Possible live on other stars

Wubo Ockels a Dutch astronaut/scientist just returned from the russian space shuttle after 193 days circulating around the globe.
At an interview in front of a Dutch TV program somebody asked him if he believes in other possible forms of lifes on other stars.
He replied: There are more stars in space than grain of sand. Yes I belief!
If that is true, which I might believe, there is a different form of religion.

What do you think?

Cannot imagine too many life forms living on other stars - but who is to say (Stars are pretty hot). I think it is pretty naive to think that this is the only planet where life exists. That said - Not sure why the obsession to find life on other planets - We spend billions on looking for it and pennies on researching the countless life forms we share this planet with.
Since religious discussion is not permitted on this forum - I see no need to go there.

Religion aside, with the billions and billions of stars that are out there, I can't believe we are the only living creatures in this universe. Are there other humanoid type beings? Being a life-long fan of Carl Sagan I believe there is. As an example, just looking a the Hubble Deep Field photo from the mid 1990's, you can see hundreds of galaxies made up of billions of stars. And this is just a very small "keyhole" view of the universe.

All things being equal and just with the basic law of averages there has to be a certain percentage of those stars with planets, and a percentage of them with conditions able to support life, and a certain percentage of them that has/had the "primordial soup" needed to create life, and a percentage of them that had everything come together to actually create life. Even if it was only ever basic single-celled organisms, it is/was still life. And does it have to be carbon-based? I like to believe that given the basically incalculable number of stars, the odds are pretty good to have/had/will have some form of life somewhere in the universe.

If conditions are amenable to life (and with countless billions of planets this must be quite common) then I believe that life is very likely. Just look how quickly live developed on Earth after it's formation, there was barely time for it to cool down before molecules were getting together to form stuff that we would have no problem describing as 'alive'.

However, after that promising start it took another couple of billion years before simple unicellular organisms started getting together to form eukaryotic cells and multi-cellular organisms. Then another couple of billion years before anything close to intelligence came along.

So I think bacteria-type life is probably ubiquitous. But anything like us is going to be pretty rare.

Justaddwata wrote in post #15255923
Not sure why the obsession to find life on other planets - We spend billions on looking for it and pennies on researching the countless life forms we share this planet with.

People will always question the unknown, and why shouldn't we? The obsession to find life on other planets stems from this I believe. From the day we're born to the day we die we learn new things and break new boundary's. Space/alien life is just another boundary and unfortunately it takes alot of research and practice to get there which = $$$.

neimad19 wrote in post #15258196
People will always question the unknown, and why shouldn't we? The obsession to find life on other planets stems from this I believe. From the day we're born to the day we die we learn new things and break new boundary's. Space/alien life is just another boundary and unfortunately it takes alot of research and practice to get there which = $$$.

Thing is - we have satellites actively looking for planets that are (based on our belief) a distance from their own star that "could" support life. Why? These stars are hundreds of light years (or more) away. Lets say we see this HUGE city on one. What difference would it make to us? No conceivable way we could get there - and considering the distance/speed of light - we are only looking at history anyway. There are a few trillion life forms on this planet that already cannot get along. Why invite ET's into the mix?

My opinion on this is a bit different to what most people seem to be looking at. Not If, or how far but more so when. If you were to compress the entire life of the universe into one year, the time there has been life from beginning to end on earth would be no more than a flash. Now assume there was life on another 1000 planets, what would be the chance of two flashes at exactly the same time?
I think at best the biggest discovery will be to find life HAS existed elsewhere.

Stealthdude wrote in post #15259246
My opinion on this is a bit different to what most people seem to be looking at. Not If, or how far but more so when. If you were to compress the entire life of the universe into one year, the time there has been life from beginning to end on earth would be no more than a flash

Er, nope.

The universe is 13.8 billion years old (give or take a few weeks). The Earth is 4.5 billion years old and life has existed on the Earth for over 3.5 billion years. So, if the age of the universe were represented by one year, then the Earth formed around the beginning of September and life appeared around the end of September.

hollis_f wrote in post #15256139
...But anything like us is going to be pretty rare.

... because they probably would have killed themselves off already

We've been lucky, in spite of ourselves.

hollis_f wrote in post #15259522
Er, nope.

The universe is 13.8 billion years old (give or take a few weeks). The Earth is 4.5 billion years old and life has existed on the Earth for over 3.5 billion years. So, if the age of the universe were represented by one year, then the Earth formed around the beginning of September and life appeared around the end of September.

That will teach me for just believing anything I hear, maybe it was intelligent life?
I should have checked before posting.

We are just one planets inhabitants. Scientists seem to assume all other planets life needs what we need to survive. It might turn out there are creatures to whom oxygen might be poisonous or sunlight fatal, perhaps breathe methane of not even need to breathe. I find it arrogant to assume we are the master race and all others are beneath us. Time will tell.

Joe Ravenstein wrote in post #15260286
We are just one planets inhabitants. Scientists seem to assume all other planets life needs what we need to survive.

Nope. Scientists don't make such silly assumptions.

Joe Ravenstein wrote in post #15260286
It might turn out there are creatures to whom oxygen might be poisonous or sunlight fatal, perhaps breathe methane of not even need to breathe.

There are organisms on Earth that find oxygen poisonous. Indeed, for the first billion years all life on Earth would have fallen into this category - because there was no oxygen in their atmosphere. It was only when cyanobacteria started photosynthesizing that it became significant.

Ronny Geenen wrote in post #15255649
Wubo Ockels a Dutch astronaut/scientist just returned from the russian space shuttle after 193 days circulating around the globe.

The Russian's have a space shuttle?

I think it's entirely possible that there is life on other planets but I think it's all just like us.

So, until we figure out how to reach those other planets, they have no way to get here either.

hollis_f wrote in post #15260442
It was only when cyanobacteria started photosynthesizing that it became significant.

If only I could photosynthesize. Image the amount of money saved on grocery's!