant of 'You know, we should have brought that metric set of spanners' when you get there.
Cheap, low cost is OK for scouting and test missions, where the turnaround time is short. Say the Moon, Mars, Venus and testing engine designs
Saturn is a bloody long way away. Cassini is the orbiter, and Huygens is going to go way beyond 'Pretty Picutres' - it's going to enter Titan's atmosphere, land in the ocean and perform spectral analysis on anything it can find.
Low Cost is a waste of time here - you want it to work first time, keep working and not break, otherwise it'll be 10 years before we build another one and get back there.
I see no reason at all to 'Scoot around taking pictures' - Been There Done That. Let's try something new and risky for a change.
My speculation:
Scientists restrict study to entire physical universe; creationist