LIKE WE DIDN’T KNOW: Earth ‘Not Best Place To Live’

11
>>Follow Matzav On Whatsapp!<<

Earth is not necessarily the best planet in the universe for life, a new study has found.

Researchers have found some 24 planets that are “superhabitable”, offering conditions more suitable for life than they are here on Earth.

And some of them even have better stars than our own Sun, the researchers said.

The new study looked for worlds that would be even more likely to foster life than our own – including those that are older, bigger, warmer and wetter than Earth – in the hope of informing future searches for life elsewhere in the universe.

The study identified 24 of the “superhabitable” planets. They are all 100 light years away, making them difficult if not impossible to ever see up close, but research with future telescopes could give us much more information about those worlds.

Read more at Independent.

{Matzav.com}


11 COMMENTS

    • I dont think think its kefira (necessarily).
      While I agree to you and am quite skeptical about these so called “super-habitable lanets”, the fact that we are here on “planet earth” does not mean it is the “best” place for us to live biologically speaking.

      It means that that was ratzon Hashem for us to be here, and thus it is “the best place to live” for the purpose Hashem has given us. But if we discover more places to live, that too would be Ratzon Hashem.
      This would (again, in theory) be no different than the discovery of the Americas.
      At one point we were only able to live in Europe, Africa and Asia, but then Hashem allowed us to discover more. Same thing here.

    • Of course this world is the best for us because hashem put us here not there. But it depends how you define good. The way we define good this world is the best. They define good as more תאוה so yea it’s possible that there’s more תאוה somewhere else

  1. Enough with the sales pitch that always ends up in a fizzle. Mars has had proof of water for a brazillian times. Now I bought the brooklyn bridge many times yet it never returned any dividends. I guess it’s time to bark up another tree!

  2. How come the article claims that a planet 5 degrees (Celsius yet) hotter than our planet is BETTER suited for life, while at the same time these climate activists go crazy over the alleged destruction of our planet over an alleged degree or two alleged increase of the earth’s temperature?

  3. “Researchers have found some 24 planets that are “superhabitable”, offering conditions more suitable for life than they are here on Earth.”

    Really. *More suitable for life* than Earth. “better stars than our own Sun”.
    “More suitable” how? Better air? Better water? Guaranteed no disease? Money growing on trees? No politicians? Something there that weakens the yetzer hara?
    What criteria did they apply to decide that those stars are “better … than our own Sun”? Stronger rays? Brighter light? Shines 24/7 (or whatever the “better and more suitable” time frame is on those planets)?
    Outside of the details we bring to our lives, human beings function pretty well here. I’ll wait for someone who lands on one of these faraway planets to come back and show details of what exactly makes it better there than here.

  4. The study identified 24 of the “superhabitable” planets. They are all 100 light years away, making them difficult if not impossible to ever see up close, but research with future telescopes could give us much more information about those worlds.

    What Emunah Peshuta the scientists have.

    They never actually saw or studied those planets but still believe that future telescopes will validate their beliefs.

Leave a Reply to NOYB Cancel reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here