I’m Convinced We Found Evidence of Life on Mars in the 1970s • Hacker News Board

Re: I’m Convinced We Found Evidence of Life on Mars in the 1970s

#111

Post by LoSboccacc » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 4:58 AM UTC

BEEdwards wrote: post #84

noetic_techy wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This fact often catches people by surprise when I tell them also. The more conspiratorial theory is that JPL prefers not to include life detection equipment because it would mean the end of robotic missions and more of an emphasis to get humans there to do real biology, which is more the domain of Houston Mission Control. Follow the money...

That would be some seriously short term thinking though. If humans go to mars we will be proceeded by the robots.

well it's too late now to go to Mars without having been preceded by robots

Re: I’m Convinced We Found Evidence of Life on Mars in the 1970s

#112

Post by ksaj » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:03 AM UTC

api wrote: post #68

mbfg wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would a position on athiesm have any negative bearing on whether the universe is teaming with life? Atheism would likely posit that finding life all over the place hints that it's a common natural process.

People could also see it as evidence for a creator, e.g. that the universe is obviously fine tuned for life. Theism isn't scientifically testable or falsifiable, so science can't say much of anything about it.

Moving the goalpost doesn't prove much. Going from how special we are vis a vis Adam and Eve, to accepting life is actually everywhere and has been since well before Earth was a thing is itself a huge leap to make.

Re: I’m Convinced We Found Evidence of Life on Mars in the 1970s

#113

Post by ksaj » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:08 AM UTC

jorvi wrote: post #37

tootie wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A botanist was the protagonist of The Martian.

And an antagonist on the TV series 'Mars'!

I'm guessing that means we're hopelessly off topic by now. Kinda like Reddit, but slower and less pathetic.

Re: I’m Convinced We Found Evidence of Life on Mars in the 1970s

#114

Post by BEEdwards » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:12 AM UTC

LoSboccacc wrote: post #111

BEEdwards wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be some seriously short term thinking though. If humans go to mars we will be proceeded by the robots.

well it's too late now to go to Mars without having been preceded by robots

True, but not exactly what I meant.

Constructor bots instead of explorer bots.

Re: I’m Convinced We Found Evidence of Life on Mars in the 1970s

#115

Post by arcticbull » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:14 AM UTC

noetic_techy wrote: post #72

amingilani wrote: post #62

> Inexplicably, over the 43 years since Viking, none of NASA’s subsequent Mars landers has carried a life detection instrument to follow up on these exciting results I'm very surprised by that. Especially since, as the article says, "NASA maintains the search for alien life among its highest priorities". I thought that would obviously translate to sending life-detection instruments to B̶a̶r̶s̶o̶o̶m̶ Mars.

This fact often catches people by surprise when I tell them also. The more conspiratorial theory is that JPL prefers not to include life detection equipment because it would mean the end of robotic missions and more of an emphasis to get humans there to do real biology, which is more the domain of Houston Mission Control. Follow the money...

Cmon folks, let’s be realistic. If someone at NASA had indeed reason to believe life exist(s/ed) on Mars it would 200% have leaked by now. No funding discussion would inhibit someone from leaking this information. It’s the biggest discovery in human history and you think someone’s sitting on it for funding reasons?! Especially since the immediate reaction would be to pour billions into them following up?

A big discovery has a high burden of proof and that’s basically where we’re at. There’s definitely reason not to rule it out but I can’t believe conclusive evidence is being sat on by all of NASA for funding reasons.

Let’s speculate for a sec. Tardigrades can survive space. Things have been hitting us knocking earth stuff into space for billions of years. Some of that stuff probably made it to Mars and back in the day it was pretty liveable. It’s not far fetched. None of that negates the above.

Re: I’m Convinced We Found Evidence of Life on Mars in the 1970s

#116

Post by mellosouls » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:16 AM UTC

Whatever the evidence, a major factor in this man's belief is likely to be the emotional attachment to the idea.

It's his life's crowning achievement as the project leader, and seeing indicators that turned out to be nothing must be a tough thing to come to terms with.

Re: I’m Convinced We Found Evidence of Life on Mars in the 1970s

#117

Post by catalogia » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:19 AM UTC

pstuart wrote: post #107

powerbroker wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is life on Mars -- JPL just doesn't want to tell us. Follow this logic: 1) two planets in habitable zone - both spontaneously cause life; 2) then many or most habitable zone planets have life; 3) Of the trillions of stars in our galaxy, there must be multitudes that have hosted intelligent life; 4) we don't hear SETI signals; 5) that means SETI must have snuffed themselves out with some super-technology; 6) erg…

> they will freak out knowing that we are all doomed, including all our offspring Um, sorry to break it to you but the horse has left the barn in regards to future prospects.

Things may get pretty shitty for them, but if I could wager on such a thing, I'd wager on the species surviving.

Re: I’m Convinced We Found Evidence of Life on Mars in the 1970s

#118

Post by NeedMoreTea » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:44 AM UTC

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #82

lovemenot wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Or we might get a repeat of when the Spanish brought disease to the Inca and Maya. Unlikely. There's been no animal hosts on Mars, in which such a micro-organism might have evolved to threaten humans on Earth. Not to say we shouldn't be careful for other reasons though. The bigger risk is the sudden extinction of entirely different branches of life, by more highly-evolved Earth-originating species.

I think the other person is saying that Earth bacteria could potentially wipe out Martian bacteria if the conditions are right. And that would be tragic.

That was exactly my thought. We discover extraterrestrial life, and inadvertently wipe it out, or just swamp them with an invasive species, without getting a chance to study them before we mucked up their ecosystem. As you say it would be tragic, but also very typically human.

Re: I’m Convinced We Found Evidence of Life on Mars in the 1970s

#119

Post by whynotkeithberg » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:58 AM UTC

psaux wrote: post #7

I often wonder why these are always auxiliary conversations. Ever since I was young, like most kids (I have 4), I also had this deep yearning for knowledge on life external to earth. Wonder why this never has gone mainstream.

You had the desire. What job do you do though? Almost everyone on earth has the desire. But it doesn't translate to everyone contributing money or their life work to doing so.

Re: I’m Convinced We Found Evidence of Life on Mars in the 1970s

#120

Post by Razengan » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 6:04 AM UTC

Excuse the cliche question, but what is Life?

If we make an AI whose thoughts and communication are practically indistinguishable from humans, and it controls a bunch of things that affect the physical world, is it alive?

If there's a disembodied mind somewhere that can think and imagine but never communicate or interact with anything, is it dead?

What about a human in a coma or permanent dreaming state? What about when they later wake up?

Okay nevermind thoughts and communication; What if there's an armada of "dumb" robots, spawned from a single factory, that can't think, only acts according to preset instructions, but still goes on to affect many things for hundreds of years, what should they be classified as? Would they be considered "artificial" life or automatons even if they existed for thousands of years and their creators were no longer around?

I don't think there is any single absolute criteria to classify all possible entities that must be out there or could theoretically exist, but the answer to "What is life?" is probably this:

Whatever other life thinks is life.