Life on Mars Today!

February 16, 2005

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...fe_050216.html

In addition to apparent widespread fossils, spherules
and Rio Tinto here on Earth, we also have this :

http://www.geo.utexas.edu/chemhydro/...rohabitats.htm

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

"Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message
...
February 16, 2005

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...fe_050216.html

In addition to apparent widespread fossils, spherules
and Rio Tinto here on Earth, we also have this :

http://www.geo.utexas.edu/chemhydro/...rohabitats.htm

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

As the first article points out, what's been found is not a direct
indication that there is life on Mars. As such, the name you picked for the
subject of this thread is misleading at best.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

February 17, 2005

Jeff Findley wrote:

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...fe_050216.html

In addition to apparent widespread fossils, spherules
and Rio Tinto here on Earth, we also have this :

http://www.geo.utexas.edu/chemhydro/...rohabitats.htm

As the first article points out, what's been found is not a direct
indication that there is life on Mars. As such, the name you picked
for the
subject of this thread is misleading at best.

Do I indirectly detect another obsolete
perspective on reality decaying?

It's over, get used to it.

Now, what about those obvious the fossil mats
in the latest Spirit imagery?

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

Dear lifeform1:

wrote in message
oups.com...
February 17, 2005

Jeff Findley wrote:
....
As the first article points out, what's been found is not a direct
indication that there is life on Mars. As such, the name you picked
for the
subject of this thread is misleading at best.
....
Now, what about those obvious the fossil mats
in the latest Spirit imagery?

You don't "get it".
Title: "Life ... today"
Body: "... fossil ..."

Now do you get it?

Fossil = remains of life, not life itself. Not evidence of life *now*,
*today*. (If they are indeed fossils.)

David A. Smith

wrote:
: February 17, 2005

: Jeff Findley wrote:

: http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...fe_050216.html
:
: In addition to apparent widespread fossils, spherules
: and Rio Tinto here on Earth, we also have this :
:
: http://www.geo.utexas.edu/chemhydro/...rohabitats.htm

: As the first article points out, what's been found is not a direct
: indication that there is life on Mars. As such, the name you picked
: for the
: subject of this thread is misleading at best.

: Do I indirectly detect another obsolete
: perspective on reality decaying?

: It's over, get used to it.

: Now, what about those obvious the fossil mats
: in the latest Spirit imagery?

To date not a single Martian probe has been in a cave, much less a wet
one. Perhaps, along with a sample return mission we can send a probe into
a cave? Will that at least placate you until we can get some real facts?

I like the one that is a balloon and a tether that sort of gets blown
around and gets its findings serendipitously when it lands.

Eric

: Thomas Lee Elifritz
: http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...
To date not a single Martian probe has been in a cave, much less a wet
one. Perhaps, along with a sample return mission we can send a probe into
a cave? Will that at least placate you until we can get some real facts?

I like the one that is a balloon and a tether that sort of gets blown
around and gets its findings serendipitously when it lands.

Now you're talking about possible FUTURE Mars missions. Again, the title is
"Life on Mars Today!". The title is still misleading. "Life on Mars Today"
is only a possibility, not a scientifically proven fact.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

February 17, 2005

Your use of the phrase 'scientifically proven fact'
quite sufficiently demonstrates your lack of scientific
credibility. Science is about evidence, and the evidence
for Mars is quite clear now, only losers cling to
obsolete beliefs. Let me guess, you aren't actually
looking at MGS or MER images either, are you?

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

February 17, 2005

Well gosh, if there's life today,
then fossils are a no brainer.

That's what I've been saying all along,
blueberries are fossil evidence of life.
Spirit is showing what we believe to be
fossil evidence of microbial mats.

NASA is playing catch up, big time.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

February 17, 2005

I thought I already explained to you that science
is about evidence, facts are things you use in law.

America's educational system really has gone to hell.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

Jeff Findley ) wrote:

: "Eric Chomko" wrote in message
: ...
: To date not a single Martian probe has been in a cave, much less a wet
: one. Perhaps, along with a sample return mission we can send a probe into
: a cave? Will that at least placate you until we can get some real facts?
:
: I like the one that is a balloon and a tether that sort of gets blown
: around and gets its findings serendipitously when it lands.

: Now you're talking about possible FUTURE Mars missions. Again, the title is
: "Life on Mars Today!". The title is still misleading. "Life on Mars Today"
: is only a possibility, not a scientifically proven fact.

I agree! You're preaching to the choir. And I was speaking about checking
in caves to test the theory of the scientists from Ames. And unless
the two MERs on Mars are able to last for another year, it will have
to be a future mission. Finding extraterrestial life, be it a microbe, is
enough to get your name in the history books for all-time.
(Crick/Watson w/DNA and not Pauling, thouh he's known for other stuff).
These Ames scientists want glory as much as anything else. Thomas wants to
be able to claim that he beat even them, if it all turns out to be true.
Thomas may believe it even if it turns out all false as well.

Eric

: Jeff
: --
: Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.