Hi Greg,

You are right, I should be more humble myself, but we should all be much
much humble in front the universe and in front of life.
We should all remember that humans had long beleived that the earth was the
center of the universe, today we assume that life needs water and THIS might
be a serious lake of humility.

On mars life may have perfectly adapted across millions of years ! Why
should life disappear !
Life may be much stronger that our mortal human nature could let us imagine.

There is (the same ?) blue Spherules at spirit site too !
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...EFF0500P2399R1
M1.JPG

Best regards,
Eric Pouhier
We should keep in mind that Einstein had put imagination ahead of knowledge.

"Greg Crinklaw" a écrit dans le message news:
...
Eric Pouhier wrote:
1. The just emerging ones are ALL white.
2. ALL the small debris are blue.

The "minerals" ) spherules are turning from white to blue when they
fade, Oooops could minerals grow and die ?

I disagree with your analysis. Some of the rocks appear to have a
coating of fine, brighter particles. Perhaps from the weathering of the
outcrop. Those buried in the soil don't seem to have this coating. I
could be wrong, but there are plenty of other explanations that involve
various stages of weathering.

I know that most of you just can't admit, or even envisage, that these
spherules are life. Let's try to forget what we think we know, we are
probably at the stone age of sciences, let's be humble !

How about not making such extreme assumptions about people you don't
know and their motives? Perhaps that would be more humble of you.
There are other very legitimate reasons to think these are just rocks,
although you seem to have done your best to cast aspersions against
anyone who might dare suggest it.

Most of us were prepared to the discovery of life traces, but why should
life had disappeared ? What do we know about life as a phenomenon ?
Nearly nothing, let's be humble ! Life may have perfectly adapted across
millions of years !

Why not ? )

Why assume the least likely explanation?

My definition of being "humble" would be to assume the most likely
explanations rather than the most interesting. It is highly unlikely
these are anything other than rocks. How humble is it to think you know
better than the trained geologists looking at these things? If they
aren't rocks, they'll figure that out--scientifically, without jumping
to unwarranted conclusions.

We should keep in mind that Einstein had put imagination ahead of
knowledge.

Imagination is fine when trying to solve a problem that cannot be solved
via tried, traditional means. But it has no place when the problem can
explained easily and simply in terms of things we already know. That
is, if you are more interested in the truth than in entertaining
yourself...


--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)

SkyTools Software for the Observer:
http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html

Skyhound Observing Pages:
http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html

To reply remove spleen