Slashdot Mirror


Cassini Spots Geysers On Saturn's Moon Enceladus

An anonymous reader writes "Huge geysers on Saturn's moon Enceladus may be fed by a salty sea below its surface, boosting the odds of extraterrestrial life in our own Solar System."

107 comments

  1. Good news by r45d15 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Moving there, less taxes to pay

    1. Re:Good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Good riddance.

      Don't let the Van Allen Belt hit you in the ass on the way out.

    2. Re:Good news by shadowbearer · · Score: 0

      Evolution in action.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  2. change the headline by ChrisCampbell47 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The geysers are old news. The new news is that Cassini has detected SALTS in Saturn's rings, pointing to a possible salty ocean under the icy surface of Enceladus.

    1. Re:change the headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It is people like you, that give the people like me, that believe in God AND Evolution AND the possibility of life on other planets, a bad name...

    2. Re:change the headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Are these similar to the methane geysers which were found recently to shoot out of Uranus ?

    3. Re:change the headline by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      So these are old geysers who DON'T complain about people being worth their salt? Wow, it really is an alien world.

    4. Re:change the headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Did they never tell about fish?

    5. Re:change the headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It is people like you, that give the people like me, that believe in God AND Evolution AND the possibility of life on other planets, a bad name...

      Are you referring to "Anonymous Coward"?

    6. Re:change the headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, I'm getting sick and tired of these childish jokes about the planet Uranus.

      I look forward to a future where they change the name of that planet to Urectum.

    7. Re:change the headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but that still doesn't really boost the odds of finding life - There's no atmosphere! The idea that ANYTHING could survive it's entire life without EVER BREATHING is at least a little silly. And under ICE no less? And the salt only makes things worse - News flash: Drinking salt water DEHYDRATES YOU. Why do you think that whales have to surface to gather air and moisture from the atmosphere? The blow-holes are there for a reason. No fresh water == No life.

      Nothing to see here.

      Ummm. I think your confused. There are a lot of species here on earth that live there hole lives under water. Even under ice. Ever here of a fucking penguin? Or a walrus? Or a killer whale?

      Moron.

    8. Re:change the headline by eedwardsjr · · Score: 1

      All of the animals you mentioned breath air. While they have the capacity to travel under ice, they do not breath salt water. Without an atmosphere, the animals you mentioned would die. You may want to shift the moron-pointing-finger to yourself.

    9. Re:change the headline by chadplusplus · · Score: 1

      Whoosh.

    10. Re:change the headline by multisync · · Score: 1

      Are these similar to the methane geysers which were found recently to shoot out of Uranus ?

      That would explain the rings.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
    11. Re:change the headline by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Polite folk call it Georgium Sidus.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    12. Re:change the headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C'mon.

      Same troll is funny troll.

    13. Re:change the headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you referring to "Anonymous Coward"?

      No, he's referring to "Anonymous Cowardon".

    14. Re:change the headline by ChrisCampbell47 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Your sarcasm detector is broken.

    15. Re:change the headline by JLF65 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      They can bleach those rings around Uranus now.

  3. Why not create our own ET life? by FreakinSyco · · Score: 1, Interesting

    We know what these planets consist of. We know of some pretty crazy bacteria here on earth. Why not shoot a rocket full of random bacteria that can survive our most extreme conditions to places like these?

    If I recall correctly NASA has always been super careful about bacteria on space vehicles. Why don't we just infect everything and kick start this whole ET thing ourselves.

    1. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 4, Informative

      that seems like a pretty dumb idea. if there is any life outside our earth, sending life forms into its habitat could be incredibly destructive. the idea isn't to kill everything we see (though humans are good at that, i'll admit) its to learn about what might be out there.

      --
      i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
    2. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by geekoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I like it.

      Besides, the more I learn about the human body, the more convinced our real purpose is to move bacteria around, so this is a logic extension of out purpose.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Merls+the+Sneaky · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Of course once we have verified it is devoid of life it's actually a good idea.

    4. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by gnick · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To what end? The same thing has occurred to me, but I can't fathom a useful end-product. If we want to study the behavior of exotic bacteria/whatever, we can replicate the conditions here on Earth much more cheaply than rocketing them off into space (not to mention they'd be much easier to watch/study). And if you've got some fantasy of them evolving into super-fish or whatever, you'd better be REALLY patient. (And, again, even if you're hoping for macro-evolution, we could replicate the environment more easily than visiting it.) If it's dead, I see no benefit of adding life.

      My vote - It's much more interesting to just keep it pristine and see what's there (even if it's nothing.) And, if there is life, it would be far more interesting to see something (however primitive) that had a fresh start rather than something that started here.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    5. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by vamidus · · Score: 1

      ...and once we learn all about what might be out there, we kill it!

      --
      èåæç©
    6. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by doconnor · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Maybe it's something we can transplant?"

    7. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by WillDraven · · Score: 2, Informative

      In my opinion giving life in general a chance to continue should something happen to the Earth is a worthy enough cause. I've often dreamt of designing autonomous starships that investigate stellar systems. If there is no life there they would seed the planets with hardy bacteria, mine some material to replicate itself, and sends a copy or two of itself on to the next star systems while it parks in orbit or on a moon somewhere to wait and greet anything intelligent that might evolve and tell them where they came from.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    8. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by CorporateSuit · · Score: 1

      Reasons why we should teraform Saturn's moon if it is, in fact, dead:

      1) To see if we can.

      Setting up outposts for mining, travel, prisoners, farming, storage, research, or anything else is secondary and uninteresting compared to the first. We are simply driven to see something else living outside of our own fishbowl.

      --
      I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
    9. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by T+Murphy · · Score: 1

      To me the greater point of finding ET life is not so much to see what it is like (although that should be interesting), but to gain more knowledge of how life started. We have our ideas of what it took to start life, and how it managed to survive, but one data point (Earth) isn't a very good sample. If it started in a similar fashion, we learn more about Earth, and if it started in a different way, we get a ton of new information we likely would never come across on Earth.

    10. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      If I recall correctly NASA has always been super careful about bacteria on space vehicles. Why don't we just infect everything and kick start this whole ET thing ourselves.

      I agree. We should Intelligently Design such a system to deploy the bacteria in such a way to give maximum chance of life.

    11. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with this. sure "we" won't see results for possibly millenia, but it would have its perks. such as terraforming. just think if we could create a bacteria that say neutralizes acid we could potentially terraform venus. or some sorta bateria that converts a hostile element in the atmosphere to something benign to us. should we do this on a planet with life? No. but what will it hurt to try things like this on planets that don't contain life. The human race needs to stop being so short-sited and start planing for a better future for our descendants. If our race is to survive we need to start doing stuff like this. Earth can't support us forever.

    12. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Dr_Ken · · Score: 1

      We know what these planets consist of. We know of some pretty crazy bacteria here on earth. Why not shoot a rocket full of random bacteria that can survive our most extreme conditions to places like these?

      If I recall correctly NASA has always been super careful about bacteria on space vehicles. Why don't we just infect everything and kick start this whole ET thing ourselves.

      What! And violate the Prime Directive.

      --
      "If you want to know what happens to you when you die, go look at some dead stuff."
    13. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by bgrantham · · Score: 2, Funny

      "You KNOW what she'll SAY..."

    14. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      To what End? I think our contribution to this universe should be the perpetuation of life, even if it isn't our own. Who knows how many times this miracle has happened elsewhere? I think it has, but I don't assume it. If we can verify that a planet is lifeless, I'm all for seeding planets. And, the moon is a pretty "pristine" ball of rock if you want to look at it that way.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    15. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 1

      one has to logically question why the earth cant support us forever? the only thing i see is our own ineptitude in caring for our home. overcrowding isint really an issue and the earth certainly has the ability to feed mankind even if we dont seem to be able to make sure all people get fed. the only reasons i can think of why the earth may not be able to support us forever are social changes that will inevitbly follow us no matter where we live unless we learn to change our patterns. planning for our decendants to have a better future doesn't require space exploration (we do it because we're a curious species) it doesnt even require technology, it requires social reform.

      --
      i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
    16. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please take your Christian bullshit elsewhere, God-boy.

      Actually, I'm pretty sure he'd qualify as being about as far from Christian as possible with a comment like that. Possibly a follower of Kali, or maybe KHYT.

    17. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by smaddox · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Seeding, mining, and replicating maybe, but waiting around for billions of years for intelligent life to evolve? Unlikely.

    18. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To create a human friendlier ecosystem. Think of it this way: if we send extremophile bacteria to another planet and they thrive, well maybe we can now send plants or small parasites and crustaceans there to feed off the bacteria. And if they survive, small fish and bigger crustaceans and so on down the line until we humans could possibly move there and have a pre-existing, self-sustaining food source.

    19. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by smaddox · · Score: 1

      I just had a random idea, actually. What if you could create a bacteria that harboured all of the DNA of terrestial creatures, but did not activate any of it. Instead it only activates the DNA needed for the bacteria to survive. I'm not a biologist, but it seems like having a store of genes could speed up evolution. Not fast enough to watch, but maybe speed it up by 10x. Of course, that assumes that the genes are useful in the new environment.

    20. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by lgw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Forever is a long time. The Sun goes out eventually, and other catastophies could happen sooner.

      You can always claim that making lives better for the future doesn't require technology, merely social reform (as if that weren't a technology), but everyhting that makes our lives better than our ancestors is directly or indirectly the result of technological improvments, so it's pretty hard to back that claim up. But, hey, maybe tomorrow human nature will change and we'll all just decide to be nice to one another!

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    21. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      create a bacteria that harboured all of the DNA of terrestial creatures, but did not activate any of it. Instead it only activates the DNA needed for the bacteria to survive.

      DNA segments would have to be activated to determine if they were of any benefit.
      If the "new" bacteria survived and reproduced then the DNA segment was useful.

    22. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      We know of some pretty crazy bacteria here on earth.

      Widening your dating options, eh? I know the feeling.
           

    23. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Javarufus · · Score: 1

      Hold on now...now, without ruffling any religious feathers, how do you know that we weren't created as a result of some alien spacecraft emitting some propellant or other chemicals into a pile of protein soup (with or without their knowledge)?

      Look what they've been missing! We're a bunch of fat, lazy, over-rewarded hypocrites that are too lazy to go out to eat and instead elect to have it delivered to us for every meal.

      That and we wrap everything in bacon. Hmmm, bacon. Sorry Jim Gaffigan, I'm taking your glory.

      Let's shoot bacon-wrapped Hot Pockets into outerspace.

    24. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Taint+Bearer · · Score: 2, Informative

      I am a biologist. Any bacteria which had that much DNA would pretty much use most of it for fuel, as it would be much to costly to replicate when the cell divides. Bacteria are able to take on DNA from the external environment so a better idea would be to seed the planet with vesicles filled with random sections of DNA taken from other bacteria that utilise other energy sources. This may assist in speeding up evolution, IF the genes are stable enough to last long enough for them to be useful. However, the original researchers will be long dead by then, so it is a very long pilot study.

      --
      For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert. Arthur C. Clarke (1917 - 2008)
    25. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Taint+Bearer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      one data point (Earth) isn't a very good sample. If it started in a similar fashion, we learn more about Earth, and if it started in a different way, we get a ton of new information we likely would never come across on Earth.

      Exactly right. If we can find life on a moon around a gas giant that is not in the "Goldilocks Zone" then this vastly increases the chances of life existing elsewhere in the universe. Also, assuming for a moment that life DOES exist in places other than earth, if the life found on Enceladus it is from a different biological origin to us, then this would increase the chances of us being able to study other life forms that we discover, as earth-based biology is also only a single data point.

      --
      For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert. Arthur C. Clarke (1917 - 2008)
    26. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm an atheist, asshole.

      If you knew anything about bacteria in the human body, you would see why it's funny AND interesting.

      We came about through the evolutionary process, this is a fact. However one of the pressures could have been bacteria. I mean, you ahve more bacteria in you then you do actual cells, and when every we go something, it find a niche to live. Interesting stuff.

      Point in fact, YOU are the one ranting. No sane person would consider my post a rant.

      "We are merely here because DNA reproduces itself. "
      I seriously hope that's not the pro-evolution argument you use. If it is, please stop and read up. While true DNA was the clincher that wrapped up the big questions in Darwin's theory there is more too it then that.

      Posting AC because I have been too prolific today.

    27. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by gyrogeerloose · · Score: 3, Interesting

      the more I learn about the human body, the more convinced our real purpose is to move bacteria around

      Someone, I can't remember who, said that "life was water's way of moving itself around."

      --
      This ain't rocket surgery.
    28. Re:Why not create our own ET life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the prime directive, our culture destroying their culture. What if they have no concept of jealousy or possession. Like the Bushmen of "The Gods Must be Crazy"... people can't seem to agree about what's fair and fall back on might makes right time and time again,
       
        I for one want an outsider, a dolphin judge.

  4. its all about the water by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 5, Informative

    My understanding is that the major thing of interest is that there is _salt water_ on this moon. salt usually comes from rocks and to get it into water pretty much requires _liquid_ water, therefore the possibility of a life sustaining habitat. the geysers indicate is its possible that it has a liquid core, though i could be mistaken on that part.

    --
    i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
  5. Implications of this finding are profound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It means that if we find some kind of intelligent shrimp on Enceladus we will be able to eat them without adding salt.

    1. Re:Implications of this finding are profound by clem · · Score: 3, Funny

      Mmm. You can really taste the sentience, can't you?

      --
      Your courageous and selfless spelling corrections have made me a better person.
    2. Re:Implications of this finding are profound by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 1

      whats wrong with the shrimp from the saltwater in the gulf of mexico? they're some of the biggest 'shrimp' known they call em prawns casue they aint really 'shrimp' per se

      --
      i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
    3. Re:Implications of this finding are profound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody puts shrimp on Enceladus.

    4. Re:Implications of this finding are profound by drizek · · Score: 1

      Since shrimp on Earth come from salt water, I'm assuming it is the intelligence that will negate the need for additional salt?

    5. Re:Implications of this finding are profound by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

        Someday one of the inhabitants of that ocean is going to go back in time and kick your butt for that remark ;)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  6. Maybe I'm missing* something by geekoid · · Score: 1

    but isn't it more amazing there is salt there then the possibility of water?

    *Likely

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Maybe I'm missing* something by Leafheart · · Score: 1

      Kind of. What is most amazing is that salt on the water can, almost guaranteed, come from liquid water dissolving rocks. That's what's so good about this discovery.

      --
      --- "When you gotta do something wrong. You gotta do it right. (Fighter)"
  7. Which System? by theCoder · · Score: 1, Informative

    ...the odds of extraterrestrial life in our own Solar System.

    There is only one Solar System in the entire galaxy. This is because the name the star that Earth orbits is "Sol", hence the Solal System. There are other stellar systems (I think that's the right phrase) out there, but only one Solar System.

    --
    "Save the whales, feed the hungry, free the mallocs" -- author unknown
    1. Re:Which System? by SomeJoel · · Score: 2, Informative

      hence the Solal System.

      If you're going to try to be a pedantic know-it-all, you really should proofread your own posts.

      --
      <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
    2. Re:Which System? by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Informative

      NASA disagrees: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/en/kids/spitzer/signs/sign_glossary.shtml#S

      "solar system
              A system of planets, moons, asteroids, comets, dust, gas, and any other objects that orbit a star, tied to it by the star's gravitational force. "

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    3. Re:Which System? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it somehow make you superior to nit-pick perfectly understandable, though just barely technically flawed statements? Pat yourself on the back for me, will ya?

    4. Re:Which System? by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      I think what you mean to say....is there is only one Solar system per say, as the word derived from the use of Sol to create a subculture for that phenomenon. If we use kleenex as the example...pass mea kleenex, means tissue as well ...sort of...but there is only one Kleenex....There are many solar systems out there, but only one true Solar system!

    5. Re:Which System? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      ... per say ...

      Per se. It's Latin.

      See my sig for some sage advice.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    6. Re:Which System? by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      .....!

      Brutus's Rule: Never correct an 800 pound guorilla in the use or spelling of words.
      You will end up looking like a mashed potato!

    7. Re:Which System? by EchaniDrgn · · Score: 1

      How self defeatist is that? We name our own sun S.O.L.

      (Knew it was referred to as Sol before this guys post, but it's funnier this way.)

    8. Re:Which System? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Solal is correct. Clearly, he means there is one Sun by mass rather than by amount.

    9. Re:Which System? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      But they forgot to make it a unique key in the Galactic Relational Database. Slacker galactic gov't workers.

    10. Re:Which System? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2, Funny

      Brutus's Rule: Never correct an 800 pound guorilla in the use or spelling of words.

      That's Brutus' Rule, and Gorilla, Brutus.

      8-)

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    11. Re:Which System? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      "There is only one Solar System in the entire galaxy."

      Rubbish, there is a google ad that keeps appearing on slashdot offering "1000 free solar systems"?

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    12. Re:Which System? by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      Doh!

  8. Ohhh the Straits Times! by deglr6328 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...that's where I get all my planetary science news! not. also. also. Why do people do this? This is the internet, not your local morning paper. You can go wherever you want to get this information. WHY NOT GO DIRECTLY TO THE SOURCE!?

    --
    - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    1. Re:Ohhh the Straits Times! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      WHY NOT GO DIRECTLY TO THE SOURCE!?

      Thus far, both the Cassini probe and Enceladusians have not responded to my requests for interviews.

    2. Re:Ohhh the Straits Times! by T+Murphy · · Score: 1

      The source is strong with this one.

    3. Re:Ohhh the Straits Times! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I've had the same gripe, but it's worse when you submit a story linking to site such as you pointed to, and after it's shot down, a week later somebody else posts the same story and links to FOX news.

    4. Re:Ohhh the Straits Times! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      This cracked me up int the article, "...hundreds of kilometres (miles) into space,..". Since when did miles and kilometers become interchangeable? Might have as well put the word 'kilometers' in the parenthesis...

    5. Re:Ohhh the Straits Times! by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 1

      Both units of distance and, to within the accuracy of the quantity given, they're equivalent. So... yeah, it's valid.

  9. I'll bet they're huge... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Huge geysers on Saturn's moon Enceladus may be fed by a salty sea below its surface, boosting the odds of extraterrestrial life in our own Solar System."

    That's what SHE said!!!

  10. The headline is misleading... by anandamide · · Score: 1

    Since the presence of geysers doesn't increase the likelihood of life, which would require a much more complex set of conditions and events to occur.
    You might as well write "Iron detected on Enceladus, increasing the likelihood of Cadillac Dealerships."

  11. Boosting the odds by aardwolf64 · · Score: 1

    Yes, it's boosting the odds from 1 in 800 kazillion to 1 in 799.999999999 kazillion.

    1. Re:Boosting the odds by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

      By my math, that's an increase of over three bajillion percent!

  12. Wrong. Little to no sodium was found by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/06/24/enceladus-does-and-does-not-have-a-global-ocean/

    Taco, you sensacionalist twat !

  13. Return mission by drerwk · · Score: 1

    Looking at the size of those things makes me think a sample return will be pretty easy; we won't need a plan for leaving the surface, just good timing getting into the hole.

  14. Enchiladas by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 2, Funny

    Did anyone else read that as Moon Enchiladas?

    Mmmm.. Moon enchiladas...

    1. Re:Enchiladas by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      Smothered with Earth moon cheese, and we've got ourselves a party!

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    2. Re:Enchiladas by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Did anyone else read that as Moon Enchiladas? Mmmm.. Moon enchiladas...

      And Jupiter's moon Io looks like pizza:

      http://www.astronet.ru/db/xware/msg/1159737

      Now all we need is a hamburger moon and a fries moon(s), and the junkfoodification of the solar system is complete. (I hear Enceladus' geysers taste like coke, so we got that covered.)

         

  15. To quote Marvin... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    Life -- loathe it or hate it, you can't ignore it.

    Don't talk to ME about life!

  16. Sensationalist headlines? by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    From TFA, "Saturn moon may contain life". And I thought slashdot used sensationalist headlines! This amounts to slightly more evidence that Enceladus may be capable of supporting life, no evidence of the existence of life at all. Given the extreme conditions that bacteria have already been found under, there are LOTS of extraterrestrial objects capable of supporting life. Get back to me when Cassini captures a photo of a penguin waving...

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Sensationalist headlines? by Owlyn · · Score: 1

      Get back to me when Cassini captures a photo of a penguin waving...

      Ah, an advanced form of life using Linux.

  17. Implications by mugnyte · · Score: 1

      Ok, so let's suppose life, in some primitive form, maybe even up to the level of crustaceans are found in these oceans. The first-non-Earth life, and quite exciting, sure.

      I'm unsure how this challenges the religious life-origin stories around the world. Any one wants to take a stab at predicting the reactions from the traditional Earth-centric worldviews?

    1. Re:Implications by FiloEleven · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's easy: the fundamentalist religious groups will do their damnedest to ignore it or try to spin it away, the fundamentalist secular groups will do their damnedest to claim that the findings refute all religion, and everyone else will assimilate the information and get on with their lives.

    2. Re:Implications by wonderboss · · Score: 1

      Any one wants to take a stab at predicting the reactions from the traditional Earth-centric worldviews?

      Denial.

      --
      more cowbell
    3. Re:Implications by MeatBag+PussRocket · · Score: 1

      to quote one of my favorite movies "Contact":
      Ellie Arroway: [to a group of children] I'll tell you one thing about the universe, though. The universe is a pretty big place. It's bigger than anything anyone has ever dreamed of before. So if it's just us... seems like an awful waste of space. Right?

      --
      i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
    4. Re:Implications by sznupi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They will just say "ahh, another glorious creation of gods". They've shown many times that inconsistent/false passages in "holy" texts can be ignored, new doctrines introduced.

      It will get interesting only when we discover intelligent life that, during its evolution, didn't need the concept of gods. Though this is likely, IMHO, only in forms of intelligence that are NOT fragile, individual units (which feel the need to control the scary world, hence - gods, prayers, and so on), in case of hive-mind for example (I guess it will operate mostly in "me" and "that which does not exist" categories). But I suspect in this case religious folks will just dismiss its intelligence.

      Oh well, in other cases it might be fun too - at least if "interstellar crusade" sounds fun to you.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    5. Re:Implications by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      I know of no religion that denies the possibilty of extraterrestrial life.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  18. Return sample mission by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Geysers are turning out to be common features of the moons of Jovian planets. Tidal forces experienced by moons orbiting these planets are high. Io (orbiting Jupiter) has large, frequent volcanic geysers as well.

    This is a great opportunity for a sample return mission. If Enceladus does host any microbiology it should be present in at least trace amounts in the water being ejected in space. Seems like it would be comparatively easy (although slow) to collect orbiting ice particles for return and analysis.

    Cross pollination of extremophiles on planets and moons orbiting yellow dwarfs like our sun is inevitable; the system is too small to provide isolation. There is no need to take an extreme position on the possibility of "ruining" alien habits; the solar system has already exposed whatever exists. The most likely result of any discovery of alien lifeforms in our solar system is a distant relation to something already present on Earth.

  19. Wow, old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The salts and possibility of organic compounds in the geyser ejecta is old news. This was the cover story on Scientific American from the issue four months ago. And the scientific journal Nature published it even before that. I guess the internet doesn't always move faster than print.

  20. Nature already does this with meteors by peter303 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    About 50 Martian meteors have been discovered so- mostly on Antarctica glaciers. Thats probably a tiny fraction of thousands upon thousands to have rained upon the Earth. Couple this with discoveries that bacteria apparently have lived inside of rock deep in the Earth for tens of millions of year and you have a mechanism of infecting the entire solar system over the eons. Gravity wells make some transport directions more likely than others. But over the vast amounts of time probably samples of every planet and moon have reached every other.

    My prediction is some parts of Mars are hospitable to extremophile life and we will eventually discover it. It may be canyons where water-bearing layers appear to leak now and then. I further predict this life will very much look like Earth's. And the interesting follow-on question will be which planet did life start on first.

  21. Its got the essentials to support a colony by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

    An underground ocean (which is what they predict is there causing the saltwater Geysers) is huge news for the idea of colonizing the planet.

    That would mean we have Liquid water, and a source of energy (tides created by the planet). Build a Greenhouse, a Distillery, set up some Lights BAM
    FARMS IN SPACE

    1. Re:Its got the essentials to support a colony by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > FARMS IN SPACE

      This is Enceladus, not Ganymede.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  22. Easy life return mission? Perhaps with Cassini? by sznupi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder...

    So we have this moon that possibly has life in its ocean. And geysers which put this water into known orbits. Together with the water they put salts. And life - if one exists there.

    So..."orbital scoop" flying for few years has a big chance to catch some microbes for the ride. Unfortunatelly...it will be probably several more decades before the next mission to Saturn; several more decades before we can sent purpose built spacecraft.

    However...we already have a spacecraft that was flying there for quite some time. Perhaps, once RTGs deplete to such a degree that the scientific package will have to be largery shut down, it is sensible to:

    1) put Cassini into orbit which maximalises probabilities of catching something for the ride (and without too much risk of hitting some ice block)

    2) after several more years - bring Cassini back (through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interplanetary_Transport_Network for example). Put it into stable, high Earth orbit where it can wait for us to have means to investigate it (too bad we get rid of Shuttles, they would be usefull for that oe thing...)

    It seems to me to be much better conclusion of the mission (even we won't find any signs of life on it) than sending it plunging towards Saturn...

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
    1. Re:Easy life return mission? Perhaps with Cassini? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such a shame that we have the LRO and LCROSS heading to the moon vs Enceladus.

  23. En-salad-us Revenge by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Mmm. You can really taste the sentience, can't you?

    If you think Montezuma's Revenge was bad...
           

  24. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and then there's this: http://www.physorg.com/news165068514.html

  25. The only two possible names left.... by photomonkey · · Score: 1

    Popplers or tastesicles.

    Hopefully, it's popplers.

    --
    Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif