There are suns far larger than our own

There is no other lifeforms!!!!

Because our universe already reach maximum

of function f(retarded)=max

yo momma so fat she already the biggest lifeforom in the universe bruh

what about my dick

Hence why the planet would need to be big?

Space colonisation when? If we ever invent technology that makes it plausible, I'll consider volunteering.

...

I mean, technically speaking, we have the technology and resources today to go out and colonize Mars right now if we wanted too. But the cost and the risk would be too great. Its about proper risk evaluation, no country wants to take a gamble until we are certain the methodology is stable.

...

I've seen theory relating to it, but I thought none of it was remotely practical, and that it was perhaps even impossible? The obstacles seem too big for our lifetimes without a huge leap in technology:

If you've come to any of these conclusions it tells me you did jack shit research beyond skimming Wikipedia articles

You could consider that all biosphere on Earth is a single organism far larger than America.

I don't read Wikijewpedia. Which part of my post suggests that I did "jack shit research"? The only mistakes I notice in my post are as follows: with my point about agriculture, I meant to refer to growing things straight out of the ground, but forgot to specify. With my point about distance being an issue, I was referring to how it would take a long time (at present time, over a month at the fastest) to move technology/resources/people/etc. between Earth and Mars.

I won't go as far as to say that terraforming Mars is impossible during our lifetimes, but I'll have to see it done to believe it.

r u trolling/memeing? the gravity of a large planet would mean that organisms would not as easily be able to grow as tall, for the increased stress to their bodily structures. It would have to be an implausibly tiny planet, i would venture to guess.

you can't tell me
isn't pushing it a bit, user.

If the organisms are large to begin with, and are proportioned in a similar manner to how life on Earth is compared to Earth itself, what difference would it make? I understand that with a human there is a certain height to which we can grow before our skeletons can no longer support us, heart can no longer circulate blood effectively, etc., but we're talking about alien life made of unknown matter.

How so? This is Holla Forums, and Holla Forums of all places.

whatever it would be, it's not gonna be any limbed mothr, it'll be a floating collection of organisms in a composite organism of something like algae or plankton out in a sea, or a massive sheet of fungi. to find comparable analogues to an unknown. hell, on earth there are organisms debated to be few km in size. it really is an open ended debate of speculation. who knows what sort of shit is out there

it just seems like you're trying too hard mang

Yeah, not to mention that there may well be organisms in the vastness of space that completely defy our current understanding of life. As for the "Wikijewpedia" thing, I guess you're right. How about Wikikepedia?

perhaps, if only the cosmos wasn't so unreachable in majority
definitely more natural sounding. maybe just kikepedia? unless I guess invariable context

Isn't there some seemingless impassable boundary in Space surrounding us (albeit distantly)? We'll have to hope on that impassibility being revoked in the future due to a new discovery, although even what's within that boundary is still plenty to explore.
Yeah, for some reason "Wikijewpedia" sounded natural in my head.

why need planets? they could be "floating" freely in galactic nebula and be bigger than our solar system

theres no boundary
in the expanding universe model theres just a point at which light is so far away from you that you wont ever see it even if you travelled at light speed towards it

space a shit

This, let's just go colonize the ocean.

I'm gonna fucking blow your minds

the earth is the center of the (this fake) universe

early models of the world/universe were correct and slowly the globalists who worship the shape of the globe tricked everyone. this is why in earlier history (mid evil era) and other instances throughout history it was blasphemy to say the world was "round" and many people were burned at the stake, not because they were going against the religious authority and their view, but because they were going against the truth. now the world is backwards and the opposite people are in authority, and if you claim that the world is flat you are metaphorically burned at the stake because everyone "roasts" you "consipiracy theorist!" "neckbeard!" "fedora!" "quack!"

if space was a giant near-vacume (low pressure compared to everything else) our planet couldn't sustain it's atmosphere. just think about how foolish it sounds when they tell you "oh its because gravity holds all the air down") if space is a vacume or near-vacume then all of the earths air would have been vacumed up into space instantly. there is nothing stopping it from doing that. a highly professional scientist with their own laboratory could test this if they inflated a balloon and then put it in a chamber that slowly removed all the air inside creating a vacume, the balloon would grow and stretch until it popped. I don't reccomend a scientist does this though, I'm not responsible for broken equipment or injuries or death or anything. don't try this.

think about how resilliant a bubble of air is under water. did you ever see a bubble at the bottom of a glass of water you were drinking? did you ever think "wow bubbles are pretty badass for holding up under all that water". It makes much more sense that we are an air bubble in a giant ocean of water.

earth is solid and it has this layer of air that we obviously live in- trapped between the earth surface area and the space ocean, firmament helping us out here.

think about why the ocean looks blue when the sun shines through it. think about how the sky is also blue, makes sense? and troll science bro's with big fancy pieces of paper from the establishment claim "its rayleigh scattering, and the sky isn't actually blue it just looks blue but it isn't because reyliegh scattering just trust us"

every single image of earth from space release by nasa has always been a composite image. they will never release a true non-edited picture of earth from space.

go back and watch any video of a rocket takeoff. why do ALL the rockets always go upwards for a moment and then start to veer off course and curve off the side? they can't keep going straight up because they will hit the water and if they go much deeper they will crash right into the firmament. they always curve to avoid it. ALWAYS. the rockets always land somewhere else out of sight or people are told it's just a retrieval of parts, but you know what the truth is.

all rockets do this. except for this one. you can even hear the splash.
youtube. com/watch?v=IAcp3BFBYw4

bible mentions "the waters above and below"

the whole world is a flat dome shape that doesn't move. the earth is fixed in place and doesn't move. if the earth was spinning as fast as they say it is, we would have been launched off and life wouldn't exist on this plane. I mean planet.

since you are very little, one of the first things you are expected to learn is that you live on the earth and the earth is a globe, and you are repeatedly shown this big spinning toy and you have a few childish thoughts like "how does everyone on the bottom not fall off?" and everyone tells you its because "gravity" holds everyone on the sphere, but remember centrifugal force is very powerful and can keep water in a bucket even though its spinning around a certain point, but it makes the bucket of water feel much more heavy, like it wants to fly off it's handle with tremendous force. now imagine that all the things on the surface of the earth including its gigantic oceans are all that "bucket of water". what do you think would or rather should have already happened to us all and our cats and dogs and houses and cars if the earth was really spinning around as fast as they want us to believe that it is?

look up operation highjump and operation fishbowl. they nuked the firmament to test if they could break it.

/redpill

double sevens take me to heaven!

...

not saying the bible is perfect m8. ever hear the fact that imperfect people made an imperfect book? I like science but both religion and science have their limits. the word of god comes straight from god. not some stupid book. anyone who takes the bible as 100% fact is an idiot who doesn't have critical thinking skills.

also nice strawman attack. suddenly everything I posted is mysteriously discredited to every common browser. right? right?

double eights because I didn't fall for the b8

...

is a very cool bro who doesn't afraid of anything

and I'm not talking about jeeeeezuuuuuzzzz

calm down Mr. Salty

Nope. Jupiter is about the largest a planet can get, if they get more massive they actually shrink because their gravity can compress the fuck out of that gas.

wew

planet
plane et
plane
et

plane

flat

The thing with space is that it's really fucking huge and there's really fucking little in between any of the really fucking few things that can be used for navigation. The ship you'd need to go in a straight line to the nearest habitable planet would have to be so huge that it would crush everything in its way, and that's just not feasible so instead it would have to be a ship that does not go in a straight line but rather is driven just like a plane. That brings the problem of hitting all kinds of junk and being hit by all kinds of junk, small shit you can't see going faster than you can detect it. It'd take much longer than the most generous estimates, and by the time it'd be halfway to the destination, mankind on Earth would already be long extinct. It's just never going to happen.

...

lol. when you try to refute science, try to begin with something other than "those goddamn kikes", because it costs you your credibility.

the rocket didn't break after hitting the dome, nor did it veer after hitting the dome. you present no science in your post so there's nothing there.

no.

There's the problem of gravity vs. oxygen supply, OP.

Do you even know what constitutes an element? There is no "unknown element," only elements we haven't been able to produce in a lab.

Alright guys, remember before you get too hype; we could probably only get away with colonizing a planet that has 150% the mass of Earth before the gravity gets too intense, not factoring in differences in air pressure, and I'd be willing to bet that level of gravity would shorten our lifespan a little bit.

who gives a shit

Planets cant get that much bigger than jupiter as they would become stars themselves.

ITT: OP was a complete retard and made a complete ass of himself and his family.

let's flip this thread around and see if we can get some interesting conversation out of it, shall we?
thoughts?

How much you weigh on a certain planet isnt completely dependent on mass though, plus we can wear stuff like exosuits

So what? Are you fucking 12 or what?

spam

Yeah that's what I meant, It wouldnt be of any use to be larger if it's already harder to become larger, the only reason why blue whales are so big is because gravity doesnt affect them much and their main predators are pretty big. Maybe on smaller planets with bigger oceans animals the size of a building could live but even then it just doesnt make any sense unless the competition is focused on size and the planet has the perfect circumstances for it. (I.E gigantic supplies of easy to get food, enough space, fierce competition to get bigger, low enough gravity, low viscosity, etc etc)

OP is BUTTHURT

The planet, where humans are fucking asses are rocky planets like Earth.
Jupiter is a gas giant you stupid faggot.

I don't think it's physically possible for a brain that small to contain such an advanced consciousness.

why? it could be a nanobrain

The fuck m8?

This is so debunkable that people actually used time to prove that godzilla could not exist on earth because it would be crushed under its own weight.
How the fuck would that problem be solved by adding more gravity?

Intel processors are nanobrains. They are now about as small as they can possibly become because of the laws of physics. They are nowhere near as advanced as human brains.

And before you say it's the processors that aren't smart enough, look into how it works. It's about as smart as it can possibly be at its size.