I think kamikazeCopilot on YouTube said it well:
kamikazeCopilot writes:
8,927 man-made objects officially tracked (up from 8,841 in July 1999). 4 million pounds of stuff. 110,000 total objects, 1 centimeter and larger.
TristanMC writes:
But as you can clearly see in the film the objects aren't behaving under natural gravitational laws. Either they should look still, or they should be moving in an almost linear motion. And in either instance they shouldn't accelerate unless it's towards the earth and they most definitely should not have such dramatic curves or angles (unless of course ALL of those curving and accelerating objects were struck by some outside force).
The 110,000+ satellites, space trash and other debris are all orbiting around the Earth. Much of this debris is travelling at very similar orbital speeds as the Space Shuttle since much of this debris itself came from the Space Shuttle, the ISS, satellites and other spacecraft and instruments which the Space Shuttle deployed.
BTW where in the video do you see curving and accelerating objects? I only see small pixelated dots or halo like objects (possibly some type of ring-like debris from a rocket or spacecraft?). Can you give me the min/sec count where this occurred? I must have missed it.
TristanMC writes:
But like I said, the video isn't important, just food for thought
Agreed this seems like a side topic on UFO's that is not really related to the question of whether life can evolve in outer space.
On the latter topic I would say that simple organic molecules can form in dense nebula and other high-density gaseous locations in the universe but I do not see how any life could originate without a suitable stable medium to allow for unhampered chemical catalysis. This along with very low gravitational forces to keep these chemicals together and the amount of radiation that is bombarding these molecules would, I think, make it very difficult for these chemicals to react in significant quantities and with beneficial results to result in creating life. Now whether life could evolve in space after its original genesis (on possibly a hospitable planet) may be a different manner. However, carbon-based life as we know it on Earth has limitations on the amount of irradiation, temperature extremes, etc that it can endure, as you stated earlier in a previous post.
There is a rather new field of biology called astrobiology (also exobiology) which is exploring and trying to find answers to many of these type of questions.
I actually did an astrobiology paper back in my Biology 101 class a couple of years ago that addressed the issue of how life might evolve on other planets based on other elements besides carbon as a molecular backbone i.e. silicone, phosophorus, etc.
I will see if I can did it up on my other laptop and post some excerpts of some of the material I found.
Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.Dr. Carl Sagan
™ Version 4.2