Not new news but….

Given there are places on earth where critters are living under the ice , why would this not be the case here as well? An Ocean Flows Under Saturn’s Icy Moon Enceladus

https://www.space.com/30559-saturn-moon-enceladus-has-ocean.html

A slight wobble in Saturn’s moon Enceladus reveals that the world contains a global ocean beneath its icy crust. Some of this ocean spurts out into space from the southern polar region. (Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/SSI)
Wobbly wet moon
Enceladus has an extensive water ocean under its icy crust, feeding water jets that emerge from near the south pole. See how Enceladus works, and how its water geysers erupt, in this Space.com infographic.

Enceladus has an extensive water ocean under its icy crust, feeding water jets that emerge from near the south pole. See how Enceladus works, and how its water geysers erupt, in this Space.com infographic. (Image credit: By Karl Tate, Infographics Artist)
Not long after NASA’s Cassini mission arrived at Saturn, it detected signs of icy plumes spurting from the southern hemisphere. Further observation suggested that the fractures at the south pole, dubbed “tiger stripes,” were the source of the geysers, allowing material from the interior to leak into space.

Originally, scientists thought only a small local sea existed beneath the icy crust, supplying the plumes with material. Gravitational mapping of the world collected during Cassini’s close passes suggested that the sea might be global, but could not be confirmed.

Following an independent line of research, Thomas and his team analyzed more than seven years of images of Enceladus, carefully mapping features on the moon across hundreds of images to measure changes in its rotation. They found that the tiny world has a small but measurable wobble as it orbits the ringed giant Saturn.

The team then ran several simulations to determine how the wobble would affect the moon if it had a variety of interiors, including one that was completely frozen. They found that the wobble was explained only if Enceladus contained a global ocean beneath its icy crust.

“If the surface and core were rigidly connected, the core would provide so much dead weight the wobble would be far smaller than we observe it to be,” co-author Matthew Tiscareno, a Cassini participating scientist at the SETI Institute in California, said in the same statement.

“This proves that there must be a global layer of liquid separating the surface from the core.”

The mystery of Enceladus’ ocean
How Enceladus could have maintained a liquid ocean for so long remains a mystery. Thomas and his colleagues suggested ideas for a future study that might help resolve the question, including the idea that tidal forces produced by the gravity of Saturn could generate more heat within the moon than previously anticipated.

“This is a major step beyond what we understood about this moon before, and it demonstrates the kind of deep-dive discoveries we can make with long-lived orbiter missions to other planets,” said co-author Carolyn Porco, Cassini imaging team lead at the Space Science Institute in Colorado. Currently, NASA scientists are considering sending a spacecraft to Enceladus as early as 2021.

“Cassini has been exemplary in this regard,” Porco said.

The research was published online in the journal Icarus.

We still don’t know how life originated on Earth, so we can’t really say much about places like Enceladus, beyond noting that the conditions beneath its surface would probably be capable of supporting life, if there’s any there.

Bubblecar said:

We still don’t know how life originated on Earth, so we can’t really say much about places like Enceladus, beyond noting that the conditions beneath its surface would probably be capable of supporting life, if there’s any there.

But there are life forms under the ice in Antarctica where creatures are living in isolated pockets and until discovered the hypothesis was there was water there but nothing else.

monkey skipper said:

Bubblecar said:

We still don’t know how life originated on Earth, so we can’t really say much about places like Enceladus, beyond noting that the conditions beneath its surface would probably be capable of supporting life, if there’s any there.

But there are life forms under the ice in Antarctica where creatures are living in isolated pockets and until discovered the hypothesis was there was water there but nothing else.

Right but that’s on Earth, a place where life is already known to have arisen.

We have a pretty expansive idea now about where life can survive once reached but we don’t have a clear idea of how likely it is for life to arise, or what conditions it can arise in.

Bubblecar said:

We still don’t know how life originated on Earth, so we can’t really say much about places like Enceladus, beyond noting that the conditions beneath its surface would probably be capable of supporting life, if there’s any there.

Considering that first of all, life has to have evolved before the ocean froze over.

I suspect the interest in Europa is that everywhere there’s water on Earth, there’s life.
So a half reasonable change we might find even basic life there.

Spiny Norman said:

I suspect the interest in Europa is that everywhere there’s water on Earth, there’s life.
So a half reasonable change we might find even basic life there.

Yes. There is a chance and where chance exists…

roughbarked said:

Spiny Norman said:

I suspect the interest in Europa is that everywhere there’s water on Earth, there’s life.
So a half reasonable change we might find even basic life there.

Yes. There is a chance and where chance exists…

roughbarked said:

Bubblecar said:

We still don’t know how life originated on Earth, so we can’t really say much about places like Enceladus, beyond noting that the conditions beneath its surface would probably be capable of supporting life, if there’s any there.

Considering that first of all, life has to have evolved before the ocean froze over.

I don’t see how that is necessary.

OCDC said:

roughbarked said:

Bubblecar said:

We still don’t know how life originated on Earth, so we can’t really say much about places like Enceladus, beyond noting that the conditions beneath its surface would probably be capable of supporting life, if there’s any there.

Considering that first of all, life has to have evolved before the ocean froze over.

I don’t see how that is necessary.

It isn’t, because the ocean hasn’t frozen over, it’s still liquid. Only the crust is frozen.

Enceladus has the smallest ocean, of any spherical body with an ocean, in the solar system.
It just happens to be easy to get to because it’s close to the surface.

There are about eight solar system objects with oceans of salt water.

Well, I am going to apply the same assumption to life being spread across the universe based on the notion if it can be proven in one section of the universe then it can be assumed to be true in other parts of the universe, similar to Spectroscopy confirming elements displaying in a colour spectrum consistently on earth confirms this to also be true throughout the universe.

Why would it be true for everything else verified in physics mathematically and yet rejecting this possibility or probability for something physically viewable around us all everyday?

monkey skipper said:

Well, I am going to apply the same assumption to life being spread across the universe based on the notion if it can be proven in one section of the universe then it can be assumed to be true in other parts of the universe, similar to Spectroscopy confirming elements displaying in a colour spectrum consistently on earth confirms this to also be true throughout the universe.

Why would it be true for everything else verified in physics mathematically and yet rejecting this possibility or probability for something physically viewable around us all everyday?

Yes. Life can happen wherever conditions exist. What kind of life? Well, we know it could be any or all sorts completely alien to us.

We also know that once it gets a foothold it will continue to find ways to evolve and cause the environment to be amenable to more and more types of life. We have seen it happen here. Trouble is, we’ve also seen what happens when one form of life starts making it toxic for all other forms of life which were here to support that higher form of life which ultimately kills itself by slaughtering all that had supported it.

monkey skipper said:

Well, I am going to apply the same assumption to life being spread across the universe based on the notion if it can be proven in one section of the universe then it can be assumed to be true in other parts of the universe, similar to Spectroscopy confirming elements displaying in a colour spectrum consistently on earth confirms this to also be true throughout the universe.

Why would it be true for everything else verified in physics mathematically and yet rejecting this possibility or probability for something physically viewable around us all everyday?

That’s why the discovery of life anywhere outside of Earth would be such a massive hit to religion.

Just about every religion has at its core the idea that God (or gods) are concerned with people on Earth, and only people on Earth.

Once life is proven to exist elsewhere, then there’s two questions which religion won’t be able to answer.

1. if what we do is so important to our God/gods, then is this other life equally important, or not important at all to God/the gods?

2. if there’s life that less important than other forms of life, what’s to say that we’re not one of the less important forms, and what we do or believe doesn’t matter as much as we might have thought it did?

captain_spalding said:

monkey skipper said:

Well, I am going to apply the same assumption to life being spread across the universe based on the notion if it can be proven in one section of the universe then it can be assumed to be true in other parts of the universe, similar to Spectroscopy confirming elements displaying in a colour spectrum consistently on earth confirms this to also be true throughout the universe.

Why would it be true for everything else verified in physics mathematically and yet rejecting this possibility or probability for something physically viewable around us all everyday?

That’s why the discovery of life anywhere outside of Earth would be such a massive hit to religion.

Just about every religion has at its core the idea that God (or gods) are concerned with people on Earth, and only people on Earth.

Once life is proven to exist elsewhere, then there’s two questions which religion won’t be able to answer.

1. if what we do is so important to our God/gods, then is this other life equally important, or not important at all to God/the gods?

2. if there’s life that less important than other forms of life, what’s to say that we’re not one of the less important forms, and what we do or believe doesn’t matter as much as we might have thought it did?

Which was why religion basically put a stop to science foraround two thousand years before science again began to make itself better known and comprehended.

captain_spalding said:

2. if there’s life that less important than other forms of life, what’s to say that we’re not one of the less important forms, and what we do or believe doesn’t matter as much as we might have thought it did?

This is the big one.

An old drinking partner who once asked me why God invented mosquitoes and I answered well, to feed willie wagtails, obviously..

He the asked me, what if we are just like fleas on the legs of animals in a far greater universe which could possibly only be on one of God’s legs?

roughbarked said:

captain_spalding said:

2. if there’s life that less important than other forms of life, what’s to say that we’re not one of the less important forms, and what we do or believe doesn’t matter as much as we might have thought it did?

This is the big one.

An old drinking partner who once asked me why God invented mosquitoes and I answered well, to feed willie wagtails, obviously..

He the asked me, what if we are just like fleas on the legs of animals in a far greater universe which could possibly only be on one of God’s legs?

Humans have an observational view of earth and being part of the food chain, whereas the animal kingdom otherwise don’t have that understanding and consciousness as far as we are aware. That aspect may be unique to humans and to earth. That aside the microscopic world of could be flourishing in many corners of the universe.

monkey skipper said:

Humans have an observational view of earth and being part of the food chain, whereas the animal kingdom otherwise don’t have that understanding and consciousness as far as we are aware. That aspect may be unique to humans and to earth. That aside the microscopic world of could be flourishing in many corners of the universe.

Yes, there’s a chance that us here on Earth are unique in some respects.

But, if microscopic life is found somewhere else, then by the extrapolation which you’ve mentioned, and taking into consideration the likely existence of billions of planets, the chances of something at least somewhat like us evolving has to be considered to be a good possibility.

captain_spalding said:

monkey skipper said:

Humans have an observational view of earth and being part of the food chain, whereas the animal kingdom otherwise don’t have that understanding and consciousness as far as we are aware. That aspect may be unique to humans and to earth. That aside the microscopic world of could be flourishing in many corners of the universe.

Yes, there’s a chance that us here on Earth are unique in some respects.

But, if microscopic life is found somewhere else, then by the extrapolation which you’ve mentioned, and taking into consideration the likely existence of billions of planets, the chances of something at least somewhat like us evolving has to be considered to be a good possibility.

Yup.

captain_spalding said:

monkey skipper said:

Humans have an observational view of earth and being part of the food chain, whereas the animal kingdom otherwise don’t have that understanding and consciousness as far as we are aware. That aspect may be unique to humans and to earth. That aside the microscopic world of could be flourishing in many corners of the universe.

Yes, there’s a chance that us here on Earth are unique in some respects.

But, if microscopic life is found somewhere else, then by the extrapolation which you’ve mentioned, and taking into consideration the likely existence of billions of planets, the chances of something at least somewhat like us evolving has to be considered to be a good possibility.

I think we have a thread entitled, Consider.

monkey skipper said:

captain_spalding said:

monkey skipper said:

Humans have an observational view of earth and being part of the food chain, whereas the animal kingdom otherwise don’t have that understanding and consciousness as far as we are aware. That aspect may be unique to humans and to earth. That aside the microscopic world of could be flourishing in many corners of the universe.

Yes, there’s a chance that us here on Earth are unique in some respects.

But, if microscopic life is found somewhere else, then by the extrapolation which you’ve mentioned, and taking into consideration the likely existence of billions of planets, the chances of something at least somewhat like us evolving has to be considered to be a good possibility.

Yup.

Well if it can proliferate the way it does in my backyard when I toss around a few buckets of water, then it is gonna roar it’s pants off when God is paying the water bill.

roughbarked said:

captain_spalding said:

monkey skipper said:

Humans have an observational view of earth and being part of the food chain, whereas the animal kingdom otherwise don’t have that understanding and consciousness as far as we are aware. That aspect may be unique to humans and to earth. That aside the microscopic world of could be flourishing in many corners of the universe.

Yes, there’s a chance that us here on Earth are unique in some respects.

But, if microscopic life is found somewhere else, then by the extrapolation which you’ve mentioned, and taking into consideration the likely existence of billions of planets, the chances of something at least somewhat like us evolving has to be considered to be a good possibility.

I think we have a thread entitled, Consider.

Noted, thanks.

roughbarked said:

monkey skipper said:

captain_spalding said:

Yes, there’s a chance that us here on Earth are unique in some respects.

But, if microscopic life is found somewhere else, then by the extrapolation which you’ve mentioned, and taking into consideration the likely existence of billions of planets, the chances of something at least somewhat like us evolving has to be considered to be a good possibility.

Yup.

Well if it can proliferate the way it does in my backyard when I toss around a few buckets of water, then it is gonna roar it’s pants off when God is paying the water bill.

Another question could be is the total amount of water a finite as is stated for earth and does water recycle itself in the universe as it does on earth?

monkey skipper said:

roughbarked said:

monkey skipper said:

Yup.

Well if it can proliferate the way it does in my backyard when I toss around a few buckets of water, then it is gonna roar it’s pants off when God is paying the water bill.

Another question could be is the total amount of water a finite as is stated for earth and does water recycle itself in the universe as it does on earth?

Though likely within parameters such as you suggest, it may well also require those of each planetary specifics.

roughbarked said:

monkey skipper said:

roughbarked said:

Well if it can proliferate the way it does in my backyard when I toss around a few buckets of water, then it is gonna roar it’s pants off when God is paying the water bill.

Another question could be is the total amount of water a finite as is stated for earth and does water recycle itself in the universe as it does on earth?

Though likely within parameters such as you suggest, it may well also require those of each planetary specifics.

Yeah, look at Mars. All the planetary scientists say that it once had flowing water, but where is it now?

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

monkey skipper said:

Another question could be is the total amount of water a finite as is stated for earth and does water recycle itself in the universe as it does on earth?

Though likely within parameters such as you suggest, it may well also require those of each planetary specifics.

Yeah, look at Mars. All the planetary scientists say that it once had flowing water, but where is it now?

As a longtime plant propagator, I know the finite difference between life and death, in regards to the simple availability of refreshment aqua.

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

monkey skipper said:

Another question could be is the total amount of water a finite as is stated for earth and does water recycle itself in the universe as it does on earth?

Though likely within parameters such as you suggest, it may well also require those of each planetary specifics.

Yeah, look at Mars. All the planetary scientists say that it once had flowing water, but where is it now?

Planets, moons and asteroids may have their greatest water volumes underground in the majority even after the surface becomes seemingly bare, our atmosphere traps rising water vapour , but the universe could be the big a big water and gas atmosphere with colder spots, hotter spots but still a finite quantity of water in different states , this could be altered by blackholes.

monkey skipper said:

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Though likely within parameters such as you suggest, it may well also require those of each planetary specifics.

Yeah, look at Mars. All the planetary scientists say that it once had flowing water, but where is it now?

Planets, moons and asteroids may have their greatest water volumes underground in the majority even after the surface becomes seemingly bare, our atmosphere traps rising water vapour , but the universe could be the big a big water and gas atmosphere with colder spots, hotter spots but still a finite quantity of water in different states , this could be altered by blackholes.

Water adheres only to levels.

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/astronomers-just-found-water-on-an-asteroid-for-the-very-first-time/ar-BB1ijRw9?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=0d7657ff4d4d4fbaa2145d52e7db77a0&ei=20

Researchers have discovered water molecules on the surface of an asteroid for the first time.

The new find could reveal how our little Blue Marble came to be. Astronomers and scientists still don’t know for sure where all our water came from, but a leading theory is that it was delivered by asteroids hitting the planet.

Saturn’s ocean moon Titan may not be able to support life after all

By Keith Cooper published about 13 hours ago
Titan’s ocean has a volume 12 times that of all Earth’s oceans, but it may be barren of life as we know it.

https://www.space.com/titan-ocean-saturn-moon-inhospitable-life-earth-study