• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Running Water on Mars? Accuracy in Reporting

Magic 9-Ball

Hey, that's a good name, for a band!
Magic 9-Ball
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
1,620
So the Washington Post blares the latest headline: "Mars Photos Appear to Show Dry Hot Springs", the starts off with a bang in the first paragraph:

"The long and frustrating search for signs of past or present life on Mars took a hopeful turn this month when scientists said they had spotted what they believe are remains of two hot springs -- the kind of warm, protected environments where many scientists think primitive life can thrive."

So they think they have where water previously was on Mars, ergo more theory that they is/may have been life on Mars. The article says: "The whole thing just shouted water and a hot spring," said Allen, who has spent time at Yellowstone studying the hot springs there. "It's so close to what we see on Earth."

Just because it's similar, can you really make the assumption that it's just like the Earth, or is water? Then you have to get well into the article to see: "The discovery of a hot springs would be a very significant one, but making that determination is very difficult based only on data from orbit," he said. "It's very interesting to the Mars community, but it will be open to interpretation."

No kidding. Just like the dried up river beds they found recently. Oh wait! They weren't. Nevermind. :rolleyes:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/27/AR2008042701524.html?g=1
 
Magic 9-Ball said:
Just because it's similar, can you really make the assumption that it's just like the Earth, or is water? Then you have to get well into the article to see: "The discovery of a hot springs would be a very significant one, but making that determination is very difficult based only on data from orbit," he said. "It's very interesting to the Mars community, but it will be open to interpretation."

No kidding. Just like the dried up river beds they found recently. Oh wait! They weren't. Nevermind. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You might do well to mark your own quoted words. There are numerous clues as to the speculative nature of the discovery in the article that you seem, in your rush to scathingly, and self-admittedly sarcastically, dismiss. Here, let me help you with them:

Magic 9-Ball said:
So the Washington Post blares the latest headline: "Mars Photos Appear to Show Dry Hot Springs", the starts off with a bang in the first paragraph:

"The long and frustrating search for signs of past or present life on Mars took a hopeful turn this month when scientists said they had spotted what they believe are remains of two hot springs -- the kind of warm, protected environments where many scientists think primitive life can thrive."
Click to expand...
 
Scathing maybe not. Sarcastically, definitely.

And, South, your points are noted, however I believe that the wording in the title "Appear to Show" is more definitive to people reading it than the other parts, at least in my neck of the woods. But we can agree to disagree on that meaning.

But I was more talking, not about the speculative wording, but the assumptions of, say, Mr. Allen who says "The whole thing just shouted water and a hot spring," said Allen, who has spent time at Yellowstone studying the hot springs there. "It's so close to what we see on Earth."

As we have seen (with the afore-mentioned river beds), to assume 'looks the same, must be like Earth and likely water' may not be looking at things with a critical eye. They "think they likely found a former Martian hot spring, they know they lack important confirmatory evidence."

So, to me, 'lacking important evidence' in this case is the problem. "They likely found" is also more of a positive spin than not.

They'll announce and report on this, but if they can't get the important evidence, will they ever run a follow up? Perhaps, but unlikely. But this is no different to any reporting done on TV or in any paper.
 
Remember, also, that the environment on Mars is not that far removed from Earth. The main differences are in air pressure, oxygen content, lack of water and temperature. No alien atmospheric gases as on the Jovian moons, no huge pressures and temperatures as on Venus. If life-as-we-know-it is going to happen, then Mars is the best bet we've got for it within the solar system, and water is one big plus in that direction.

Ever since before Viking, there have been photos which have hinted that water was once there, and may be locked up as a mineral under the surface, starting with Valles Marinaris. Every vehicle has discovered more evidence, yet the final proof has never quite made it to the surface.

Finally, give the guy a break - he has to winkle out grant money just like everyone else, and good, enthusiastic PR never hurts there. He's not talking to planetologists or even geologists. You expected maybe he would put the reporters to sleep with comparisons to the stream bed table he used in college?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom