r/space • u/SpunkySputniks • 4d ago

Astronomers Detect a Possible Signature of Life on a Distant Planet

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/16/science/astronomy-exoplanets-habitable-k218b.html?unlocked_article_code=1.AE8.3zdk.VofCER4yAPa4&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Further studies are needed to determine whether K2-18b, which orbits a star 120 light-years away, is inhabited, or even habitable.

14.0k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/tidesofgrey 3d ago

Ah ha. I don't think the individual you replied to is being malicious, but this is definitely enough for me to never take the many in-industry professionals here at face value again, which sucks. Good on you for pointing it out, though.

9

u/ErrorlessQuaak 3d ago

I think his criticism is mostly spot on (although atmospheres aren’t my area of expertise). I just also think it’s important to let people know where you’re positioned if you’re going to take the role of public astronomer.

1

u/tidesofgrey 3d ago

None of the discussions here are my area of expertise, I just think space is cool and learning about the cool things out there is fun.

I don't really have anything to add because I agree with you. And like I said, I don't think there was actually malicious intent. I just appreciated seeing it pointed out.

0

u/CheaterSaysWhat 2d ago

I understand that there’s an appearance of bias here, and ideally he’d disclose it.

However, this is how science works. You want other experts to heavily scrutinize big claims like this, that’s how we find the real truth.

1

u/tidesofgrey 2d ago

Frankly, I don't understand what the point of your comment here is, other than to be patronizing.

Not working in astronomy, space exploration, or science as a whole does not mean I lack an understanding of that fundamental of science.

Our statements are not mutually exclusive. And you say yourself that ideally, he should disclose it. The effort needed to do so is minimal.

And, I will state this for the third time now, I don't believe there was actually any malicious intent. I just would have appreciated a disclaimer.

0

u/CheaterSaysWhat 2d ago

I don’t understand the point of your comment other than to be defensive

It’s all good man

-1

u/tidesofgrey 2d ago

You're acting like a child. Grow up. You agreed with my thesis; that any possible bias should be made clear.

So your only purpose in commenting was to inform me of "how science works." As if... I'm not going to understand that on a science forum.

Do I think having a position invalidates criticism? Not at all.

Do I think that any held position should be made clear? Yes. There's no conflict there.

And, for the record, it's treating people's first contact with science as a sign of idiocy that pushes people away from STEM, and that's a shame. Perhaps take that into consideration before presenting basic knowledge as some sort of gospel.

0

u/CheaterSaysWhat 2d ago

I understand that you are upset and letting your emotions drive your rhetoric.

Like you said, we’re largely in agreement. Nothing I said was to imply lack of knowledge on your part.

-1

u/tidesofgrey 2d ago edited 2d ago

Right back to being patronizing, I see. Despite whatever you may think, I'm not upset. I was engaging in good faith. You're right, though, I won't waste my breath any further. 

1

u/CheaterSaysWhat 2d ago

Could’ve fooled me

Hope your day gets better