There are no known habitable exoplanets

Everywhere you look, there are people claiming NASA found "Earth 2.0" or "planets better for life than Earth". But this isn't true. Kepler-22 b, Kepler-186 f, Gliese 667 Cc, Proxima Centauri b, the TRAPPIST-1 system, K2-18 b, and all other potentially habitable exoplanets likely can't host alien life. Even with things like the James Webb Space Telescope, we have yet to find any habitable exoplanets.
If you enjoy, please like and subscribe
Footage in this video taken using Space Engine

[@Kyplanet893]

edit: i changed it ok so this video has been out for about a week now and a lot of the comments are mad at me for making clickbait, so i’m gonna try to clear that up in one comment when i was writing this script a few months ago, i had just gotten recommended a bunch of ai generated clickbait bs that inspired me to make this. I put “there are no habitable exoplanets” as the title as a direct response to the titles of the other videos, which were saying stuff like “these are the most habitable exoplanets” this video sat on the back burner for a few months until i finally got around to publishing it, and I didn’t bother to change the title the title is not arguing that habitable exoplanets don’t exist. I say in the video that they probably do. If anything I should’ve added quotation marks to the title (there are no “habitable” exoplanets) to make it more in line with what i actually wanted the video to say (which was meant as a direct counter to the ai misinformation that’s everywhere) but I forgot to do that, and overnight this became my best performing video ever, and now i’m scared to change the title for fear that the whole thing will just die my goal isn’t to misinform people. I actively try to avoid clickbait as much as possible, and I research my videos for months before publishing them. When I made this title, clickbait genuinely wasn’t even on my mind, “there are no habitable exoplanets” was just my first automatic thought (and if you check my other videos you’ll hopefully find this is true, my other video titles are usually very simple and non-clickbait. This video is very much an outlier) So sorry if you feel clickbaited, but that honestly wasn’t my intention. I had no intent of making the video clickbait, and at this point i’m scared to change it because it could kill the video’s performance, and I feel as though this is an important video to get out to as many people as possible, since it’s directly countering popular misinfo i’m not trying to make excuses, i need to hold myself up to a higher standard so i don’t become the exact thing i’m trying to stop, and ig i’ll just remember to revise video titles in the future essay over

[@DarkMagicianGirl0]

I don't think you are making excuses but you are choosing to leave a clickbait title up at this point, even if not originally, to get money despite the fact you know that this is misleading. You do what you want but it is disheartening to see that you care more about getting money than being honest.

[@Harv72b]

Option one: change the title & risk losing some views. Option two: Keep the title & gain the wrong kind of views. Just my two cents.

[@davidstocker2278]

I don't think the title is clickbait. There aren't currently any habitable exoplanets that we know of. There are some that we think could be, but that's not helpful. Please don't change the title.

[@DarkMagicianGirl0]

@@davidstocker2278 the problem though is exactly in what you said. There are no habitable exoplanets planets that we know of. Which is wholly different than there are not any habitable exoplanets. It is dishonest, because we don't know and it is framed as an absolute. He admitted to that which I think is pretty brave and intelligent but then chose not to change it which is quite selfish. Oh and please elaborate on the that's not helpful aspect of your argument. I don't understand.

[@johnray1956]

yeah, the reality is that Venus, Mars, type planets seems to be the norm in the habitale zone. It's like earth has all the elements needed. planets detectable to us requires large amounts of work to make habitable. I have my own personal propossal that would require alot of work. it would require using asteriod dust to blanket the plants surface. This would lock in the gases that causes the runaway green house. as many rocky worlds is missing a upper surface layer like earth. if mars had this surface layer, mars would be the size of earth.

[@denifnaf5874]

A majority of humans died on earth Conclusion: Earth is the deadliest planet

[@PlanetGuy901]

Earth is not the deadliest planet. There are a lot more planets that are *IMPOSSIBLE* to live on. (A.K.A Venus-Like planets and Gas Giants.)

[@Tyranid_Hive_Mind]

​@@PlanetGuy901 and how many casualties are in those planets?

[@PrimerNitrogen]

r/wooooooooosh​@@PlanetGuy901

[@AppulightningYT]

​@@PlanetGuy901but absolutely ZERO people died on those planets however entire species died on earth TL;DR: earth is the most deadliest planet in the universe

[@Lucas_Stradeus]

​@@PlanetGuy901Bruh

[@CometMothman]

There is no easter bunny, there is no tooth fairy, and there are no habitable exoplanets

[@jeb123]

And also there is no Queen of England.

[@tonytaskforce3465]

For all intents and purposes, yes.

[@sir_dragonfly7287]

​@@jeb123 he's right now

[@retrogaussgun2296]

There is no war in Ba Sing Se

[@tonytaskforce3465]

@@retrogaussgun2296 I left my heart in San Francisco.

[@1rez378]

After taking a look at housing prices they still seem more habitable than Earth

[@Curt_Randall]

that makes no sense, even if you were trying to be funny.

[@sydn2698]

@@Curt_RandallIt does make some sense, you have no funny bone

[@willhuck9179]

tee hee

[@markg.7865]

The commute to work would be brutal.

[@1rez378]

@@markg.7865 You could just work remotely... with several hour delay on zoom calls

[@user-lh3iw7tg7q]

This video is far better than most largely because the narrator is more interested in practical facts and scientific accuracy rather than self-promotion via BS and clickbaiting. How refreshing, thank you.

[@MusicClips2000]

You mean I don't need to keep hiding under my bed waiting for Betelgeuse to pop?

[@user-lh3iw7tg7q]

@@MusicClips2000 You got that right, because of course there's human time and star time, which have almost nothing in common. But it would be a grand show!

[@nicosoftnt]

Indeed

[@Aibo-cx9gw]

@@MusicClips2000 Goads! You had me laff for real there. Self promotion user said above - yeah the only reason to make this comment is to lure you to my channel and find proof I cannot sing. Which is more to the fact than city lights on Proxima B or that they found Dyson spheres around a handful of M-dwarf stars. That claim whimpered and died so fast the researchers involved must be hiding under their own beds in embarrassment. No wait, the claim came from Sweden. The country who do not believe in science (remember the no lockdown and no facemask during Covid which had the country rated as the worst among the nordic countried for fatalities and ½ a million of serious long-covid cases.) ....dammit I need to stop soapboxing. =)

[@DarkMagicianGirl0]

He openly admitted that he is using a clickbait title in his message to draw you in. He also stated fear in changing it because it might be less popular. I don't know what you are talking about.

[@pinkharmonica7656]

This video is unfortunately attracting all the people who watch the 3 hour AI future civilisation videos and actually take them seriously.

[@titan-1802]

It's really unfortunate, because most people who comment here either didn't read the pinned comment about the video's title or that they didn't watch the full video.

[@goldencheeze]

isn’t the end goal to reach those who have been misinformed? like for those of us who already get it yeah it’s entertaining but for someone who’s been fooled, even if this video won’t help everyone it’ll at least help some people

[@pinkharmonica7656]

@goldencheeze yes, but being misinformed is "wholly different", as one would put it, than being borderline schizophrenic. There's a reason he has people attacking him for literally doing nothing but providing the factual information we know and giving his thoughts about the things we don't. People are saying he's a liar and made this video to "clickbait people for money" like it's a fuckin ActionLab video. I like ActionLab, but *that's* what clickbait is. Not a dude making a no frills video criticizing people making videos that *actually* clickbait people into thinking there are other planets we could live on.

[@Evil_Jyan]

bright side

[@seth1571]

@Evil_jyan 🤮

[@alexbyman1966]

The 'G' note when you start the topic on the next planet is triggering the My Chemical Romance part of my brain.

[@CTGReviews]

for me I think of the NSMB Wii theme

[@SladeF-ll5rk]

WHEN I WAS A YOUNG BOY

[@IDoABitOfTrollin]

Okay so im not alone

[@moonwalker7813]

glad to see I'm not alone

[@icecoldnut5152]

gang

[@bigedslobotomy]

I’m so tired of headlines screaming “NEW EARTH FOUND CLOSE TO US!” First, it usually at least 40 light years away (which is close astronomically but 50,000 years away with our current technology.). I have a feeling that bacterial life might be fairly common, but having bacteria is not the same as having intelligent life. (That requires an environment that is suitable to complex life, and that environment must be fairly stable - not given to extreme swings in temperatures.)

[@ragnarwillz4115]

With the same AI voice

[@zaytime4156]

Yeah plus bacteria kills so if that’s the life then not impressed

[@TehAnimationSparxx]

True, but having bacteria means there's potential for more life down the line. Proof of bacteria on an exoplanet would be HUGE.

[@scottvelez3154]

I bet they have cool alien looking creatures

[@Joshua-dc1bs]

Could life have evolved and adapted specifically for those environments -- ones which WE find inhospitable?

[@generikadeyo]

No one talks about it enough that mars and venus are also in the habitable zone. It's really not the only factor that's important for habitability.

[@SaladofStones]

Venus and Mars are both outside of the habitable zone

[@yalexander9432]

Venus is barely in the inner edge lol. Mars is too small and on the outer edge. If it were earth sized I'd probably be an iceshell world.

[@FuneFox]

​​@@yalexander9432Currently mars during the summer reaches up to 20°C and did have liquid water at one point (keep in mind the sun was even smaller back when it did), so if it had an atmosphere like Earth it would probably not be completely covered in ice.

[@landrypierce9942]

@@SaladofStonesNo they aren’t. With an earth-like atmosphere, they would be livable, just very cold and very warm respectively.

[@chistinelane]

Both are on the bare edges and both were briefly habitable.

[@lioshin]

even if theres water, life, and a magnetic field, i guarantee you we cant breathe any exoplanet atmosphere

[@chistinelane]

I think Isaac arthur brought a good point if you think about it: What if aliens smell really bad? Like they breathe out or sweat capsaicin or even thiols (the chemicals that make skunk spray so bad)? What if they smell... Toxicly bad? As in, the chemical they emit, perhaps even pheromones, can straight up kill earth life. I mean heck, oxygen itself is deadly toxic to what used to be the dominate life forms on earth.

[@naterod]

Even if the planet has oxygen, the levels of concentration would probably be pure poison to us

[@TheGingerMale]

100% chance you took a breath while typing this

[@bigwsly]

So much has to be right to get a breathable atmosphere that it is just unlikely to find

[@lioshin]

@@TheGingerMale probably

[@FallingPicturesProductions]

'Planets don't have to be habitable to be interesting.' I know it, you know it, everyone in this comment section knows it. But for the vast majority of people, they don't care unless it's habitable.

[@oldylad]

Well, yeah. I mean we have plenty of gaseous or rocky orbs around us, life is far more significant

[@HenryMiller-ox1xu]

⁠@@oldyladmore but not so much more as to completely ignore any other planet

[@scottvelez3154]

I want aliens :(

[@quneptune]

​@@HenryMiller-ox1xuStop forcing people to care about your stupid useless planets!!

[@gokuformanvsfood]

​@@HenryMiller-ox1xu...we don't ignore them, in fact we've spent billions studying them!!

[@pastaman64]

I wonder if somewhere in the universe, there are aliens sitting on a frozen, radioactive hellscape with crushing gravity thinking "damn, the fact that this planet is so perfect for life is such a miracle it shouldn't even be possible"

[@Dan-dy8zp]

Yes, probably. Also, we always assume life evolves only on planets. I've always thought that was a little odd.

[@CookieIcecream-dj5fu]

@@Dan-dy8zp Yeah, we all know the ancient aliens of Atlantis actually inhabited a star.

[@Dan-dy8zp]

@@CookieIcecream-dj5fu Oh. Right. Of course. *slaps forehead*.

[@Dan-dy8zp]

​@@CookieIcecream-dj5fu Why not float in space? It could inhabit the nebula where new stars are forming out of the gasses and photosynthesis while collecting up matter to reproduce. Why not live in the rings of gas giants ?

[@hhhhhhhhh1071]

@@Dan-dy8zpI think that wouldn’t be dense enough to support more than proto-organisms without DNA or any sort of analog for it Even those I’d expect to go extinct in a few seconds as there isn’t enough pressure to hold anything together

[@anthonymorris1360]

As a resident from Keplar 22B, I'm glad our guise keeps eveyone away.

[@notjebbutstillakerbal]

Your cover's been blown, bud!

[@asiamies9153]

What do you guys call your planet?

[@Ashgarify]

Keplar 22C

[@Black_Aces]

A probe will be arriving to your planet shortly.

[@DrHotelMario]

What scares me is eventually when we find the PERFECT habitable planet, we'll discover it has an alien ecosystem that would kill us instantly due to no immunities.

[@denifnaf5874]

Or even develop sapience...

[@themelon_1785]

Would you like to hear the good word of human supremacy?

[@thoth7290]

if the answer to the fermi paradox is "all species are hostile supremacists who nuke eachother to death upon first contact" i wont be surprised, just disappointed

[@doug2424]

That scenario can play out on any "habitable"planet! We could be the infection. We would have to tame the exoplanet anyway.....

[@PriceTag3]

luckily or immunesystem has millions opun milllions of random combinations to protect us from foreign bacteria, so we would most likely be completely fine, and our immunesystem adapts very quickly so it would probably create a cure

[@buivars]

AI generated "education" content on KZbin is genuinely a huge issue, and a giant tragedy. I sincerely thank you for noticing the issue and attempting to fight it off. I also entirely agree with your point. Do habitable exoplanets exist? I can say with near absolute certainty, that yes, they do But when our sample size of "well understood exoplanets" is like, 4, with everything else being basically guesses, of course we haven't found any Earth clones yet.

[@JuniAku]

I’ve had to block so many AI channels. It’s like the few things I enjoy online eventually turn to shit.

[@FuneFox]

Probably the reason we didn't find any Earth-Like worlds is because we're not very good at finding exoplanets (yet). If you check an exoplanet mass distribution graph, you'll notice most of them tend to be massive, and there's almost none under earth's mass. Exoplanets that are not too large for life are pretty easy to miss.

[@Erikaaaaaaaaaaaaa]

Exactly. Our very best telescopes are just at the very edge of, in the most optimal conditions, being able to just about theoretically detect an Earth-sized planet. Some other commenters here have talked about how we've surveyed thousands of planets and found none habitable, but that really isn't an interesting statistic considering that we're not surveying planets fairly and equally. Hot, massive planets with tight orbits are extremely over-represented.

[@drew8443]

Almost all earth-sized exoplanets found so far orbit red dwarf stars, which we have now realized are very bad for life (frequent super-flares that strip away volatiles). But this happens only because telescopes aren't yet sensitive enough to spot earth-sized planets around bigger, more luminous G-type stars (like the Sun). The next decades will be so exciting! :)

[@kingofflames738]

If we would see our system from a different star we'd probably only really see the four gas giants and deem the solar system uninhabitable.

[@TheSilverShadow17]

​​@@drew8443The best candidate for life: K-type stars aka Orange Dwarfs. A hair bit smaller than the Sun but much more forgiving and friendly than Red Dwarf stars since they don't emit as much solar flares.

[@NefariousKoel]

Yeah, I don't see this getting mentioned enough. The data collection bias is always something to keep in mind. The two main methods used depend upon either the relative masses of the star versus the planet or the size/luminosity of the star compared to the size of the planet, along with limited orbital angles. All including the planet's orbital distance. With the technology used to find exoplanets, the available data is heavily biased towards large planets. Especially those close to the star. Which likely rules out detection of many earth-sized planets unless they're near a small red dwarf. I rarely see this bias mentioned, but it's an important point to keep in mind. I think habitable earth-like planets are likely to be very rare but we're also not currently able to work with a full picture due to the detection limits.

[@p1ls726]

Some people are getting confused. He's not saying there aren't no habitable planets, he's saying we haven't found any yet. And may never find any. Or it might happen tomorrow. We just don't know yet. Sometimes "we don't know" makes people uncomfortable, but there's nothing wrong with it.

[@Erikaaaaaaaaaaaaa]

The reason people are getting confused is because he decided to title the video "There are no habitable exoplanets" It's the inevitable consequence of clickbaiting. People will react to the clickbait title.

[@sal_277]

Bro, he literally titled the video "There are no habitable exoplanets"

[@p1ls726]

@@sal_277 Oh it is definitely clickbait. There's no denying that.

[@cam609lee]

"We don't know" is science's best friend. And then when we know, we do. It's not about popularity/politics, but objective truth. Reminds me of Don't Look Up lol.

[@Slo-ryde]

Even if some of these far off exoplanets were seemingly habitable….. we’d have no way of getting there with the propulsion systems we have, nor do we know how to preserve biological entities even if we could travel at relativistic speeds!

[@GymnasticsCoach83]

About 2 years ago, I got in a spat with some random arguing that the AI generated images were the actual planet and what it looks like, after i told them we don't have the tools to actually see the true exo planets and what it truly looks like. This channel is such a breath of fresh air. I love it.

[@peaktroglodyte]

I think the reason we haven't found any viable habitable exoplanets is simply due to the lack of data we have. We've only been observing exoplanets for a little over 3 decades, with most of those planets orbiting perilously close to their parent stars (primarily red dwarfs), and/or are Gas Giants and Super Earths/Sub-Neptunes, mainly so because they are very easy to detect. We have little data on Earth-sized exoplanets orbiting Sun-like stars because they're so much harder to detect, due to their much longer orbital periods which makes it hard to verify their existence via transit methods (which is the most common method). Our exoplanet catalogue will continue growing over the next couple decades with more powerful telescopes, and as telescopes become more powerful and our observational periods grow longer we will probably have more data on habitable exoplanet candidates.

[@WildWombats]

People also have a huge misconception in thinking we should know everything by now. It's arrogance, or hubris, to think we already know everything. I was told by someone once that we know everything there is to know about stars and studying them further would be pointless. To me, that's blasphemous because even if we think we know it all, we should still continue to research to ensure it holds. So to me, the primary issue is people think we can do way more than we actually can. The reality is we base a lot of our findings on a telescope that realistically can only see most planets as no more than a few pixels on a screen along side some very limited data. Many feel we should at least have identified every planet in the milky way and know for sure whether life exists at any given area. Fact is, we can't even confirm microbial life in our own solar system much less another solar system. Now, as far as intelligent life goes, yes, we definitely should have detected something if it were out there at least within a vicinity. But that doesn't mean they're not here either. It's a bit easier to tell with intelligent life since they can create things that are unnatural you wouldn't find anywhere else, also generate heat and potentially signatures in the atmosphere would be more dominant than early life / microbial life.

[@Black_Aces]

​@WildWombats For someone to say that we know all there is to know about stars is complete ignorance. From what we know as the observable universe it's specilulated that as big as that is, it's barely a fraction of the rest of the universe we can't even see. The scale is just too large to comprehend..

[@nozodah]

Its so refreshing to find an astronomy channel that isnt AI, misinformation, and clickbait

[@donaldpodzikowski8028]

Amen! I must block an average of 3 a day.

[@Elyzeon.]

It is clickbait

[@drew53768]

As an astronomer who studies super-Earths around dwarf stars (like the ones you mentioned): THANK YOU! This is the most accurate video I've been able to find about 'potentially habitable exoplanets'. And it's really well-produced to boot! It sucks that we haven't found any... but we're doing our best lmao

[@The-tv3ht]

Kepler-22 B has another downside. It's low density means it can't have an iron/nickel nucleus, which means it won't have any magnetic field and any life that'd form there wouldn't survive

[@RomanAres]

Exoplanets aren't going to adjust themselves to us, so we need to adapt to them

[@alexstromberg7696]

Or terraform

[@Isthisjoebiden]

​@@alexstromberg7696If we could do that, we'd just fix all earth's issues...

[@shiro4095]

also doesn’t mean that other lifeforms need our exact needs to develop maybe they evolved to live with their planets conditions

[@blizzard1198]

​@@shiro4095I mean if that was true almost any planet should have life then.

[@cancerouscorndog6425]

Yeah if we just drop 1 billion people into trappist-1’s atmosphere SOMEONE is bound to survive right?

[@WhyIsJupiterInTheFridge]

Finally, SOMEONE THAT ACTUALLY KNOWS HABITABLE PLANETS WITH MICROBIAL LIFE IS RARE!

[@Erikaaaaaaaaaaaaa]

This is based on nothing lol. We have literally no statistics to this.

[@Iemonlemon]

@@Erikaaaaaaaaaaaaa to be fair humans exist

[@AceGe0d4sh]

w name

[@_apsis]

plus the likelihood of that habitable planet also being earth-habitable is very low

[@AmonTheWitch]

we can't even check if our closest neighbours have any life on them and already declaring the galaxy to be dead 💀

[@Hiccup_-gz8nm]

Planets are the coolest thing space has to offer and no one can change my mind. Inhabitable or not, every planet is awesome

[@BidoMaggot]

ok

[@kipkipper-lg9vl]

We will probably gave to search through hundreds of thousands of planets to find one that is even vaguely habitable, we simply haven't looked at all that many in the grand scheme of things

[@Novastar.SaberCombat]

It would make no difference if we found thousands. The logistics alone (via rocket propulsion) are absolutely catastrophic. Totally implausible in nearly every way imaginable. Even the creation of space stations "along the way" wouldn't really work. It's a simple matter of energies expended vs. energies gained; it doesn't add up to a net positive.

[@CarlosAM1]

​@@Novastar.SaberCombatI mean all you really need is a few thousand nuclear bombs or fissile saltwater and you can already send a ship to another star in a few decades. As we advance further things like fusion engines will be developed as well, not to mention Dyson Swarms being able to accelerate laser sail ships to drastically reduce the energy needed.

[@spooky_4624]

@@Novastar.SaberCombat😊

[@landenmoudy5749]

​@@CarlosAM1the better option would be an engine that uses the controlled fusion of hydrogen atoms. Hydrogen is the most available element in the universe, and it's the easiest element to fuse. However, we are decades - centuries from this kind of technology being cheap and readily available.

[@CarlosAM1]

@@landenmoudy5749 Yeah, those are the fusion engines I mentioned. Do keep in mind though that while Deuterium fusion with itself is possible it is most certainly not optimal, usually tritium + deuterium are used which are easy to ignite and can even be spin polarized to improve performance, however despite being an isotope of hydrogen tritium is extremely rare. Helium 3 also works but its crazy rare and harder to get going, spin polarizing is also not as effective here. Pure hydrogen-hydrogen fusion is so incredibly hard you may as well not even bother, at least not any time soon.

[@manhhoanguc837]

I blame the issue of not detecting many earth sized planets around yellow dwarfs like our sun on Kepler mission 's short durations. We can barely interpolate datas to extract 3 to 4 orbits of this type of planets, which is the minimum for confirmation.

[@Rigel644]

I really appreciate this. It‘s hard to find quality space-related content online because people‘s approach to the topic is completely warped, ie: drawing interest from science fiction instead of viewing it in the same light as nature on Earth: simply appreciating it the way it is, not depending entirely on mystery to be interesting. I couldn‘t exaggerate how incredibly rare this is.

[@ExE_9808]

Perhaps the real exoplanets are the friends we made along the way.

[@planetobjeciaoureturns2914]

While there might be a habitable exoplanet out there, such truly Earth-like worlds would be VERY RARE. Even if we do find life on other planets, their environments would probably be vastly different and hostile to life from Earth. And we don't know much about planets outside our solar system. We only know about their mass, size, and distances from their parent star(s). A big issue with most "Earth 2.0's" is that most orbit M type stars. Which are not only VERY VIOLENT, but also any planet that orbits them in their habitable zone would be tidally locked, meaning one side is an endless day, and the other side is an endless night.

[@FleshWizard69420]

Yeah the red dwarves would microwave many of the earthlike planets lmao

[@MrGnorts]

@@FleshWizard69420not with space infrastructure in place to block it

[@SethXyrillEscudero]

Yeah but they're will be a lot of problems that we can face

[@jerry3790]

There’s always the possibility they have a 2:3 resonance instead of tidal locking, like mercury

[@thecornerho4472]

what about moons around those said planets?

[@I.amthatrealJuan]

KZbin has been recommending me underrated gems lately. You are one of them. Concise and critical minded, digging away all the media sensationalism designed to generate clicks at the expense of nuance in this short attention span economy. Just mention temperatures in Celsius too

[@liamdoyle2828]

This raises the issue of the relationship between reporting on the findings science and the actual findings of science. Over reporting of what's happening in the scientific community is an issue that has been going on for decades.

[@John-qd5of]

I would like to consider the likely sampling bias effect in all of this. The fact is that it is much easier to find larger planets, because the gravitational effects on a parent star are more obvious. It is also easier to observe larger planets that transit red dwarf stars and orbit closely. That means that the atmospheres of these planets can be observed.. There are also just many more red dwarfs than sunlike stars.

[@Winner8501]

THANK YOU FOR THIS VIDEO. I've argued million times with people who don't have a clue about what makes planets 'habitable' and next time I'll simply point them to this video and save my time and energy.

[@DarkMagicianGirl0]

This video doesn't say what the specifics are that make a planet habitable. Even down to the primary component of what makes them. For us it is carbon. We have speculated that silicon is just as viable but would need a completely different environment than earth. If you are instead saying that we thought that any of these planet could support human beings that is almost completely incorrect. Most of the planets we are looking at now for habitable life (and we are still in the early stages) are used to compare and contrast the environment we live in with others. I don't know anyone at all that thinks we could go and live on any of these planets but how close it is to being habitable. Also take note that most habitable doesn't mean it is habitable, it just means it got the closest. I don't understand what you are thanking him for. Can you elaborate?

[@lyricusthelame9395]

I like to imagine some government spending billions of dollars to send a probe to k2-18 b and then waiting hundreds of years to get anything back only to find out that it's literally hell.

[@juicykcaz8326]

I rlly appreciate you focusing your channel on real science and not clickbait, makes the subjects u cover so much more interesting

[@thecringekid5744]

This just shows how much of a gem the Earth truly is.

[@GoldenNada]

Habitable for us and habitable for life are 2 different things, but i agree none of these planets are probably habitable but they are still interesting and they probably wont kill us right away.

[@StyleshStorm]

Finally a astrological KZbinr who's actually honest and not click bait. Subscribed.

[@ArmyJames]

“Astrological”. 🙄

[@Usernameis3-qv6jy]

When I search for exoplanet videos, you're the only one that doesn't mislead the viewers. I didn't realize how clickbait-y those videos thumbnail is And thank you for still being optimistic rather pessimistic about the chance of we found Earth's perfect candidate

[@FleshWizard69420]

So far we've found: Piles of gas giants Giant balls of lava Irradiated wastelands Colossal rocks with crushing gravity Big Mars Big Europa Whatever that one carbon pulsar planet is There's so many things that need to go right to get a habitable planet, I'd wager there's only a few in the galaxy

[@jackturner8472]

there's at least ten million, dunning-kruger. Also, We? How many planets have you found?

[@Kyplanet893]

by “we” he means humanity i say we as well when talking about stuff like this

[@aman_s_96]

@@jackturner8472 Where tf did you pull out "10 millions" number from?

[@Trolligi]

@@jackturner8472 there is no way for us to know because we only have a sample of 8 planets. Your confidence in your own estimate makes you also a victim of the dunning-kruger effect.

[@jackturner8472]

@@Trolligi we only have samples from one, actually. We have 5,000 confirmed planets, and most of them have hints as to their composition. There are at least 100 billion planets in the galaxy, that would make earth like planets 0.01% of all planets in the galaxy. Which is still ignoring the fact that there used to be literal oceans on mars, and there may have been oceans on Venus. So that’s at least two chances out of our sample size of four (Nobody is counting gas giants as possible habitable worlds btw!) So actually, there are likely many more than ten million habitable worlds in the galaxy. I’d wager, you don’t know what you’re talking about!

[@SuzumeMizuno]

I love your videos, I always learn something interesting!! Thank you for your work!

[@CIS101]

Subscribed. I really like channels with informative professional content, and professional, and respectful hosts !!!

[@AIGTF9904]

dude you are a super underrated channel my guy keep up the amazing work!

[@MrSamPhoenix]

We can’t be the only ones. We just don’t have the tools to find other habitable planets

[@IamMonikaDLC]

We're not, just because other exoplanets don't meet our picky ass needs doesn't mean there isn't other lifeforms that thrive on it

[@wuphatlizar2541]

@@IamMonikaDLCfr

[@toranp.8942]

Is there any good argument WHY we can’t be the only ones? We don’t know what starts or causes life when there is no preceding life. We could very well be the only ones

[@gabrielragum]

​​​@@toranp.8942"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". We can't say for certain that either case is true without concrete evidence :)

[@toranp.8942]

@@gabrielragum exactly, we have no clue, and there’s no way to ever know for sure unless we find a way to see the entire universe in real time

[@cookiez_myman]

Genuinely thank you for bringing up the AI-Generated sci-fi (specifically astronomy related) youtube channels - it’s such a bad epidemic and can be hellish for people who want to get into general space related stuff.

[@ramenrarity]

Hella underrated space channel, without this I wouldn’t know these exoplanet videos are clickbait

[@jwilson544]

First time ever watching your channel, and im digging it. Getting the vibe u educate folks that astronomy is boring for all the reasons mainline media says it's interesting and is actually super interesting for reasons most folks have never heard of. You've got a new subscriber, good sir

[@jaimeduncan6167]

I agree with the general idea of the video, but it's important to be precise if we are going to criticize other science communicators. For example, he shows, convincingly that Kepler-22 b is very likely not to have life that evolved from the circumstances we suppose life arrived on Earth. Please notice that abiogenesis is an open problem. That is not the same as saying that Kepler-22 b is not habitable.

[@macbuff81]

Also, a magnetic field is important

[@Smothered_burritos]

Great video. Everytime I hear new earth like planet I get excited only to find that we don’t actually have enough information to draw a definitive conclusion that it is in fact habitable. Thanks for your thorough and straight forward explanation! You’ve gained a new subscriber ❤❤❤

[@CIS101]

For me this is the first serious video or content I have seen on this subject. Very interesting. Good video. Thank you !!

[@elchippe]

A planet being cold is not necessary a killer deal for life, anyone traveling past in the cryogenic geological era when every surface land in earth was covered by kilometers thick ice sheets would have thought that earth is inhabitable, there was very few sign of life back then but life survived close to volcanic vents.

[@gamersvr6379]

I saw a video yesterday of a guy saying astronomers found an exoplanet 40 light-years away that might be habitable IF it has an atmosphere, but the average temperature there is 107°F or something like that. Its name is Gliese 12b, astronomically 40 light-years is basically nothing, which means the planet has very likely not faced any drastic changes and is pretty close to us. If they happen to find an atmosphere on this planet it'll probably be the planet most likely to be habitable.

[@SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer]

The equilibrium temperature of 315 K is too hot hot for liquid water to be sustained, especially with an atmosphere.

[@cactusgamingyt9960]

Florida planet?

[@JaisalLakum]

Unfortunately that planets orbits the acronym of blue giant that shoots atmosphere wiping flares

[@Brian-nw2bn]

Loving this channel so much. So happy to have found you so early in your journey. I promise you man you’re going to blow up in no time! Keep up this great interesting content mate you’ll be at 100K subs before you know it. Liked and shared. God speed !

[@kat0na_cat]

You need more subscribers dude! This is very well made!

[@CL-ss7gg]

Hi, loved your video, however where can I find the sources you used to talk about trappist 1 planets, especially trappist-1d, because I couldn't find any.

[@Kyplanet893]

d’s results have been especially difficult to get thanks to stellar noise so there hasn’t been any official publications yet, i’ve just heard that some problems in the data can be explained if it’s airless and given it’s small size it probably is but here’s the one saying c might have an atmosphere: ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023NatAs...7.1011M/abstract and there’s multiple sources saying b is airless

[@CL-ss7gg]

@@Kyplanet893 Ok, thank you!

[@celavetex]

Aliens: "Too pulled on by moon"

[@AirelonTrading]

Thank god. Thumbed up, and hope this gets millions of views

[@AILIT1]

I subbed for the honesty. As any space lover halfway through their life I'd love for us to find a truly habitable exoplanet or find life elsewhere. I'm a realist though and have largely had to shut my ears to updates because of the clickbait that plagues all forms of news including space news.

[@julianodobler2782]

As an enviromental sciences guy, i find the recent collective realization of the astronomy crowd on subjects like habitable exoplanets and terraforming projects quite amusing. Who knew a biosphere would be such a complex system that cannot be easily replicated on another planet?!

[@ehenningsen]

There are no "known" exoplanets that can definitively support life. That said, there are about 200,000,000,000 stars on each galaxy and about 4,000,000,000,000 known galaxies. We have a long way to go before we can definitively say we are the only ones

[@denifnaf5874]

Imagine if we find life on a planet but it's an ugly planet A bug planet

[@wetswordfighter]

@@denifnaf5874In that case, it's time to spread some democracy🔥🔥

[@notjebbutstillakerbal]

@@denifnaf5874 Better than no life at all.

[@stupidmango4036]

Hahahaha Ok little Johnny (Also habitable for us; If we haven't found it even in scans BEYOND the space shuttles' reach, we probably would never reach it when trying to get there)

[@bostonjunk]

You deserve more subscribers - wishing you every success

[@n9879]

Thank you for reinforcing my belief in the rare earth hypothesis

[@jiplinnartz5820]

you forget that older red dwarf stars generally tend to settle down their stellar activity over time. also athmospheres can regenerate over time. so this makes trappist 1 a little more promising.

[@Kyplanet893]

i talked about that a bit but went more in depth in my trappist 1 video even if red dwarfs calm down they still blew away their planets volatiles when they were younger, so there’s a chance that even when they calm down the planets will have no material to rebuild atmospheres or oceans so will be airless anyway

[@jiplinnartz5820]

@@Kyplanet893 yes that’s the exact thing I might have always understood wrongly then. I don’t know but it could be a possibility. I have to ask my professor. I thought that over these billions of years the star can acquire these materials again. I mean we are talking about billions of years. And that is also why I wouldn’t bother looking for life around younger red dwarves because life probably can’t survive there for billions of years.

[@nullifier_]

very refreshing to see how this discussion have matured. astronomic journalism has been painting this idea that we are finding earths everywhere our telescopes point at and in reality what's being discovered is planets around red dwarfs or mini-neptunes or other variation that possibly couldn't bear organic life.

[@itzcat288]

This is really interesting, thank you for making this

[@ChrisPTY507]

Loved your honesty and I sight in this topic. Nice way you call out the BS clickbait and content creators exaggerating information just to generate content.

[@Neptoons-]

Why is it such a trend for media to hyperfixate on exoplanets that are either not what we think they are, or not even real at all when there’s other interesting exoplanets people don’t even realize 🗿

[@oberonpanopticon]

Because most people only care about the prospect of aliens

[@madisonwolfe777]

it's kinda related to this thing called "popular science", look into it! pop sci is basically surface level stuff thats curated to specifically appeal to a very large audience, which stuff like "3 exo planets found in habitable zone" certainly do

[@TheSilverShadow17]

Do you also think that K-type stars are the best possible choice for finding exoplanets?

[@ochreJ]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[@alexanderg1935]

I'm sure 19th century scientists said the same thing about the ether.

[@callusklaus2413]

You have no evidence that there *isn't* a leprechaun riding a tea cup around the sun with a gun that fires heart attack rays, but that platitude doesn't mean we should put any stock in the idea.

[@satgurs]

@@callusklaus2413 i have evidence there is

[@monkeydigs6696]

@@callusklaus2413there should be a movie on that

[@Fossil_Frank]

@@callusklaus2413 In general, outside of some specific math topics, trying to prove the nonexistance of something is an impossible standard.

[@PollarisTheGD]

Honey! I just found a hidden gem between astronomy channels! But seriously keep up the good work, m8.

[@mayochupenjoyer]

you’re making my 10 year old self (who wrote a book for school about exoplanets) very happy

[@avandorhu-3389]

I don't get why a lot of the planets peoples are pushing as habitable orbit flare stars, when there are at least a few red dwarfs nearby that are Far calmer. Luyten's star, Teegarden's star, and Gliese 1061 are all red dwarfs that flare Far less than most other red dwarfs, so even if their parents Did emit more flares in the past, they should have had the opportunity to re-generate an atmosphere.

[@tommi59tk]

All you mentioned do not transit we do not know their sizes. We can't check now for presence of atmospheres on them. Planets should be dense enough to be rocky not water worlds

[@cateccy8647]

@@tommi59tk we know their masses though which is equally good for estimating composition

[@dnocturn84]

How are they supposed to regenerate an atmosphere? Do they regenerate water this way as well? They have most likely been sterilized in the past by their parent star for a very long amount of time. Unless these planets formed far away, had a powerful protective atmosphere and magnetosphere and somehow moved inwards after their star calmed down, or formed anew after a massive collision event or were later captured former rouge planets, I can't see a way to get them habitable.

[@avandorhu-3389]

@@dnocturn84 you are forgetting about volcanism. Earth's crust has a lot of water inside of a mineral called Ringwoodite, which would get released through volcanism. Also, after earth's initial hydrogen atmosphere was blow off, our current atmosphere initially started as a mix of various volcanic emissions before slowly being converted by life.

[@dnocturn84]

@@avandorhu-3389 For a Red Dwarf to calm down takes a long time. During that same time, its planets and their liquid cores will also cool down. Cool down = less volcanism, maybe none volcanism left at all. Also, these sterilization phases through flares are extremely powerful and will penetrate deep into their crust and eliminate all volatiles. The combination of both of them makes a regeneration of an atmosphere very unlikely to me. But not impossible, true. These effects can also vary a lot.

[@AlfallMap]

The only problem is that it's terrestrial life being compared to extraterrestrial worlds, most if not all Terran fauna and flora would not survive on other objects such as Titan, unlike its potential native Titanean fauna and flora which are adapted to the object's specific environments, and Titanean fauna and flora wouldn't survive on Proxima b unlike its own potential native fauna and flora. And I would've loved to have continued the comment using your own words but B&Q decided grey triangles is an appropriate thing to associate with garden hardware. Oh I _love_ it when that happens.

[@AlfallMap]

Oh, and then following that, we get motherf!&cking Output, which will not shut its grimy mouth for one second. *"iF y'AlL dOn'T gOt ArCaDe"* anti🤓

[@xeschire706]

There very likely would not be life on Titan at all whatsoever, do you even understand how biology works, & how it is still governed by the laws of physics?

[@dagestan7734]

@@xeschire706You know the chance of liquid methane being a water replacement can work right?

[@aseriesofletters6346]

it’s worth keeping our mind open to life, uh, finding a way, but we do have to keep our expectations constrained at least somewhat by what we’ve observed thus far. if we make too many assumptions about life’s hypothetical upper limits for what it can withstand, this whole process becomes unscientific speculation. Plus, the presence of unconventional forms of life on these worlds would probably come with bio markers that would stick out like a sore thumb in worlds that otherwise seem inhabitable.

[@chistinelane]

​@@dagestan7734there's so little energy that any life like chemistry would have to be pretty weird and limited.

[@VGEmblem]

The title was not clickbait. Just a fair analysis that the candidates we've found so far are a stretch, and furthermore a good reminder how little we actually know about these planets

[@Catishcat]

Personally, I never gave into into the misinformation, but it's nice that this video exists. It's kinda sad but I'm tired of being disappointed, we all crave new discoveries and it's hella depressing to have to take on the "nothing ever happens" attitude. The actual discoveries are still exciting and important, but the ways they're framed by media only serve to disappoint in the long run by overselling what actually happened.

[@Hys-01]

loved this video. I also hate the pop-astronomy side of youtube that's growing recently, but in the end it's just simple click bait, nothing actually harmful

[@Kyplanet893]

the thing is when people see clickbait and realize it’s false information, a lot of people immediately jump to blame the scientists not the person who made the clickbait so it ends up leading to a distrust in science for some people and we already have enough of that

[@Hys-01]

that's actually a fair point, thanks

[@cat_city2009]

Tidal locking doesn't preclude the possibility of life.

[@richardcaves3601]

Yes it does.!!!! Try astrophysics!!!?

[@cat_city2009]

@@richardcaves3601 Try doing some basic research. The heat transfer from the light and dark sides would even out the temperature if the planet had an ocean. The problem with planets orbiting red dwarfs is solar flares etc, not tidal locking.

[@richardcaves3601]

@@cat_city2009 like I said try basic astrophysics. Dr Brian Cox is a good start for amateurs, which judging from your reply, you are. Alternatively, read Ward and Brownlee. That'll give you a comprehensive list of all the known factors to date that we know are absolute essentials for multi cellular intelligent life to evolve. Here are a few: Goldilocks zone in the galaxy. Goldilocks zone from the star. Liquid water. Goldilocks moon. Goldilocks planet tilt. Goldilocks atmosphere. Goldilocks pressure and gravity. Circular orbit. Goldilocks type of star. Goldilocks galaxy. Goldilocks magnetosphere. Outer gas giants. Goldilocks extinction events, number and size. There's more, much more!! Yes, life is abundant in the universe, but 99.99% of it is dormant and never likely to awaken due to planetary conditions. Even when awakened, the length of time needed to gain a foothold is astronomical. Then there's the jump to single cellular life and that gaining a foothold. Huge. After that there's the incredibly rare chance of multi cellular life evolving. Check with any biologist - it's just so very rare. And then there's the chance of that evolving intelligence, another incredibly rare chance. Like I said, try the basics first. Then your comments won't be so ridiculous.

[@PeloquinDavid]

Tidal locking almost certainly makes it far less likely that fluid metallic cores of planets would circulate through the coriolis effect in a way that generates a protective magnetic field. Without such a field, virtually no planet within a red dwarf's so-called "habitable zone" (which virtually guarantees their being tidally locked) could long keep an atmosphere of any kind, let alone one with an already breathable (to us) mix of gases.

[@cat_city2009]

@@PeloquinDavid I didn't know that. Fair enough.

[@areyoukiddingmeee1586]

This will be my favorite space channel 🤍

[@supercompooper]

Black holes are like hotel California. But in fact they are so lucky he will check in but never leave.

[@fridayenjoyer]

1:15 I thought The Black Parade was about to start playing 😅

[@fatiguewatterson5734]

“Let’s start with the notorious Kepler 22b.” -single piano note- “When I was… a young boy… my father… took me into the city. To see a marching band.”

[@Isthisjoebiden]

​@@fatiguewatterson5734he said son when, you grow up...

[@hidden2098]

⁠@@Isthisjoebidenwill you be, the savior of the broken… the beaten and the damned?

[@user-xu8ob4gx3b]

Do water giants have grounds, like, do they have a ground that stops the water, or is it just a giant water bubble floating through space?

[@omen3834]

well, planets often have solid, metallic cores. stars often do not. for example, if you looked deep beneath the immense amount of gases of jupiter and saturn, you could in theory see a metallic core. and considering liquids are often denser than gas, water planets would be similar, miles and miles of ocean (maybe some supercritical fluids and/or ice as well) before eventually reaching a metallic core.

[@user-xu8ob4gx3b]

@@omen3834 thanks

[@blizzard1198]

Yes they have ground, the same way if the ocean disappeared you would see ground or land.

[@cateccy8647]

loved the video, but I recommend that when you talk about the specific temperature of a planet, you use insolation/stellar flux compared to earth instead of equilibrium temperature (or both). equilibrium temperature estimates rely heavily on other statistics, such as albedo and cloud cover, which is unknown/guessed or not even included in the equation for most exoplanets, which makes it a pretty inaccurate statistic. modern habitable zone estimates are also almost always given using insolation instead of equilibrium temperature

[@tylersizelove7521]

Thank you for clearing up the click bait videos on this topic, it's way to easy for people to get excited about what the James Web finds and they blow it out of proportion.

[@Thesamurai1999]

Keppler 22b is a puffy/cotton planet :3 Edit: for those that don’t know, that is a real classification.

[@thecannonball34]

Now that's the place for me.

[@notjebbutstillakerbal]

@@thecannonball34 Just know the place's clouds aren't solid. You'll fall for a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnng time.

[@ozne_2358]

The latest "potentially habitable" world is Gliese 12b : a world receiving a 1.6x solar flux (!!!) around a red dwarf. People must be desperate to find something, anything that resembles earth.

[@SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer]

The equilibrium temperature there is also 315 K, which would not be able to sustain any oceans in the long run.

[@asiamies9153]

@@SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer Gpt says: "- If the atmospheric pressure is similar to Earth's and the greenhouse effect is not extreme, it's plausible that liquid water could exist. - If the planet has a significant greenhouse effect, surface temperatures could exceed the boiling point of water, making oceans unlikely. - Conversely, if the planet's atmosphere has high albedo or low greenhouse gas concentrations, surface temperatures might be lower than 315 K, possibly supporting oceans. In summary, while an equilibrium temperature of 315 K is within the range where liquid water could potentially exist, the actual ability of an exoplanet to sustain oceans depends on a combination of atmospheric pressure, composition, albedo, geological activity, and orbital characteristics. If these factors are favorable, the planet could indeed have oceans."

[@asiamies9153]

@@SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer How do you figure it could not sustain any oceans if the actual temperature was 315 K? Shouldn't the range of 273 K - 373 K be enough, assuming pressure of one atmosphere or are you assuming low albedo / high greenhouse gas concentrations?

[@SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer]

@@asiamies9153 At around that temperature (especially with a high stellar flux of 1.6 Se), there would be a much higher evaporation rate of the oceans, where the water vapour is broken down due to radiolysis from stellar radiation, then the hydrogen escapes into space and only oxygen remains, leading to a runaway greenhouse effect.

[@Plorxium]

Great video, very concise on each exoplanet.

[@suluturnip]

Your videos are great. I appreciate the research you put in and the way you relay information to your viewers. The voice over is great for the most part. However, if I could recommend trying to find an even cadence as there are times where your words become condensed. I can be distracting. Beside that, fantastic videos. Thank you.

[@genghisdingus]

Things a planet / moon needs to support life similar to life found on Earth A good amount of Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon, and Hydrogen To be a rocky planet an atmosphere that doesn't crush things gravity that is not too strong To be orbiting at the right distance to not be too cold or too hot a star doesn't blasts away its atmosphere and/or a magnetic field to block it from removing the atmosphere Optional stuff that helps: To be rotating at a decent pace (earth like life could survive at the edges of the shadows) something to protect from being bombarded with asteroids every couple thousand years (or not have a near by asteroid field) have an ozone to allow for surface life

[@timedeathe]

First microbial life existed on earth for a billion years without oxygen. Hell it was even toxic to life for another billion more. Being rocky isn't a show stopper. As ice giants in habitable zones can still have abiogenesis due to complex chemistry. There's also another type of planet known as hycean worlds or ocean plants and even iceshells. A thick atmosphere can be adapted to just think of the deep sea life on earth but on land. Have gravity become crab starfish worm or elephant. Its not an issue. Even if it's too hot for water or too cold other liquids can work. Including lava. Yes lava is a candidate for alternative solvents so the habitable zone is from a tenth of the distance of mercury to basically Saturn excluding iceshells. Also not a showstopper just a mild inconvenience. Hell If it's thick enough then you don't need that. As something like Venus is going to last billions if not tens or hundreds of billions of years allowing for life and civilization. Day time side would still be habitable slightly outside the habitable zone and slightly outside for night time side. Not an issue become worm cockroach or bacteria then you don't give a fuck about the bombardment. Finally thick enough air gots that covered. You can now see the issues with rare Earth hypothesis.

[@dnocturn84]

Looking at how intelligent & complex life formed on Earth, it has to be mentioned, that our moon was an important factor as well. It propably helps to create our magnetic field, stabilizes our rotation speed and its gravitational pull was a key factor to make complex life in our oceans develop though tidal waves AND it seems to have an influence on continental plate creation. Without our moon, life would not exist on Earth.

[@timedeathe]

@@dnocturn84 it doesn't help with the magnet field plus a moon isn't required. Vents volcanic glass and even radioactive decay are other options and that's scratching the surface.

[@dnocturn84]

@@timedeathe One of the key theories is that the impact of the body that created the moon itself, made life possible in the first place. Without this impact, Earth might have turned out another Venus. This impact removed a lot of CO2 and buried a lot of it in Earths crust. The following cooldown phase could have been the neccessary catalyst, that made Earths whole structure possible. A streight path of celestial formation out of a dust disc, without such catalyst, might not result in a continental planet as we know it, but in a Venus world every time.

[@timedeathe]

@@dnocturn84 we aren't certain about it and astrobiologist are going away from that thinking. Plus collisions seem common as when they were first detectable we found them meaning that isn't a filter. for carbon cycles there not a requirement and you could have other methods of it besides plant techonics

[@dylanisntvibing]

Seems like our existence and the environment that allowed it to come to fruition is much, much more of a exceptionally mythical miracle compared to the rest of the universe than we think..

[@trashaimgamer7822]

It's not. It's just a matter of circumstances.

[@Isthisjoebiden]

​@@trashaimgamer7822Yeah, sure.

[@ozhmium]

i think that finding life on exoplanets is going to seem like a piece of cake compared to finding habitable exoplanets. despite that, we still haven't found extraterrestrial life, which should attest to how unlikely it is we'll ever see a habitable exoplanet.

[@TheNickoslicK]

The title of this vid is a good shout. I mean look at the incredible chain of events it took for Earth to Spawn intelligent life or even just life. Not a double star system, Thea Collision and the moon creation, Saturn halting Jupiter’s procession inwards, extinctions, you could go on. Refreshing take good video mate.

[@sunla]

I can't stand those AI channels. If they are using an AI voice, that immediately tells me they're not above AI scripts, AI imagery, etcetera. And AI hallucinates, that is the Achilles Heel of AI that will never be "fixed" - so, you should never get your facts from AI, making AI-voiced channels one of the worst places you can get your knowledge from. Thank you for putting this out there!

[@sunla]

At the end there, I can think of another thing to add to the list of criteria. Not only should we pay attention to whether it resides in the habitable 'goldilocks' zone, but whether it has a relatively stable, or otherwise eccentric orbit. Eccentric orbit in pretty much any case is bad news.

[@ExtremaduraBall207]

I also really don't like when people say Kepler-452b is habitable. Yes, it is in the habitable zone of its star and the star is similar to the Sun, but the gravity of the planet could be twice that of Earth and the star is older than the sun, meaning it receives more radiation, concluding in a likely runaway greenhouse effect, making it more likely to be a bigger Venus instead.

[@SaladofStones]

It might of been habitable in the past then

[@DerpDerp3001]

I don’t understand your reasoning. I believe there is some logic that I am missing. Habitable zone is pretty much proportional to radiation it receives.

[@ExtremaduraBall207]

@@DerpDerp3001 Kepler-452b is in the inner edge of the habitable zone and the gravity could be twice that of earth, so if it has atmosphere it would be too warm due to the runaway greenhouse effect. With more radiation I meant more radiation than Earth receives from our Sun

[@DerpDerp3001]

@@ExtremaduraBall207 though the runaway greenhouse effect doesn’t really occur until the temperature that more carbonate rocks decompose compared to the reaction of CO2 and oxide salts to create carbonate. We still don’t really know what caused Venus’s former runaway greenhouse effect. Venus is likely very odd in why it happened.

[@tommi59tk]

First that planet should not been confirmed and second the planet has no 2 earth mass .We need 10 years rv data to measure the nass of that planet

[@splatter_proto]

yo this video is dope, i'm gonna like and comment and subscribe

[@deadweight194]

IRS is still gonna find a way to tax us on these planets.

[@Terranallias18]

What the title says: There are no habitable exoplanets What I'm hearing: Free real estate Jokes aside, I actually prefer it if most worlds weren't actually Earthlike. If interstellar travel is possible, it would mean worlds more interesting than "It's just like Earth and was probably filmed ten miles from Los Angeles or Vancouver".

[@kilroy987]

Thumbnail: There are none. Title: No known. Tired of the KZbin algorithm yet? I am.

[@mattalley4330]

Yeah, the misleading and often outright dishonest thumbnails/titles/etc is very old.

[@samuelschonenberger]

I see far more agregious clickbait everyday, including the cheap videos he mentioned in the intro

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

Clickbait predates "the algorithm" and you all know what it meant.

[@stupidmango4036]

Wah wah wah "It's not exactly matched up cus he changed the title" wah wah wah Dude fucking chill out and go back to that shitty marshmallow dick-sucking expression KZbinr if you wanna complain about clickbait.

[@oxfordbambooshootify]

I think it's way more interesting to imagine what kind of life currently inhabit these extreme exoplanets

[@xanderunderwoods3363]

As someone who was president of 2 different astronomy clubs, all I can say is thank you. I just subscribed to your channel because I cannot thank you enough for this video! ❤ Obviously, LV-426 is the best candidate for life. Awwww man, I just bought Real Estate on proxima B, lol 😁 Have a nice day