More evidence is consistent with possible ancient life on Mars (2025)
1–10 of 139 posts
Re: More evidence is consistent with possible ancient life on Mars (2025)
#2The article is good but the title is a bit too slippery a statement in my opinion. The article is saying more evidence is consistent with possible ancient life on Mars. In astrobiology the massive problem is that geology can imitate biology. The presences of minerals formed by microbes on Earth does not prove microbes are involved in their production on Mars, it is a big jump to make.
Re: More evidence is consistent with possible ancient life on Mars (2025)
#3Mineral that can be only formed by life, or under special conditions when water flows over rock, has been found on Mars, where water had been known to flow over rock.
NASA doesn't want to find life on Mars. They want to find evidence, so that the next probe can be more complex and more expensive than the previous one.
NASA will never send wet microscope to Mars, you know, the kind you used in school to show bacteria in dirty water. As that would instantly prove life on Mars and make ever more expensive probes hard to justify.
Re: More evidence is consistent with possible ancient life on Mars (2025)
#4Mineral that can be only formed by life, or under special conditions when water flows over rock, has been found on Mars, where water had been known to flow over rock. NASA doesn't want to find life on Mars. They want to find evidence, so that the next probe can be more complex and more expensive than the previous one. NASA will never send wet microscope to Mars, you know, the kind you used in school to show bacteria…
Sending a microscope is easier said than done. Many natural structures can look like bacteria, and vice versa. If there's more complex single celled life then we might see stuff swimming around but that's considered unlikely close to the surface where there's a decent amount of solar and cosmic radiation. If complex life does exist it's probably deep underground or in caves and lava tubes where we can't reach it yet.
The other reason is planetary protection. The best places to send a microscope are low lying areas where there may be brines near the surface. Those specific areas have been designated high on the list of protection sites. Earth microbes are really resilient, so even with intense sterilization procedures we can't be 100% sure. We don't want to contaminate the most valuable scientific find ever, and so we're approaching it carefully.
But I think the first reason I gave is the most significant one. It's technically pretty hard and not definitive. The surface of Mars is probably mostly sterile even if there is life. If it survives, it's probably underground.
I also disagree that NASA would not want to find life. If anything, finding life would make their budget explode. They could suddenly make a strong case for a Europa submersible, a submarine to visit Titan's methane lakes, huge space-based SETI radio telescope arrays, huge space telescopes to try to find more exoplanets and characterize their atmospheres, all kinds of things, since we'd know for a fact there's life out there.
If life emerged in two places in one solar system, we'd know that the universe is teeming with it. Maybe not complex intelligent life -- there's still reasons to think Earth may be kind of special for that. But life, certainly.
Re: More evidence is consistent with possible ancient life on Mars (2025)
#5Mineral that can be only formed by life, or under special conditions when water flows over rock, has been found on Mars, where water had been known to flow over rock. NASA doesn't want to find life on Mars. They want to find evidence, so that the next probe can be more complex and more expensive than the previous one. NASA will never send wet microscope to Mars, you know, the kind you used in school to show bacteria…
What mineral can only be formed by life?
Re: More evidence is consistent with possible ancient life on Mars (2025)
#6Mineral that can be only formed by life, or under special conditions when water flows over rock, has been found on Mars, where water had been known to flow over rock. NASA doesn't want to find life on Mars. They want to find evidence, so that the next probe can be more complex and more expensive than the previous one. NASA will never send wet microscope to Mars, you know, the kind you used in school to show bacteria…
If they found actual life on Mars the NASA budget would multiply many times, so I don't understand your thinking.
Re: More evidence is consistent with possible ancient life on Mars (2025)
#7Mineral that can be only formed by life, or under special conditions when water flows over rock, has been found on Mars, where water had been known to flow over rock. NASA doesn't want to find life on Mars. They want to find evidence, so that the next probe can be more complex and more expensive than the previous one. NASA will never send wet microscope to Mars, you know, the kind you used in school to show bacteria…
This is an odd comment. Any scientist or scientific organisation would love to be the first to discover life on another planet. It would catapult that organisation and individuals involved to legendary status with their discoveries being counted amongst the greatest of humankind. It would be an epoch defining moment. Funding for their work and personal riches would pour in. There would be movies made about it. Their names would be remembered thousands of years into the future.
To imply there would be a conspiracy to cover up such discoveries because you think the opposite would happen is such an odd way to think about things.
Re: More evidence is consistent with possible ancient life on Mars (2025)
#8Mineral that can be only formed by life, or under special conditions when water flows over rock, has been found on Mars, where water had been known to flow over rock. NASA doesn't want to find life on Mars. They want to find evidence, so that the next probe can be more complex and more expensive than the previous one. NASA will never send wet microscope to Mars, you know, the kind you used in school to show bacteria…
> NASA doesn’t want
Citation needed
> NASA will never
Citation needed
Re: More evidence is consistent with possible ancient life on Mars (2025)
#9Mineral that can be only formed by life, or under special conditions when water flows over rock, has been found on Mars, where water had been known to flow over rock. NASA doesn't want to find life on Mars. They want to find evidence, so that the next probe can be more complex and more expensive than the previous one. NASA will never send wet microscope to Mars, you know, the kind you used in school to show bacteria…
If they found actual life on Mars the NASA budget would multiply many times, so I don't understand your thinking.
I think the opposite - unless the discovery of life was preceeded or coincidental with the discovery of some other hyper interesting thing (for example, if Martian life has some sort of utility for medicine, maybe) then I think that would be that for Mars exploration missions. Of course there would be many announcements and excited political agreements around "continuing to explore the new frontier" but I think that no more money would appear.
I suspect that NASA knows this full well, as do Mars scientists, and I suspect that they are being very careful to make sure that definitive proof does not appear until they understand all sorts of other stuff about the planet.
Re: More evidence is consistent with possible ancient life on Mars (2025)
#10Mineral that can be only formed by life, or under special conditions when water flows over rock, has been found on Mars, where water had been known to flow over rock. NASA doesn't want to find life on Mars. They want to find evidence, so that the next probe can be more complex and more expensive than the previous one. NASA will never send wet microscope to Mars, you know, the kind you used in school to show bacteria…
I’m curious why you seem to believe that all exploration of Mars would cease as soon as life is discovered there? It would be one of the biggest scientific discoveries of all time and would open up a huge number of possible future missions, for the next few centuries at least. It would also make for good justification for missions to other worlds that could harbor life.