NASA Debunks Life on Venus Claim

[DeathToTheOil]

MOSCOW, January 25 (RIA Novosti)

NASA has dismissed the sensational claim by a Russian scientist that there is life on Venus, saying that the “disc” seen moving on the surface was in fact a lens cap.

Earlier this month an article published in Solar System Research magazine reported several objects resembling living beings detected on photos made by the Soviet probe that landed on Venus in 1982.

Leonid Ksanfomaliti of the Space Research Institute of Russia’s Academy of Sciences published research that analyzed photos made by the Venera-13 lander showing several objects resembling “a disk,” “a black flap” and “a scorpion.” All of them “emerge, fluctuate and disappear,” the scientist said, referring to their changing location on different photos and traces on the ground.

But NASA photo analysts dismissed his claims. “It makes much more sense that it's a piece of the lander designed to break off during the deployment of one of the scientific instrument,” The Daily Mail reported on Tuesday, quoting Jonathon Hill, a NASA mission planner.

http://en.ria.ru/science/20120125/170941972.html

All I can say is this: There was no indigenous life on Venus when I was there six years ago. I'll let other people speak for themselves.

[rurallib]

1. life ended on Venus eons back

when Republicans refused to believe that global warming was going on .....................

[onehandle]

2. It's a natural phase.

Venus will return!

But only if we don't raise taxes on our job creators.

[zbdent]

16. it's cyclical ...

in another few billion years, when the Sun gets cooler ... so will Venus.

[Ratty]

3. That our press even reports these types of claims

Shows what a sad state science is in in our country. We might hear about this Russian claim somewhere or other (why is it always the Russians that come out with this stuff? If it isn't cars fueled by water it's spinning superconductors canceling out gravity), but I've seen this report in a number of newspapers and mainstream outlets - and NOT in the Odd News section or Today's Nutbag column, but reported as serious news.

Don't even get me started on all the habitable planets we've found and the real Tatooine right on our doorstep!

[DeathToTheOil]

12. I see we're in agreement

I am very skeptical about all these alleged extrasolar planets.

[Gore1FL]

14. Why?

What in the process of detecting them do you take issue with?

[DeathToTheOil]

19. Sick Transit ;-)

What if the star in question is variable? If so, that's your very slight reduction in brightness right there.

[caraher]

23. There are several techniques used to detect extrasolar planets

Not all over them depend on brightness variations from transits. I'm sure there are false positives out there, but on the whole it seems clear that planets are definitely not rare in the galaxy.

[Confusious]

30. Most are found by the wobble method

If the star moves in space, then it has a planet. To put it simply.

The only way you can see the planet through the transit method is if we are straight on with the planet, but the wobble method still applies since it will pull the star to the left and right as the planet sweeps out its orbit.

Variable stars are also just that. Variable. They don't brighten and darken on a regular schedule. Planets do make them brighten and darken on a regular schedule.

[DeathToTheOil]

34. Not anymore

Just google Kepler Space Telescope. The wobble method hasn't been used in eons.

[Confusious]

35. Don't know where you're getting your info from

But it's wrong. You can't use the transit method if the planet is not in the same plane that we are looking at the star from. Most planets aren't. So the only other option is the wobble method.

The wobble method (Doppler shift) is the best we have right now. Eons? The first extrasolar planet was just found in the middle 90's and extrasolar planet discovery is in it's infancy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_wobble

Currently, the majority of extrasolar planets have been detected using the Doppler shift method (wobble method).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Exoplanet_Period-Mass_Scatter_Discovery_Method_TR.png

The radial-velocity method has been by far the most productive technique used by planet hunters. It is also known as Doppler spectroscopy.

I said I was keeping it simple. I guess it was still to complex.

[Posteritatis]

36. All 1200 or so of them? Oy. (nt)

[Ratty]

24. It's the way they're described as habitable

The news that planets are more numerous than we may have thought, that binary star systems have more planets than we thought - it's all exciting. Describing them as 'habitable' is just wrong. We've found rocky worlds roughly the same size as Earth, in the habitable zone around their stars. That's a monumental discovery. I have seen correct headlines, describing the worlds as being in their habitable zone, but many many more that simply trumpet them as habitable.

Someday we'll detect chlorophyl or something but by then all the newspapers will have exhausted their supply of hyperbole and THEN what will they use for headlines?

I won't even comment on the whole Tatooine thing.

[LibertyLover]

26. Actually, most of the extrasolar planets that have been found are not habitable, generally

of their distances from their suns and the type of stars their suns are. Very recently, one or and maybe two were found to exist in what has been called the Goldilocks zone - i.e. it is just the right distance from its star to MAYBE, and that was the operative word in the report I read, have liquid water. It was considered a major discovery.

[Confusious]

31. 151 have been found in the habitable zone

That does include the ones who have highly elliptical orbits and pass in and out of the habitable zone though.

[Gore1FL]

27. That I get

We definitely need more data before we declare things habitable (though it seems like we keep finding life in places on earth we didn't think it could exist). I suspect life is common in the universe, but obviously that can only be a hypothesis at this point of our understanding.

My concern was the questioning that any exoplanets exist or have been detected.

I don't understand the Star Wars reference. If there was going to be a Star Wars planet nearby, I'd prefer Dagoba. We could send particle physicists there to study the strong force.

[Posteritatis]

38. The media spun up the Star Wars angle on a planet in a binary system

Pretty much every article about it called it Tatooine despite the fact that it was a gas giant.

[Posteritatis]

37. The media is reporting them as habitable, not the researchers. (nt)

[Ian David]

15. Do you think the extrtasolar planets are really Chemtrails? n/t

[snooper2]

4. Waiting for the first person to complain about us leaving trash laying around on Venus

[Warren DeMontague]

5. Given that Venus is like 800 degrees and under immense pressure at the surface

what was probably happening was the rapid melting of the parts of the probe itself.

[Rozlee]

25. 127 minutes according to Wikipedia.

Being consumed and liquified so quickly would make any solid material appear as if it was scrambling around. I can't even imagine such a hellhole. Although our decendents may.

[Liberal Veteran]

6. Did IQs just drop sharply while I was away?

Ma'am, I already said that it was not indigenous. It was on a derelict spacecraft.

[Serve The Servants]

33. Is this gonna be a standup fight, sir, or another bughunt?

Fun fact: It rains sulfuric acid on Venus.

[dipsydoodle]

7. Maybe it was a beer can

which Len Scap dumped.

[Orrex]

8. I for one salute our Venusian overlords

[Phoonzang]

9. Um...that's not the right photo. See here:

[Broderick]

13. Sure looks like a living creature to me

OMG!

[AlbertCat]

20. Why didn't the just go ask William Shatner?

Do we have to think of everything?

[hedgehog]

10. Ummm....

[jakeXT]

11. Miss Venus looks alright

[eyewall]

28. How did I miss these films??

I also didn't know the Russians had a probe sending back images from the surface of Venus.

I need to get out more.

[eyewall]

42. "photos made by the Soviet probe that landed on Venus in 1982."

I guess I need to work on my reading comprehension too.

I knew about that one.

[progressoid]

17. Well duh. They should have looked 53 miles west of Venus.

[bathroommonkey76]

21. You got it all wrong Peppy!!

Bananarama

She's got it

[progressoid]

32. That's Shocking!

Shocking Blue:

[leveymg]

18. yes, but can anyone explain why lense caps come to life on Venus?

Wouldn't that be an even bigger discovery? Hmmm?

[AlbertCat]

22. C'mon guys! Give those life forms a break....

They're under a lot of pressure.




Bada bing!

[Spock_is_Skeptical]

39. DOH HO HOHOHOHOHO!!

[Blue_Tires]

29. That's just NASA's official story

They don't want us to know about the Amazon women on the moon, either...

[Gore1FL]

41. That's probably why we quit going back.

It might be why Neal and Jenny Armstrong divorced, but I can only hypothesize on these matters.

[tabasco]

40. That's a surprise

to those of us from Venus.