chapotraphouse

The paper says it has a 3 sigma chance of life given the compounds assuming their methodology is good, scientific proof requires 5 sigma. Its a difference between 99.7% accuracy and near 100% accuracy, kind of important though when we're talking about shit we have no clue about and can't observe by conventional means.

It should be noted that the majority of the citations on the paper are the same guy citing himself. I'd take it with a grain of salt until other people can corroborate it. Most other papers say the planet is a hot, small mini-Neptune gas planet with rings probably, maybe a warm enough atmosphere for life. The compounds measured are basically related to farts and decaying plant matter in a hot environment, should smell like mexican food a bit. In a comparison, the planet should have about 20-1000x more plant-fart compounds than we do, some people argue this is evidence of early algal/bacterial growth like on earth's oceans.

If the other papers are right about the pressure of the atmosphere the water on the planet would behave quite differently than here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercritical_fluid