From Newsgroup: alt.paranormal
On 7/24/25 11:48 PM, Pro Plyd wrote:
In April, a team of scientists based at the
University of Cambridge claimed that a planet
orbiting a distant star bore a possible
signature of life.
Talking about this story:
https://archive.is/ApwLm
This was confirmation of a previous analysis of the
very same planet.
The planet has been of special interests since at
least 2015. It was considered a candidate for life
back then. They detected Dimethyl sulfide in the
atmosphere two years ago, or at least that's when
it was reported, and they confirmed the findings
again in April.
Dimethyl sulfide is a VERY tasty biosignature
because, unlike most biosignatures, we know of
no non-biological means to produce it. They also
found other "Biosignatures" but this dimethyl
sulfide is so exciting because, as far as anyone
knows, it can only come from life.
Well. It can be the result of industrial emissions,
yes, but those in turn are the product of biological
activity i.e. man.
So they found MORE THAN ONE biosignature and even
got a confirmation of this all important Dimethyl
sulfide signature. And...
But the new observations have failed to confirm
evidence for life.
This is not true. Read the cite.
We have a detection of biosignatures. We have a
confirmation of those biosignatures. And then we
have a "Failed to Confirm."
It's been confirmed. At least twice now.
In the original study, the
Cambridge team claimed that K2-18b appeared to
have a gas in its atmosphere that on Earth is
produced only by living things. The NASA study
did not find strong evidence for that gas.
This is stating that they found evidence for the gas.
"Strong" is the word you need to take note of. They
are NOT saying that they did not find evidence, they
are saying that they did find evidence but it's not
very "Strong."
So we have three studies finding evidence for this
Dimethyl sulfide....
WhatrCOs more, the NASA team argues that even if
the gas was on K2-18b,
There are ZERO non biological sources on the planet
earth. There are ZERO known non biological sources.
The gas was found in 2023. They confirmed that finding
in April. Now NASA just found evidence for that gas though
they say it's not "Strong" evidence... and that a gas with
ZERO non biological sources could have resulted from a
non biological source....
They are lying. Again.
NASA is phenomenally consistent with the denial of any
evidence for life outside of earth. I've already been
over this in the example of Mars...
it might have formed
through mere chemistry.
It's not know to have EVER come into existence from a
non biological source.
What once seemed like
a promising clue of life rCo a biosignature rCo
might be a mirage.
Actually, it looks more like NASA is actively squashing
the story. The exact same NASA that went searching for life
on Mars using optics that can't even see bacterial life on
earth, most of it anyway, or any suspected like on Mars (the
famous structures within the Mars Rock) is telling you that
a biosignature with precisely ZERO known non-biological
sources may have originated from a non-biological source, and
that's why a second confirmation (at least) of biosignatures
is not any kind of confirmation....
But even their claims here, which as incredibly misleading,
do imply that they found alien life.
NASA found evidence for that life! They say it's not
"Strong" evidence but even "Less than strong evidence" is
still evidence, AND TOGETHER WITH THE PREVIOUS FINDINGS
strengthens the claim that we have found a life bearing
world.
NASA is a government agency. They do not exist to inform you.
They exist to carry out policy, not make it.
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2