Youtube comments of Thunderf00t (@Thunderf00t).

  1. 9500
  2. 4700
  3. 4600
  4. 3300
  5. 3300
  6. 2900
  7. 2000
  8. 1700
  9. 1500
  10. 1400
  11. 1300
  12. 1300
  13. 1100
  14. 1100
  15. 1000
  16. 988
  17. 890
  18. 796
  19. 743
  20. 732
  21. 675
  22. 589
  23. 549
  24. 497
  25. 442
  26. 322
  27. 261
  28. 157
  29. 147
  30. 147
  31. 133
  32. 129
  33. 125
  34. 125
  35. 116
  36. 101
  37. 98
  38. 97
  39. 88
  40. 85
  41. 83
  42. 81
  43. 74
  44. 68
  45. 64
  46. 59
  47. 59
  48. 56
  49. 53
  50. 41
  51. 41
  52. 38
  53. 23
  54. 23
  55. 23
  56. "The paper goes into great detail about the methods used to determine phosphine concentration." -yeah, they go into great detail of how difficult this measurement is. This is certainly trying to fish a signal out of the noise type levels. Quoting that they did this in the paper does little more than confirm they are down in the signal to noise level! In any event, Im not sure what you are complaining about, I praise them for being able to measure anything that small, AND assume that their tiny signal is correct! Not really sure why you are so upset here! 'You state multiple times that the researchers didn't consider (many) other methods when they obviously did. And they state as much and provide the methods and source code for their analysis. > "We find that PH3 formation is not favoured even considering ~75 relevant reactions under thousands of conditions encompassing any likely atmosphere, surface or subsurface properties (temperatures of 270–1,500 K, atmospheric and subsurface pressures of 0.25–10,000 bar, wide range of concentrations of reactants)."' Oh jeese! All this crap can be summed up as the phosphorous oxygen bond is strong. If you need pages of source code and thousands of conditions to work this out your might want to consider reading an entry level inorganic chemistry textbook. 'Lightning striking the surface is also discounted (21:41)' No it wasnt. " because the Venusian crust is largely basalt and there isn't enough lighting." .... i dont know where youre getting all this from, but it wasnt the paper. You do realise that its not even clear if there is lightning on venus, let alone what the surface composition is. But the signs of lightning an vulcanism and MANY times clearer than this 'phosphine on venus' and millions of times stronger than 'phosphine is a sign of life on venus' Even if there was a huge quantity of phosphides produced on the surface, just as you say, there isn't a lot of water for hydrolysis reactions at the surface. It is almost exclusively in the clouds. 1) fail on understanding of atmospheric mixing. 2) Riiiighht. So phospides on the surface couldnt produce phosphine cos no enough water, but you are perfectly happy to entertain the idea of that water magically condensing somehow so that bacteria can make that same phosphne out of.... OH THE SAME WATER YOU SAY THERE IS NOT ENOUGH OF! "Lastly, the researchers completely acknowledge that unknown chemistry could be responsible and even list those explanations first:" Oh is that the researcher in this video who proudly claims 'In my earlier work I stated that if you find phosphine on ANY terrestrial planet... it can ONLY mean life'' Why thats an odd way of saying it could be something else!
    23
  57. 20
  58. 19
  59. 15
  60. 14
  61. 12
  62. 10
  63. 10
  64. 8
  65. 8
  66. 8
  67. 7
  68. 7
  69. 7
  70. 6
  71. 5
  72. 5
  73. 4
  74. 4
  75. 4
  76. 4
  77. 4
  78. 3
  79. 3
  80. 3
  81. 3
  82. 3
  83. 2
  84. 2
  85. 2
  86. 2
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1