LogFAQs > #975733676

darkknight109 posted...

Even if we're restricting our scope to just the galaxy, there are somewhere between 350 billion and 500 billion star systems in the Milky Way galaxy alone. The idea that none of them are capable of sustaining life beggars belief. Even if you think Earth is a one-in-a-billion type of planet (and, notably, we've already found other Earth-like planets in other solar systems), that would still give us hundreds of planets capable of sustaining life in the galaxy.

And yet, there's no sign of them. The question - with some potentially disturbing implications - is why not.

The thing that trips up most people also is they restrict themselves to think life as we know how it survives on Earth. Aka, Oxygen consuming, CO2 emitting (or visa versa), need water, etc. But there's no reason to think why life must obey these rules, elsewhere. In fact, we KNOW this is bunk - there's bacteria living in a phosphorus lake that consumes that and arsenic, instead of any O2 or CO2. We have organisms on Earth, now, that break the mold on how life "should" work and survive, meaning it's silly to think Earth's limitations would follow suit everywhere else.

Once you realize this, it really opens up the possibility for an astounding sort of life to be possible.