http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1033640.htm

Above is more evidence that Mars did in fact once harbour
microscopic life. This raises serious questions about the
science payload on the MER rovers. These tell tale
signs have now been found in a large proportion of
Martian rocks so I think the naysayers are losing
credibility.

One cannot help feeling that NASA did not put a biology
payload on the Rovers so that they could get further
funding for such missions down the road.

The whole basis of exploring Mars is to find if life
did once exist there. Lets cut all the bull about
interesting geology and photos; no-one really
gives a toss. We pay attention to this information
because we think that it could give indications as to
the biological viability on Mars.

This whole saga has got me thinking about the Viking
findings. Many of the scientists on that project still to
this day claim they found biology. So we have to
wonder why NASA might be motivated to put a
pessimistic light on their Viking findings.

The answer is all about money and future funding.
Is this honest science?