NASA scientists: There is life on Mars

jay gw

Unregistered
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
1,821
WASHINGTON -- A pair of NASA scientists told a group of space officials at a private meeting here Sunday that they have found strong evidence that life may exist today on Mars, hidden away in caves and sustained by pockets of water.

The scientists, Carol Stoker and Larry Lemke of NASA’s Ames Research Center in Silicon Valley, told the group that they have submitted their findings to the journal Nature for publication in May, and their paper currently is being peer reviewed.

What Stoker and Lemke have found, according to several attendees of the private meeting, is not direct proof of life on Mars, but methane signatures and other signs of possible biological activity remarkably similar to those recently discovered in caves here on Earth.

Stoker and other researchers have long theorized that the Martian subsurface could harbor biological organisms that have developed unusual strategies for existing in extreme environments. That suspicion led Stoker and a team of U.S. and Spanish researchers in 2003 to southwestern Spain to search for subsurface life near the Rio Tinto river—so-called because of its reddish tint—the product of of iron being dissolved in its highly acidic water.

Stoker told SPACE.com in 2003, weeks before leading the expedition to southwestern Spain, that by studying the very acidic Rio Tinto, she and other scientists hoped to characterize the potential for a “chemical bioreactor” in the subsurface – an underground microbial ecosystem of sorts that might well control the chemistry of the surface environment.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mars_life_050216.html

They seem to be trying to make comparisons between life in caves on Earth and then on Mars. But aren't there a tremendous number of differences they're not accounting for?
 
jay gw said:
They seem to be trying to make comparisons between life in caves on Earth and then on Mars. But aren't there a tremendous number of differences they're not accounting for?

Sure, but the fact is that methane signatures are being detected on Mars. The question is what is producing them.

One answer would be biological activity.

More research needs to be done to determine the correct answer.
 
Sure, but the fact is that methane signatures are being detected on Mars. The question is what is producing them.

One answer would be biological activity.

What else produces methane signatures?
 
Re: Re: NASA scientists: There is life on Mars

username said:
Sure, but the fact is that methane signatures are being detected on Mars. The question is what is producing them.

One answer would be biological activity.

More research needs to be done to determine the correct answer.

All the article said was evidence has been found, not life itself (the title of this thread was misleading). The article goes on and talks about what would be needed to pursue this sort of investigation (drill equipped lander).
 
jay gw said:
They seem to be trying to make comparisons between life in caves on Earth and then on Mars. But aren't there a tremendous number of differences they're not accounting for?

I don't know the answer but your post raises another question: Why does the title of this post read "There is life on Mars" when nothing in the posted article suggests that?

Were you just looking for attention?
 
Farts?


Methane is a fairly common organic chemical, not a proof of life by any means. There's oceans of it on Titan.


"Signatures"? You got me. What the hell's a methane signature anyway? Is there any way they can be mistaken?
 
Re: Re: NASA scientists: There is life on Mars

Rob Lister said:
I don't know the answer but your post raises another question: Why does the title of this post read "There is life on Mars" when nothing in the posted article suggests that?


Correct. In news headlines, the colon can be read as the word "say".


So your headline is "NASA scientists say there is life on Mars."

I think you have misquoted them.
 
Methane signatures on Mars could mean only one thing:

Farting aliens.

Do we really want to meet them? I mean, how bad is it?
 
Hutch said:
Suggest we submit this to the BA rule: If it deals with the cosmos, ask the Bad Astronomer.

Then check his answers.

Hey, he's usually right (at a frightening rate), but that doesn't mean we shouldn't check his answers... ;)
 
So far, people have been making jokes about this, but no one has said whether the evidence Nasa says it's found can be accounted for by something other than living matter.

Does anyone know if they've really found the evidence, or are they speculating based on the data from probes?
 
jay gw said:
So far, people have been making jokes about this, but no one has said whether the evidence Nasa says it's found can be accounted for by something other than living matter.

Does anyone know if they've really found the evidence, or are they speculating based on the data from probes?
Here is an article from November 2004 that discusses the methane found in Mars' atmosphere and includes a (very) brief mention of the non-biological ways that it could be formed.
 
jay gw said:
So far, people have been making jokes about this, but no one has said whether the evidence Nasa says it's found can be accounted for by something other than living matter.

This is no joke!
angryred7.jpg

This critter looks like a rather nasty source of methane. See it in action here.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Methane signatures on Mars could mean only one thing:

Farting aliens.

Do we really want to meet them? I mean, how bad is it?
It is possible that they eat trash and piss gasoline, Imagine the market for them as domestic pets.
 
The Fool said:
It is possible that they eat trash and piss gasoline, Imagine the market for them as domestic pets.

Good point Fool, but I think the chances of anything coming from mars are a million to one.....
 
From the Sky and Telescope article:

Scientists cannot state with certainty the source of the methane. Other possible sources besides microorganisms include volcanic or geothermal activity, or a recent comet impact.

But Krasnopolsky points out that the THEMIS instrument on NASA's Mars Odyssey orbiter has found no evidence for volcanic or geothermal hot spots, despite the fact that the instrument was specifically designed to find them.

(But I thought they're talking about UNDERGROUND phenomena. How would a probe in space detect underground hot spots?)

Krasnopolsky also says that there is only a 2 percent chance that a comet impact could have occurred recently enough to account for the observed methane.

(How did he arrive at that figure?)

Krasnopolsky's calculations suggest that Martian organisms would be producing only 270 tons of methane per year, which is 100 million times less than the amount produced by terrestrial organisms. This yields a Martian biomass of at least 20 tons, but possibly higher. "Mars is generally sterile except for small oases," says Krasnopolsky.

___

This site

http://globalwarming.enviroweb.org/ishappening/sources/sources_ch4_facts1.html

says this

Methane also escapes from natural gas deposits.

Does the probe have the ability to see underground natural gas deposits?
 
jay gw said:
What else produces methane signatures?

They just put in a heated perfumerizer in the bathroom at work to combat methane signatures.


Heheh,

ah,

hehe, this is just too easy. Thanks for the lobbed softball.


Silicon said:

Correct. In news headlines, the colon can be read as the word "say".

In NASA headlines, the colon also produces methane signatures.

Stop it! You guys are killing me!
 

Back
Top Bottom