(Abraham) Loeb has caught the public’s – and NASA’s – attention for his comments about a newly discovered interstellar object, known as 3I/ATLAS, that is hurtling toward the sun and through our solar system. NASA says it’s a comet. Loeb suggests it could be alien technology.
It’s just a rock. Without any ice. 🤦♂️
(this is that “comet” without a tail, right?)
It has ice and it has a tail. Comets get a longer “tail” as they get closer to the sun, when heat and radiation cause them to disintigrate and off-gas.
ATLAS’s speed and origin are what make it interesting. It’s a speedy guy for a comet at its location/trajectory. And, it’s interstellar in origin, meaning it came from outside the solar system. Most of what we see in our solar neighborhood was all made from the same big space glob a long ass time ago. Interstellar objects are rare… ish. We’ve been seeing more since we have big space telescopes now. So who knows.
Anyway, when ATLAS gets closer to the sun and burns off more tail, we can analyze those bits of rock and gas to figure out what it’s made of and maybe where it’s from.
Loeb is an idiot that doesn’t understand Occam’s Razor. Or basic logic.
These are his quotes from the article:
Loeb said 3I/ATLAS “is probably a natural object” but thinks it’s important to consider the possibility that it’s technological.
“We have the duty to consider a low probability event,” Loeb said, “just because the implications are huge.”
He’s just a curious guy who understands the probability but doesn’t shy away from testing a hail mary hypothesis. Let people be creative.
So then it’s the article writer/editor who is the idiot trying to make it sound like “alien” has a credible supporter.
You mean the one who provided the above quotes in the article?
It’s okay to admit you didn’t read it.
Do you not understand that clickbait is shit?
I sure do.
That’s why I scanned through about twenty articles on the subject to find the most recently updated and reliable source that offered a unique and balanced perspective, one that’s well-sourced with minimal bias.
It’s why I picked a journal owned by a non-profit with free articles and minimal ads.
The article title is precisely what the article is about, an expert in astrophysics giving their opinion on a recent astronomical event, and even then I added (It is not) to the title.
Do you know what clickbait is?
You apparently do not. As again, no one who knows what they’re talking about on this issue is going to be OK with treating aliens as a remote possibility vs implying a professor is seriously questioning it.
Scientists do treat extraterrestrial life as a real possibility.
Source: Above, a harvard professor and astrophysicist who treats aliens as a real possibility.
But I donno man, one of the only rules here is to be cool to each other. I’m being pretty cool to you, but you’re not acting so cool to me.
A difference of opinion is one thing. Trolling for a reaction is not. Do I have to ban you or do you actually care about the subject?
