From Wikipedia[0]:

"The scientific consensus is that a layer of liquid water exists beneath Europa's surface, and that heat from tidal flexing allows the subsurface ocean to remain liquid."

Liquid water is hardly "freezing near absolute zero".

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_(moon)#Subsurface_ocean

"near absolute zero" is not nearly correct. The temperature of Europa ocean is believed to be between 0 and -4 degrees Celsius.

Just one aircraft carrier less, and NASA can send probes to most of Jupiter‘s moons and still have money left for marketing…

Yeah but it won't be NASA sending them but CNSA.

Which is all the same for humanity.

It might seem like a long shot, but exploring moons like Europa isn't just about finding life... It's about expanding our understanding of life's potential across the universe

Why would salt be a problem? There are single celled organisms known as halophiles that survive extreme salt. Do you know what range of concentrations are reasonable for life, or which salts might be present on Europa?

I wouldn’t put it that way, but I’d rather space exploration money focus on colonization and improving life on earth. For example, asteroid mining has massive potential. What if rare metals suddenly were no longer rare? What could we make? What if we had outposts on other planets? How might that change perspectives and culture on earth? How might R&D to colonize Mars make life on Earth more resilient and sustainable?

Searching for life elsewhere seems so empty and unsatisfying. Almost like a religious quest for enlightenment or something. If we found a fossil snail on another planet, then what?

> asteroid mining has massive potential

Europa Clipper "is the largest spacecraft NASA has ever developed for a planetary mission" [1]. If you want to mine asteroids, learning to send big spacecraft to the far end of the asteroid belt seems like a no brainer.

> If we found a fossil snail on another planet, then what?

Depends on what we find. Think about the density of medical knowledge we extract from the Amazon basin every year. New biochemistries could be game changing in ways we can't predict. (We have enough trouble predicting how known organic chemistries behave. It is overwhelmingly likely, if alien biochemistries exist, that they show us new science.)

If it's similar to terrestrial biochemistry, on the other hand, that suggests our bodies might do better extraterrestrially than we've assumed. That, in turn, could catalyse the investment and support needed to mobilise a multi-generational effort towards colonising space. (Their morphology could also give us hints on how to survive in that environment. Biomimicry on a whole new level.)

[1] https://europa.nasa.gov/mission/about/

> Searching for life elsewhere seems so empty and unsatisfying.

To me, finding any extra terrestrial life, or even just a fossil of past life, would be the most exciting find in the history.

It would answer humanity's longest open philosophical question. The religious and social consequences would likely change the course of human history.

Imagine humans no longer fighting each other, but rather working together towards a goal. I can think of nothing that would catalyze such a change more than the discovery of extra terrestrial life. Even climate change isn't doing it.

There could be immediate peace on Earth between all mankind once there is extra-terrestrial life to hate or fear instead.

We are perfectly capable of hating them and ourselves at the same time.

How do you think the discovery of extraterrestrial life would do that? I think most people would say “that’s neat” and continue living their life unchanged.

Yes, I guess new ideas have never contributed to any change in social dynamics ever. That's the course of history you know: the social psychology and accepted wisdom is exactly as it is now, unchanged from Roman times because no new thinking based on discovery or philosophy ever led to a shift in the structure and beliefs of society.

Yeah... I would go that far. Average human's life wouldn't change in short period. But on a larger scale of time, it could propel us to explore the universe.

We are brought into existence from dust, and marvel at the creation we find ourselves in. It looks like we're the only living things in this vast cosmos, how strange.

But sure, we could just focus all our attention on increasing our industrial capacity and expansion. Although that also seems so empty and unsatisfying to me.

> If we found a fossil snail on another planet, then what?

There'd be a massive jump in the likelihood of finding a living snail.

> There'd be a massive jump in the likelihood of finding a living snail.

And there would be an ever bigger jump in the likelihood of some billionaire being the first to eat extraterrestrial escargot.

If you want to swallow something inedible, plenty is available here. Or elsewhere; you can eat a moon rock if you really want to.

nasa's budget is miniscule compared to the funds allocated to the military

They complete each other, first step is to explore other planets, then send the military to protect it and take the resources there before other nations.

> "We’re not a life search mission. We’re a habitability mission,” says Robert Pappalardo, Clipper’s project scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), which manages the mission. But even Pappalardo, a cautious scientist who is constitutionally averse to hyperbole, says finding a hint of life is “not out of the question.”

What more important can we human beings do than exploring space and improve our tech?

> What more important can we human beings do than exploring space and improve our tech?

This is a value statement. Every answer from heroin to petting my cat is technically a valid answer.

OP's question is written obnoxiously. But it raises a valid point: why should we do these things, and why should it matter to people who don't find it inherently valuable?

"What an ignorant fool! There could totally be life there!"