Scientists Believe that they’ve Finally Found Alien Life on Ceres at last

Upon closer inspection, the planet looks like a giant golf ball with dimples all around its surface, possibly caused by asteroids that came crashing into the dwarf planet. These asteroids may have carried with them microbial beings which could be thriving in the planet.

NASA’s Dawn spacecraft which was launched in 2007 to study the protoplanets Vesta and dwarf planet Ceres has taken photos of the dwarf planet’s bright spots, areas which have left scientists both awed and perplexed.

Dawn captured the said photos on June 6, Saturday. On the snapshots are two main large bright spots which are surrounded by numerous white dots that are smaller in size, but bright just the same. These recent images were shot at a close distance of 2,700 miles above Ceres.

What confounds the NASA team is how these odd bright spots were formed on Ceres’ surface. Principal investigator Chris Russell from the University of California, Los Angeles opines that it is these bright spots that make Ceres distinct in the entire solar system.  Russell admits that his team is still trying to crack the code as to the source of these lights. Scientists, on the other hand, hypothesize that these formations could have been formed by ice or salt reflecting light off the surface.

Recently, NASA surveyed the public, asking for their opinion on the origin of those bright spots on Ceres.  In the study, participants were presented with the following options: volcanoes, geysers, rocks, ice or salt or other materials.

As of press time, 40 percent of the respondents from the survey answered that the bright spots on Ceres are made from other materials, while a good number (three out of ten) opted for ice. Only six percent of the respondents chose rocks.

Dawn will continue probing Ceres until June. Thereafter, it will begin its journey into the lower orbit of Ceres, approximately 900 miles over the surface.  The journey is expected to be completed in early August 2015.


Rephrased from:



  1. says

    by Babu G. Ranganathan
    (B.A. Bible/Biology)
    SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE CANNOT BE ETERNAL because it could not have sustained itself eternally due to the law of entropy (increasing and irreversible net energy decay, even in an open system). Even a hypothetical oscillating universe could not continue to oscillate eternally! Einstein showed that space, matter, and time all are physical and all had a beginning. Space even produces particles because it’s actually something, not nothing. Even time had a beginning! Time is not eternal.

    The law of entropy doesn’t allow the universe to be eternal. If the universe were eternal, everything, including time (which modern science has shown is as physical as mass and space), would have become totally entropied by now and the entire universe would have ended in a uniform heat death a long, long time ago. The fact that this hasn’t happened already is powerful evidence for a beginning to the universe.

    Popular atheistic scientist Stephen Hawking admits that the universe had a beginning and came from nothing but he believes that nothing became something by a natural process yet to be discovered. That’s not rational thinking at all, and it also would be making the effect greater than its cause to say that nothing created something. The beginning had to be of supernatural origin because natural laws and processes do not have the ability to bring something into existence from nothing. What about the Higgs boson (the so-called “God Particle”)? The Higgs boson does not create mass from nothing, but rather it converts energy into mass. Einstein showed that all matter is some form of energy.

    The supernatural origin of the universe cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence and power for the origin and order of the universe. Where did God come from? Obviously, unlike the universe, God’s nature doesn’t require a beginning.

    EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn’t mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life or the universe works doesn’t mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws may explain how the order in the universe works and operates, but mere undirected natural laws cannot explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell then the genetic code and biological machinery exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how could life or the cell have naturally originated when no directing code and mechanisms existed in nature? Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.

    Even the father of Chaos theory admitted that the “mechanisms” existing in the non-living world allow for only very rudimentary levels of order to arise spontaneously (by chance), but not the kind or level of order we find in the structures of DNA, RNA, and proteins. Yes, individual amino acids have been shown to come into existence by chance but not protein molecules which require that the various amino acids be in a precise sequence just like the letters found in a sentence.

    The disorder in the universe can be explained because of chance and random processes, but the order can be explained only because of intelligence and design.

    WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No human observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports.

    Some things don’t need experiment or scientific proof. In law there is a dictum called prima facie evidence. It means “evidence that speaks for itself.”

    An example of a true prima facie would be if you discovered an elaborate sand castle on the beach. You don’t have to experiment to know that it came by design and not by the chance forces of wind and water.

    If you discovered a romantic letter or message written in the sand, you don’t have to experiment to know that it was by design and not because a stick randomly carried by wind put it there. You naturally assume that an intelligent and rational being was responsible.

    Visit the author’s popular Internet article, BIG HOLES IN BIG BANG THEORY

    Read the Internet article, ‘SMOKING GUN’ PROOF OF BIG BANG ALREADY IN DOUBT by creationist and scientist Dr. Jake Hebert.

    I encourage all to read my popular Internet articles: NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION and HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

    Visit my newest Internet site: THE SCIENCE SUPPORTING CREATION

    Babu G. Ranganathan*
    (B.A. Bible/Biology)


    *I have given successful lectures (with question and answer period afterwards) defending creation before evolutionist science faculty and students at various colleges and universities. I’ve been privileged to be recognized in the 24th edition of Marquis “Who’s Who in The East” for my writings on religion and science.

    • Gary S says

      Still spouting that simple-minded nonsense, Babu?
      What makes you think that we (or YOU) can understand or use our puny logic on the vastly different conditions and physics which involve these extreme behaviors? Try thinking in terms of a huge space of quantum indeterminacy which has random vacuum fluctuations. Who can say that this condition did not give rise to our universe? But another interesting question is why can’t you stick to the subject of this article?
      Hmmm? ;^P

  2. Gary S says

    No, scientists DO NOT say what your title claims!
    In fact, the link to your “article” says just the opposite – “no-alien…”
    AND NOTHING in the text indicates anything about aliens.
    What’s the matter with you???
    Oh, I see … you’re a “Health Writer.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *