A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

L.I.F.E.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 3rd 17, 10:50 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,433
Default L.I.F.E.

In article ,
says...

NASA acknowledges that organic matter exists in the surface of mars?

[just put one sentence. No arguments of course]


Cite? A description of this 'organic matter'?


This one was easy to find:

Dec. 16, 2014
NASA Goddard Instrument Makes First Detection of
Organic Matter on Mars
https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard...organic-matter

From above:

The team responsible for the Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM)
instrument suite on NASA's Curiosity rover has made the first
definitive detection of organic molecules at Mars. Organic
molecules are the building blocks of all known forms of
terrestrial life, and consist of a wide variety of molecules
made primarily of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen atoms.

No doubt this is what got Jacob all worked up. But, that was
*immediately* followed in the same paragraph, with:

However, organic molecules can also be made by chemical
reactions that don't involve life, and there is not enough
evidence to tell if the matter found by the team came from
ancient Martian life or from a non-biological process.
Examples of non-biological sources include chemical
reactions in water at ancient Martian hot springs or
delivery of organic material to Mars by interplanetary
dust or fragments of asteroids and comets.

So nothing definitive, just like every other "indication" of life on
Mars (present or just past).

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
Ads
  #22  
Old May 3rd 17, 06:09 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,422
Default L.I.F.E.

Jeff Findley wrote:

In article ,
says...

NASA acknowledges that organic matter exists in the surface of mars?

[just put one sentence. No arguments of course]


Cite? A description of this 'organic matter'?


This one was easy to find:

Dec. 16, 2014
NASA Goddard Instrument Makes First Detection of
Organic Matter on Mars
https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard...organic-matter

From above:

The team responsible for the Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM)
instrument suite on NASA's Curiosity rover has made the first
definitive detection of organic molecules at Mars. Organic
molecules are the building blocks of all known forms of
terrestrial life, and consist of a wide variety of molecules
made primarily of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen atoms.

No doubt this is what got Jacob all worked up. But, that was
*immediately* followed in the same paragraph, with:

However, organic molecules can also be made by chemical
reactions that don't involve life, and there is not enough
evidence to tell if the matter found by the team came from
ancient Martian life or from a non-biological process.
Examples of non-biological sources include chemical
reactions in water at ancient Martian hot springs or
delivery of organic material to Mars by interplanetary
dust or fragments of asteroids and comets.

So nothing definitive, just like every other "indication" of life on
Mars (present or just past).


Yeah, I found that a while back. It's why I asked him to describe
said 'organic material', which his exposition implies is tree bark or
something.


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
  #23  
Old May 3rd 17, 09:46 PM posted to sci.space.policy
jacob navia
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 319
Default L.I.F.E.

Le 03/05/2017 à 19:09, Fred J. McCall a écrit :
So nothing definitive, just like every other "indication" of life on
Mars (present or just past).


Yes. Nothing definitive. A definitive measurement would have been the
concentration of carbon compounds corresponding to fossils in those
formations.

The rover did not turn back to make that measurement. Actually, it is
difficult to understand how the exploration is being done, and I argued
here some months ago that the rovers should have turned around.

But they didn't. So, there is nothing definitive, just speculations of
people that wait and wait till NASA starts accepting reality.

There are so many "hints" that all together they show a consistent
picture. Life in mars exists underground, well protected from radiation
and the harsh conditions of the surface.

Human exploration is done with the fix idea that "there is nothing
there", and, not surprisingly, they don't find anything.

In another message you say:

Sorry dude, no smoking gun here. Your rambling on about it like it's
been proven makes you sound like a raving nutter (my opinion, of
course).


Great arguments here. "Raving nutter", yeah, of course.

I write here for the record. This is a very ancient usenet group, and I
have been following it since a long time.
  #24  
Old May 3rd 17, 11:30 PM posted to sci.space.policy
jacob navia
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 319
Default L.I.F.E.

Le 02/05/2017 à 02:47, Fred J. McCall a écrit :
No, I'm the one making the claim that there is so little risk that
going nuts and quarantining Mars forever because it's somehow
different than the Moon makes little sense.


Agreed. Going nuts is a bad thing, and quarantining Mars forever is also
stupid.

I was saying that before bringing any marsian biological material here,
we should find out "in situ" i.e. in Mars, what kind of life exists there.

There are no technical barriers for studying marsian life remotely.
Actually, that was what Viking did already.

Taking care of bio hazards with first contact is just taking elementary
precautions. After we have analized marsian life and its behavior we can
make a better judgement about its potential danger.

Marsian life is adapted to mars, i.e. underground life, probably
bacteria, and maybe higher forms. It could be dangerous in earth
conditions, and anyway, if it exists we should not send people to mars.

And here is the reason why you seem to ignore marsian life. It would
make all the plans of sending people to mars impossible.

Since humans can't be sterilized, and making a 100% containment for
earth bacteria on mars is impossible, all landing plans would have to be
scrapped.

We can then conduct experiments (aboard a space station around mars, for
instance) to see how earth life forms interact with marsian forms.

If we see no problems we can go a step further and send a few people
that would not be allowed to come back until several years have passed
and we know that there is no immediate risk.

First contact is not to be taken lightly.
  #25  
Old May 4th 17, 01:55 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,422
Default L.I.F.E.

jacob navia wrote:

Le 02/05/2017 à 02:47, Fred J. McCall a écrit :
No, I'm the one making the claim that there is so little risk that
going nuts and quarantining Mars forever because it's somehow
different than the Moon makes little sense.


Agreed. Going nuts is a bad thing, and quarantining Mars forever is also
stupid.


If going nuts is a bad thing, you should probably resist doing it so
frequently.


I was saying that before bringing any marsian biological material here,
we should find out "in situ" i.e. in Mars, what kind of life exists there.


And when you don't find any, how long do you look? The range and
scope of toasters is limited.


There are no technical barriers for studying marsian life remotely.
Actually, that was what Viking did already.


Well, other than the "have the right instruments and cover enough
ground" 'barriers'.


Taking care of bio hazards with first contact is just taking elementary
precautions. After we have analized marsian life and its behavior we can
make a better judgement about its potential danger.


What Martian life? So far as we can tell right now, there isn't any.


Marsian life is adapted to mars, i.e. underground life, probably
bacteria, and maybe higher forms. It could be dangerous in earth
conditions, and anyway, if it exists we should not send people to mars.


What Martian life? So far as we can tell right now, there isn't any.


And here is the reason why you seem to ignore marsian life. It would
make all the plans of sending people to mars impossible.


How's that again?


Since humans can't be sterilized, and making a 100% containment for
earth bacteria on mars is impossible, all landing plans would have to be
scrapped.


Why? You think we're going to find spotted owls or something?


We can then conduct experiments (aboard a space station around mars, for
instance) to see how earth life forms interact with marsian forms.

If we see no problems we can go a step further and send a few people
that would not be allowed to come back until several years have passed
and we know that there is no immediate risk.

First contact is not to be taken lightly.


So how many centuries do you want to sit and spin with toasters?


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
  #26  
Old May 4th 17, 10:47 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,422
Default L.I.F.E.

JF Mezei wrote:

On 2017-05-03 20:55, Fred J. McCall wrote:

What Martian life? So far as we can tell right now, there isn't any.


You cannot say that. All you can say is the tiny rovers who covered a
tiny territory on Mars have not found conclusive evidence of life that
could be detected with its limited sensors.


Of course I can say that. Which part of "so far as we can tell right
now" is it that is a mystery to you?


For all we know , Mars is filled with a life form that we don't know how
to test for. or it could be empty of any life and be more sterile than
a hospital operating room.


Hell, there might be unicorns prancing around the Martian plains
****ting magic pixie dust everywhere.


And it is exactly because we can't be sure that we have to ensure proper
process happens when any crew or material is returned to earth.

Just because it LOOKS like there is no life doesn't mean we can be careless.


I give up. You're obviously incapable of understanding basic biology,
don't believe in evolution, and think the whole thing is just Pure
****ing Magic.


--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2018 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.