How Might We Discover We Are Not Alone? Part 4 – Remnants And Artefacts

Monoliths to Asteroids

What might we find, hiding under our noses?

I did toy with calling this part '2001 Syndrome'. One popular theory, as expounded in the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, is this: considering the timespan of our planet's existence, alien life may well have visited in the past and left items behind for us to discover when we have advanced sufficiently to find and understand them.

I like this possibility. Given the enormity of the Universe, it makes a kind of sense that any aliens who may have visited, will have done so during the early 'hours' that our planet has existed with life, rather than last few 'seconds' in which humanity popped up.

If aliens visited our solar system and found our planet, seeing its clear potential to harbour intelligent life one day, it seems logical that they would leave some sign for us to discover at a later point. As in the film, it would make sense for such a sign to be located somewhere that we can only reach with reasonably advanced space-faring technology (For now, I won't get into the idea that they may have influenced our development). It's almost pointless discussing what it could be, because it could be anything. A ruin, a buried object with an obvious radioactive or magnetic halo to signal its presence on a planet or moon, a lifeless floating spaceship, or asteroid core... Who knows? The point being that it would be reasonably obvious to find once we had the required technology to look for it. The question, is what level of technology the species in question thought was required.

Taking a Step Back

Will we ever get back here?

Although I find this possibility plausible, even likely, I don't believe it will be the way we find alien life. Not for a long, long time, at any rate. Our society has become too insular, too concerned with the small pictures and forgetting the big ones. Look at how long it's been since we went to the moon. Even recent plans to go back, have since been scuppered.

As always, the excuse is 'wasted' money. I don't want to get on my high-horse, but it's too easy for politicians to cancel expensive projects related to space exploration. Average Joe Public doesn't care, because he or she does not see immediate benefits. Politicians in turn do not want to look at the wider picture, when their terms of office are so fleeting. They want to keep Joe Public happy for those small handful of years required to get back into office. How better, than to loudly announce the cancellation of space exploration projects that sound horrendously expensive (Never mind that they're usually a drop in the ocean compared to money wasted in other areas). Given the politically correct high-horse Joe Public likes to be on, he or she can look at space exploration, and say “Why are we wasting money in space, when we should be spending it fixing our problems here?”

People can also say “What's the point in going back to the moon?” Like any long-term project, the benefits may not be immediately apparent, but it would be the first step to getting humanity back out into a wider universe (forgetting the research and knowledge we would gain even on this small venture). Of course the lack of immediate benefit, especially for manned space travel, means the public tend to think: “Pah, stop wasting money! Just send probes! And we'll cut the money on them, too!”

Politicians and Joe Public will never consider that we're on a small planet, to which numerous disasters could occur at any time. We have all our eggs in one basket, and if something happens on a large enough scale, it could easily be goodbye to the human race. Of course, those issues all seem like the stuff of science fiction or scientific scaremongering that won't occur in our lifetime. So the world carries on, oblivious and caring less and less about space exploration.

What does this mean? That we're very unlikely to get out into our solar system, to even have a chance of finding signs left by another race. In my personal opinion, we'll be lucky if humanity makes it back to the moon this century, let alone anywhere else. It's possible that private industry, through financing anything from tourism to the gathering new raw materials, may be the area to make the big changes, but we'll have to wait and see. Big Business doesn't like to invest unless they can see clear progress, and space exploration isn't really an area that can make progress without big funding in the first place. It's a vicious circle. Luckily there are a few entrepreneur's such as Richard Branson, who are visionary enough to buck the trend, and fund research. Let's just hope they get somewhere.

Any Other Chances?

Might we discover something akin to what we
hoped the 'Face on Mars' was going to be?

In the meantime, what other potential is there for discovering these ancient signs? Perhaps one of the Mars orbiting satellites, or other planetary/moon probes could photograph something (Of course, the possibility exists that they already have). Though due to the scales at which these spacecraft take their photographs, it would have to be an ancient structures or similar large sized object, implying not only the past(?) existence of life, but intelligent life.

The sad truth is that in a very short time, we've lost our vision and pulled back to excruciatingly slow baby steps at our current point in history. Apart from the forms of probe mentioned above (which are themselves suffering increasing budget cuts), as a species we're doing very little to get out there. We're becoming increasingly insular and short sighted. Goals are always set in the near future, to ensure financing and public acceptance. We've stopped being a race that dreams of greatness in our children's future, in exchange for brooding self-blame and dwelling on the transitory. In short, while I find it quite probable that some race has left behind signs for us to discover, I don't believe it will be something we find any time soon.

Next, we shall explore the more controversial theories... first, 'Ancient Memories'

Click here for:
Part 1 - Equations and Paradoxes
Part 2 - Signals from Beyond
Part 3 - Something Small
Part 4 - Remnants and Arefacts

Image Credit:
2001: A space Odyssey - MGM / Warner Bros.
NASA - http://www.nasaimages.org

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

How Might We Discover We Are Not Alone? Part 3 – Something Small

Microbes and Worms

Possible Martian microbial life?

One possibility for the discovery of alien life, that is considered the most likely by many people, is that of microbial or at least small-scale life.

How might we find it? There are a few select ways. We might discover a fossilised sample in a meteor fragment from another planet, that has arrived on Earth itself. This possibility almost happened in 1996 (Click here to read more on the NASA website), when tiny worm-like shapes were found in what is thought to be a sample of Martian meteorite. However, the question of contaminated samples soon arose, as well as the suggestion that the shapes could have occurred through natural processes. New techniques recently put to use, suggest the existence of chemicals which could indicate the signature of life, thus strengthening the case for the worm-like shapes once again.

Mars

3D representation of a Mars Rover

Keeping with Mars, perhaps one of the Rovers or other probes might find something. Science Fiction especially, tends to jump toward Mars as the most likely suspect due to its historic expectations, but there are still good reasons to consider it. Mars is the only extraterrestrial planet on which we have regularly operating probes at ground level searching out new material. If the discovery is a small one, it is very possible that the Rovers would be the first suspects to find it. If they do find anything, chances are it would be a simple microbial life-form. But wouldn't it be fun if they caught a tiny Martian insect on camera? Perhaps they may find a simple moss-like substance on a rock, or even photograph a fossil fragment.

It seems unlikely that'll we'll find something like this anywhere else, though. We just haven't been sending out enough probes to the other planets and their moons, with the ability to investigate at this level. There have been a few others with potential, though.

Other Places

The surface of Titan

It's possible that recent spacecraft such as the Japanese Hayabusa probe that collected particles from the Itokawa asteroid, might find something. Perhaps some of the key chemical building blocks of life or even fossilised microbial samples may be discovered in its captured particles. The only other possibility that I can think of, is the Cassini-Huygens probe that landed on Titan, one of Saturn's moons. Further analysis of the photos and data it sent back may provide new evidence, but it seems unlikely, given the landing occurred some time ago.

The drawback with a discovery of this nature, is that it still leaves a lot of the doors open. For those interested in the subject of alien life, it would be of enormous import. It is a discovery that would make the headlines, and alter our perspective on the likelihood of life having evolved elsewhere in the universe. Unfortunately, it wouldn't make much difference to the everyday populace. The world would go on as normal. Proof of intelligent life is what will make the big change.

Next, we shall discuss 'Remnants And Artefacts'

Click here for:
Part 1 - Equations and Paradoxes
Part 2 - Signals from Beyond
Part 3 - Something Small
Part 4 - Remnants and Arefacts

Image Credit: NASA - http://www.nasaimages.org
Some text modified from my previous article 'NASA Announcement - Possible Proof of Life Out There?'

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

How Might We Discover We Are Not Alone? Part 2 – Signals From Beyond

SETI

The Arecibo Radio Telescope, most commonly
associated with the SETI project

Probably the single greatest public effort to detect signals from beyond our world, is the SETI ('Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence') project. We've all heard of it, and on the off chance you haven't, you should have, so click here. Aside from being used in numerous science fiction stories, it also crops up in almost any serious discussion about the existence of alien life.

This kind of search is probably one of the only mainstream and publicly acceptable outlooks on potential alien contact, next to the discovery of microbial or simple life somewhere close-by. Essentially it works on the principle “We think they might be out there, but even if they are, they're nowhere near us.” For some reason, this logic makes the subject more palatable to most people, organisations and governments. It's the 'polite' side of looking for ET. Most humans will only imagine what's beyond, in the context of their current level of socially-acceptable knowledge. So our belief that there could be life, combined with our disbelief that anyone out there would be capable of traversing the distances, makes it the seemingly 'logical' method. Not to mention, it is more comforting. If we do find anything, it's safe. Confined by distance and our belief that said distance makes physical contact nigh on impossible.

However, don't make any mistakes. Regardless of the reasons, the SETI project and those like it are a good thing. They're at least trying, but there are some serious problems.

WOW!

The (in)famous 'WOW' signal

Firstly, even if we run with the idea that other planets are putting out signals in the form we are looking for, it's a needle in a haystack. A signal must be regular enough and strong enough, that when astronomers look at the right portion of sky, they can detect it. Famously, they did once pick up something referred to as the 'WOW' signal (called such, because one of the astronomers wrote the word 'wow' beside the numerical print-out). The signal itself provided little information, except that the frequency number closely matches that at which hydrogen resonates. The thought is, that Hydrogen being the most common element in the Universe, the number could be used by different species as a baseline of mutual knowledge from which to begin communication. Unfortunately, even after repeated checks of the same portion of space with more powerful telescopes, it was never repeated. SETI has since had very little luck.

When, Where, How

Who's sending, and who's receiving?

The sceptic perspective, is of course usually based around the Fermi Paradox. “We've not found anything yet, after so much searching. Obviously it's because there's nothing out there.” If you've read 'Part 1', you already know why I think this is a complete misfire of logic.

Having said that, I also don't think we'll have much luck with this kind of search. For starters, it is perhaps a mistake to assume that other cultures will use communication methods akin to our own. You could argue that some are bound to, but then I believe another problem creeps into the mix. There has been a logical progression to our human communications technology that possibly implies similar races would find similar solutions. Of course I could be completely wrong, but it makes sense (to me, at any rate). If their progression follows a similar path, we have an obvious and simple difficulty.

Everyone from scientists to science fiction writers, love to talk about how we have been sending signals out into the distant reaches of space for the last hundred years. If science fiction is to be believed, they're either fascinated by repeats of 'I Love Lucy' or deciding to eradicate us because of old broadcasts of Hitler, war atrocities, and our 'destruction' of the planet.

The thing is, our communication methods are changing. Television signals are increasingly broadcast via satellite, a medium that transmits inward, not outward. Meanwhile the ever-growing internet is primarily transmitted via cable. While our transmissions are increasing, their methods are becoming refined and targeted. If this progresses, our civilisation will soon have very few broad, outward transmissions. The logical conclusion is that we will have had a short one-to-two hundred year window during which we have output hoards of signals for aliens to eventually pick up.

On a cosmic scale, imagine a thin circle radiating out from a small dot, eventually passing over other tiny dots very quickly. Now imagine that each of those dots has to be at a sufficient technological level and just happen to be listening at the right time, to pick up those faint messages radiating out from a tiny blue planet.

Reverse the situation. Imagine that a few of those worlds send signals out in a similar way to ours. What are the odds that we will be listening at just the right time, to pick up such a short period of transmission? Especially given the absurdly huge length of time that our world and others have been around, in comparison to the period we've had the technology to listen?

Whilst I think it's great that we're listening, I believe the odds of our discovering something through these methods are so low (even if the universe is teeming with life), that we shouldn't expect to hear anything. Even so, it is important that we don't make snap judgements based on our lack of success in this area. Detecting nothing should not make us believe we are alone, or be used as an excuse to give up the search.

Tomorrow, we shall discuss 'Something Small', the possibilities of microbial or primitive life.

Click here for:
Part 1 - Equations and Paradoxes
Part 2 - Signals from Beyond
Part 3 - Something Small
Part 4 - Remnants and Arefacts

WOW signal image credit: The Ohio State University Radio Observatory and the North American AstroPhysical Observatory (NAAPO).
Arecibo Radio Telescope and Adromeda Galaxy image credit: http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/astronomy/downloads.jsp

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

How Might We Discover We Are Not Alone? Part 1 – Equations and Paradoxes

What Do I Know?

One of my illustrations

There seem to be an ever growing number of articles lately, discussing the possibilities of alien life. Whether they're asking if it's here already, discussing the likelihood of finding it via radio signals, or everything in between (perhaps my recent resurgence of interest has simply helped me notice and search them out more).

Either way, I thought it would be interesting to discuss the pros and cons of some of the established arguments. I'm no expert and I've not spent years researching the subject in great depth, so why do I feel the need to give my opinion? Because I thought it might be of interest to read the main issues, explained (hopefully logically) with the level of knowledge and understanding that most of us standard grunts on the ground have.

I'll deal with the main cases from 'Part 2' onward, but first let me get a couple of issues off my chest. Any person interested in UFOs or even just the possibility of extraterrestrial life, will know of the Drake Equation and the Fermi Paradox. These are oft-quoted arguments in almost any discussion of alien life, and I would like to get them out of the way before delving into anything else. They can be applied both positively and negatively to many of the arguments, so rather than repeat myself or get sidetracked, I will refer to these sections instead.

The Drake Equation

Frank Drake

The Drake Equation is a pseudo-mathematical equation that many individuals love to quote. It supposedly takes a number of variables, using them to estimate the number of extraterrestrial civilisations out there (just click here to look at it).  In my opinion, it unfortunately means nothing. The Drake Equation is based upon estimates of so many unknowns that it becomes worthless. Even the few factors that could be estimated, are exactly that. Estimates that we still have very little knowledge of (e.g. 'The number of Earth-like worlds per planetary system'). I may as well ask you to use an equation to come up with a reasonable answer for the number of grains of sand on a beach you've never seen, where you do not know and can only estimate a) The size of the beach, b) the depth of the beach before hitting bedrock, c) the amount of grains per metre vs the number of rocks, d) the tidal forces on the beach, etc...

Unfortunately, the Drake Equation has become quite established and entrenched even with scientists of note, having itself been created by the respected professor of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Frank Drake. It has probably helped a lot of research programs like SETI (which I'll cover in 'Part 2'), by giving 'numbers' and 'statistics' that can be shown to the money-sources, convincing them to back projects in a way that they understand. On the flip side, it adds unjustified weight to a lot of arguments and discussions about alien life, often with sceptics who wish to invalidate the ideas proposed by those they are countering.

So in all, I will state that I don't believe the Drake Equation can be used as a pro or con argument either way. It just doesn't have enough weight. It sounds nice because it looks scientific and can provide numerical answers, but it is essentially meaningless.

The Fermi Paradox

Enrico Fermi

The Fermi Paradox was proposed in 1950 by Enrico Fermi, a renowned physicist probably best known for his work on the first nuclear reactor and atomic bomb, alongside J. Robert Oppenheimer. Put simply, the Fermi Paradox says that statistically, given the age and scale of the universe, even with the most cynical estimates it should be teeming with technologically advanced civilisations. If so, we should have discovered some sign of their existence by now.

I'll admit, I prefer the Fermi Paradox to the Drake Equation because in essence it is simply asking a viable question. It is not trying to pull an answer out of thin air. The problem is that sceptics and non-sceptics alike, tend to forget that it is essentially a very good question. Not an answer or proof.

For example, many a sceptic will say “There is no life out there. Just look at the Fermi Paradox! It's proof that if there was life, we would've heard about it by now.” Perhaps most sensible sceptics wouldn't put it so bluntly, but often that is the thrust of their argument when they refer to the Fermi Paradox.

Using that logic, imagine an ancient scientist or philosopher, let's call him Fred Bloggs (A British equivalent of John Doe, for those wondering). He puts together some anecdotal facts about his world, before there are any real proofs, and concludes that it is probably spherical or at least round. He has a paradox, though. When he looks around, it's all flat. He puzzles over this, but at least he's still smart enough to wonder why his world facts don't quite match up. It becomes known as the Bloggs Paradox. Meanwhile, a man who only likes to believe the established safe view that the world is flat, hears of this Paradox. Next thing you know, he's in a discussion with friends who wonder about the nature of the world. He says “Ahh, but it's the Bloggs Paradox! You can't prove in any way that the world is spherical, with all the evidence around you. So it must be flat. The Paradox proves it!”

So to repeat, what I'm trying to say is that the Fermi Paradox is simply an unanswered question regarding current knowledge that seemingly contradicts. It is not a proof of anything.

So with those out of the way, let's move on to the good stuff... Next, we shall discuss 'Signals From Beyond'

Click here for:
Part 1 - Equations and Paradoxes
Part 2 - Signals from Beyond
Part 3 - Something Small
Part 4 - Remnants and Arefacts

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

NASA – Intentional Disappointment?

Unusual Microbes

On December 2nd, 2010, NASA was due to make an announcement to ”...discuss an astrobiology finding that will impact the search for evidence of extraterrestrial life. Astrobiology is the study of the origin, evolution, distribution and future of life in the universe.”

Some of you may have read my previous article 'NASA - Announcement - Possible Proof of Life Out There?', which I wrote shortly prior to the news conference.

Of course, there was a great deal of speculation going on. It seemed that NASA finally had something potentially incredible to tell us. I, like no-doubt many others around the globe, tuned in on-line to their announcement as it came through. Part of me was sceptical of how major the discovery would be, since we've heard so many things in the past that turned out to be nothing. However, part of me was also fascinated and hopeful that it could be something momentous.

It turned out that the magnificent discovery was a form of microbial life found here on earth, that uses a different element (arsenic) for one part of its basic structure, where up till now it was thought only phosphorous was used, as it is with other life on Earth.

Not only was this their big announcement, but already many experts are questioning that NASA's results are accurate, and dubious about their methods of testing.

Oddly enough, it fits in with one of the possibilities I suggested “The recently discovered Mexican 'Cueva de los Cristales' (Cave of Crystals).” and, “...there is speculation that it could result in the finding of independently evolved forms of life in its isolated unique environment. This could impact studies of astrobiology...” I got the location wrong, but in general, my least optimistic theory turned out to be correct.

Felisa Wolfe-Simon, part of the NASA presentation team

It all begs a few questions, though... Undoubtedly NASA knew what speculation the wording of their news conference would spark. I'm sure you would agree, they're not stupid. So they worded something that would clearly give out the wrong signals, then made an announcement that, while I'm sure it is fascinating to the world of microbiologists, is hardly the kind of revelation to the rest of us that the news conference announcement implied. A simple quantifier would have sufficed, without giving anything away, surely? The mention of it being something microbial on earth, perhaps?

One of the original co-authors of the paper on the discovery, stated this in reply to the sceptical scientists: "Science works in a certain way. It's resistant to change," he said. "But if you look qualitatively at our data, it's compelling. They may prove us wrong, or they may reproduce the results and find new stuff... It's the way the process works." A fair statement, but with a viewpoint like that, implying that they're not even 100% sure they're correct and that their data is replicable themselves, why was such an event set up to reveal the findings? Why would they announce it this way? It makes you wonder... Perhaps they are fanning the flames for more funding? Obama has made plenty of absurd cuts to NASA's budget recently, but surely they would realise that the disappointing scale of their final announcement would in turn undermine that effort.

When all is said and done, we can speculate endlessly and get nowhere. The only real thing we know, is that any genuine search for extraterrestrial life will continue pretty much as it did before, without missing a beat...

(To read a different and extremely good discussion on the subject, try giving this blog a go: “Dear NASA... We like the Super-Tough Microbes, Yes, But...” )

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.

NASA Announcement - Possible Proof of Life Out There?

Surprise News Conference

CGI rendering of the Mars Rover

Yesterday, I heard about an impending announcement by NASA at a news conference due to start at 2pm EST (Eastern Standard Time) on the 2nd of December. That's about 7pm (if my maths is correct) for those of us on GMT. (Click here to read)

Here's a snippet from the announcement of the news conference:

“WASHINGTON -- NASA will hold a news conference at 2 p.m. EST on Thursday, Dec. 2, to discuss an astrobiology finding that will impact the search for evidence of extraterrestrial life. Astrobiology is the study of the origin, evolution, distribution and future of life in the universe.”

Renowned theoretical physicist, Michio Kaku 

Apparently speculation has been rife on the internet since the announcement. Everybody's wondering what it could be. Possible proof of the existence of extraterrestrial life? Even renowned scientist Michio Kaku has been asked to talk about the possibilities on America's MSNBC and FOX networks, and posted on his blog about the event (Click here to read).

His thoughts are that it could be anything from:
a) The discovery of many earth-like planets in space (As opposed to the larger Jupiter-like planets they tend to be discovering).
b) Analysis of the chemicals on some of our solar system's moons that could provide the building blocks to life.
c) Proof of the existence of some extraterrestrial microbial life.

Personally, I feel we can discount options a) and b). There have been past announcements about moons in our solar system that have chemicals that could allow the existence of life. We've also had plenty of announcements about extra-solar planets. Not only have we had them before, but given the differing scientific fields that such discoveries would influence and impact, it seems highly doubtful they would call a news conference specifically related to astrobiology.

Option c) seems the most likely on his list.


The Possibilities

Obviously at this point the news conference could be about the discovery of the tiniest bit of extraterrestrial microbial life, right through to walking on stage with a live alien making first contact. However, being sensible, what are the most likely contenders?

In my opinion, we can break them down to a few major ideas.

Small Scale Contenders:

The Mars Rover finding evidence for
sub-surface water

1 – The Mars Rovers. Yes, I know, everyone always jumps to Mars as the most likely suspect due to its historic expectations, but bear with me. Mars is also the only extraterrestrial planet on which we have regularly operating probes at ground level searching out new material. If the discovery is a small one, it is very possible that the Rovers would be the first suspects to find it. It could be anything from a tiny Martian insect caught on camera, to a simple moss (or similar) on a rock, to photographing a definite fossil fragment.

Cueva de los Cristales
(Cave of Crystals)

2 – The recently discovered Mexican 'Cueva de los Cristales' (Cave of Crystals).  This discovery was a completely isolated never-before-seen phenomena on this scale, and there is speculation that it could result in the finding of independently evolved forms of life in its isolated unique environment. This could impact studies of astrobiology greatly, but why would NASA be the ones making the announcement?

The Hayabusa re-entry into the
Earth's atmosphere

3 – The Hayabusa Spacecraft. The Japanese Hayabusa probe that collected particles from the Itokawa asteroid. Perhaps some of the key chemical building blocks of life or even fossilised microbial samples have been discovered in its captured particles. Perhaps its minilander, Minerva, didn't fail? Then again, even if NASA were involved in analysis of the materials, why would they be making the announcement?

Mid Scale Contenders:

Saturn's moon Enceladus, taken
from the Cassini probe

1 – The Cassini spacecraft and Huygens probe that landed on Titan. This mission has not only landed a probe on Titan, but analysed the chemical make-up of several of Saturn's moons. Could further analysis of the photos from the Cassini-Huygens probe have provided new evidence? (Seems unlikely, given the landing occurred some time ago) Or has the Cassini probe discovered chemicals around one of the moons that can only created by the existence of life? (Or at least provide the necessary building blocks)

Large Scale Contenders:

The famous 'Face on Mars' after
closer photography from orbit

1 – The Mars orbiting satellites, or other planetary/moon probes. Perhaps one of these has indeed photographed evidence of life? Though due to the scales at which these spacecraft take their photographs, it would have to be something like ancient structures or similar, implying not only the past(?) existence of life, but intelligent life.

2 – A signal of intelligent origin. I find this unlikely, because although it would be of importance to astrobiologists, it would not be they alone whom it would impact, as the news conference suggests.


Global Impact

It's difficult to speculate, as it depends entirely upon the level and scale of their discovery. It can't be absurdly large, or we would be hearing some kind of announcement from the White House (Unless of course this has been kept under wraps sufficiently to get the news people in-place without giving the game away too much. The news conference is happening at NASA's Washington offices, after all).

If it turns out to be genuine proof of extraterrestrial life, even on the smallest scale, it will completely alter our perception of our place in the universe. However, this will be a gradual change, as it won't impact or interest the average Joe on the street as much as the latest sports scores.

If it turns out to be proof of not only extraterrestrial life, but intelligent life, then it could cause all manner of situations, from riots in highly religious and extreme countries who decry the evidence and its implications, right through to causing our largest world governments to band together to discover more about our alien companions in the universe, potentially ushering in a new era of planetary co-operation and purpose.


Final Thoughts

Of course, all of this is speculation by someone who has no real scientific knowledge, but for the average interested individual such as myself, those seem the most likely logical candidates. My gut instinct says something on a scale that the Mars Rovers might discover.

I could be completely wrong (and I probably am), but it's fun to wonder. The only way we're really going to find out, is tonight, by watching the NASA news conference.

We should all make the effort if we can. It may not be anything spectacular, in fact it's probably disappointingly mundane, but it could also be something that completely changes our world and our existence forever. Wouldn't you want to be one of the first to know?

All work is the © copyright of W.D.Lee and/or the respective companies, individuals or organisations to which the work is related. No infringement is intentional. No reproduction or copying is permitted without express permission.