Originally posted by xinfectedsoulx
Yep, so I really don't understand why scientists say that 'this' planet cannot support life.
Also, why did you make Oxygen and 3 bold red?
i changed some things in your original statement

.
Originally posted by Nux
In order for another planet to harbor life such as ours, or EVEN small organism or plant life, a series of things would have to be exact. Such as:
Galaxy would have to be the right size, with the right size black hole in the middle to drive the galaxy.
The solar system with the planet in question would have to be in the correct position in that galaxy.
The solar system would have to have a few same or similar characteristics as well:
The solar system would have to have a strong gravitational ring surrounding the inner planets to form an "asteroid belt" for protection from objects entering our solar system.
The solar system also needs to have a large Venus like body floating through it, so it can provide further safety from objects careening toward our impending doom.
That venus like body, also needs to have large moons for, you guessed it.. further protection.
The planet in question needs a moon, protection (jeez)
Planet needs to be correct distance from the sun.
Planet needs correct atmosphere, gravitational field.
The Sun of the solar system needs to be the correct size...
Ok so, these are just a few of the things that need to be exact if you want life like ours on another planet. Sure you can say "well there can be beings made of light and gas" but in reality time everything is made out of the same materials, which means in order to live it has to go by the same agenda. Sorry.
for life LIKE OURS, yes, those are some speculated conditions. what everyone seems to be disregarding is the fact that there is absolutely no reason why other life would have to be like us. all life on earth is carbon based - well what if another long chain forming element (for example silicon) was substituted? technically, it would still be able to yield a DNA type molecule. who's to say it would even need a long chain type molecule to store information - it could be completely different. you can't just claim that "these conditions need to be present to harbor life," because you don't know what can and can't harbor life. just a few decades ago, scientists would laugh at you if you said life existed in regions on earth where we now know archae bacteria live and thrive (800 degree thermovents, highly acidic environments, etc.).
Originally posted by Nux
Wormholes you say? Wormholes have also been called "magical portals through space". Last time I checked, magic wasn't real. Scientist also like to call wormholes "nerd wet dreams" or "absolutely ****ing impossible".
way to have absolutely no idea about the physics behind the wormhole theory before assuming it's stupid. space/time can be folded, bent, curved, etc. as proven by einstein's general relativity. WORMHOLES ARE THEORETICALLY POSSIBLE as proven by einstein, and i highly doubt you will be able to discredit general relativity. according to one source, the amount of energy required to create a 3 foot spherical diameter wormhole would be roughly equivalent to the negative mass of jupiter. yes, that is extremely impractical, but when we're talking about crossing the universe, it is certainly a better option than spending millions of years to get to other galaxies.
just because something has the label "magic" does not mean it actually requires magic. do "magic tricks" actually require magic?
you also completely ignored hyperspace and warp drive, both of which are also theoretically possible.
Originally posted by Nux
I'm not saying there is no life out there, there could be. I'm saying the odds of it are slim to none, and so what if there is? We will NEVER see them.
Well, WE made it. So if it happened once, it can certainly happen again. And why won't we ever see them? You can't just make baseless predictions like that. YES, granted it would be extremely hard, but you can't say it's impossible.