L.I.F.E.

This is a good film, showing us the dire consequences of bringing mars
samples back to earth. A good movie actually, much better than "Alien".

NASA has recently acknowledged that there is a lot of organic compounds
in the soil of Mars.

Then, silence, it was some months ago.

We have proof that methane is being produced on Mars. Till now, our
exploration is safe, since the rovers do not come back here.

I tried unsuccessfully here to start a discussion about why the rovers
do not stop doing geological science and start doing biological science.

I do not think that marsian life can be like the unlikely being
displayed in the movie. But it could be very nasty.

As far as I can understand this, marsian life is similar to earth life,
since the fossils being proposed after obervations of marsian soil look
similar to earth fossils. At some points in the past, earth and marsian
life produced very similar fossils. But that was eons ago. Marsian life
has gone underground. What has developed underneath the surface?

We do not know.

Mars life has adapted to much more difficult conditions because of the
cold in the surface. It lives underground and in spring, when everything
restarts, breathes methane. It could be bacterial life only, but even
that, it would be an unknown kind of bacteria for earth life.

Exomars is a bad idea. Sending people is a bad idea too, since they
would come back.

I am not pleading for stopping any mars exploration but let's play it safe?

Let's keep it one way until we know more. Everything that goes to Mars
never comes back here.

jacob navia wrote:

This is a good film, showing us the dire consequences of bringing mars
samples back to earth. A good movie actually, much better than "Alien".


Fiction.


NASA has recently acknowledged that there is a lot of organic compounds
in the soil of Mars.


Cite? The closest thing to that I've seen is the detection of
non-life related nitrogenous geology.

Then, silence, it was some months ago.

We have proof that methane is being produced on Mars. Till now, our
exploration is safe, since the rovers do not come back here.

I tried unsuccessfully here to start a discussion about why the rovers
do not stop doing geological science and start doing biological science.


The rovers could certainly stop doing geological science, but would
require a whole new set of instruments to do biological science and so
far there is no biology detected on Mars to do science on.


I do not think that marsian life can be like the unlikely being
displayed in the movie. But it could be very nasty.

As far as I can understand this, marsian life is similar to earth life,
since the fossils being proposed after obervations of marsian soil look
similar to earth fossils. At some points in the past, earth and marsian
life produced very similar fossils. But that was eons ago. Marsian life
has gone underground. What has developed underneath the surface?


Please provide a cite for these 'fossils' on Mars.


We do not know.


But it is most likely nothing at all.


Mars life has adapted to much more difficult conditions because of the
cold in the surface. It lives underground and in spring, when everything
restarts, breathes methane. It could be bacterial life only, but even
that, it would be an unknown kind of bacteria for earth life.


Please provide a citation for this 'Mars life'.


Exomars is a bad idea. Sending people is a bad idea too, since they
would come back.

I am not pleading for stopping any mars exploration but let's play it safe?

Let's keep it one way until we know more. Everything that goes to Mars
never comes back here.


If you were running things, we'd still be waiting to get samples back
from the Moon.


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

Le 28/04/2017 à 05:43, Fred J. McCall a écrit :
jacob navia wrote:

This is a good film, showing us the dire consequences of bringing mars
samples back to earth. A good movie actually, much better than "Alien".


Fiction.


As all films I suppose. Fiction is the way artists make us understand
reality.


Please provide a cite for these 'fossils' on Mars.

A crucial discovery was done by Mrs Nora Noffke, that identified similar
microbial mats in the surface of Mars as she knows from fossils here on
earth. Incredible but true, NASA hasn't even cared to answer that paper
(published in a peer reviewed journal), so this is one more lost
occasion for NASA to discover life on Mars.

http://www.astrobio.net/mars/potenti...-rover-photos/


But it is most likely nothing at all.


What is the source of the methane then? As you may know, methane is NOT
stable under marsian conditions. Then, something must be regenerating
methane in spring...


Mars life has adapted to much more difficult conditions because of the
cold in the surface. It lives underground and in spring, when everything
restarts, breathes methane. It could be bacterial life only, but even
that, it would be an unknown kind of bacteria for earth life.


Please provide a citation for this 'Mars life'.


Besides the fossils above, the methane production, we have the discovery
of magnetite in marsian meteorites, the photographs of McKay of the
marsian life forms in a meteorite from Antartica, the spectral analysis
of the rock in face of the Viking lander (similar to lichens, the rock
would go "green" in spring), the results of the viking experiments (that
show a circadian rhythm), but obviously:

There is no worst blind man as the man that doesn't want to see.



Exomars is a bad idea. Sending people is a bad idea too, since they
would come back.

I am not pleading for stopping any mars exploration but let's play it safe?

Let's keep it one way until we know more. Everything that goes to Mars
never comes back here.


If you were running things, we'd still be waiting to get samples back
from the Moon.



There isn't any signs of life in the moon. There are a LOT of signs of
life in mars.

As I told you: if you do not want to see it, you will not see it.
Even if it is in front of your face.

jacob navia wrote:

Le 28/04/2017 à 05:43, Fred J. McCall a écrit :
jacob navia wrote:

This is a good film, showing us the dire consequences of bringing mars
samples back to earth. A good movie actually, much better than "Alien".


Fiction.


As all films I suppose. Fiction is the way artists make us understand
reality.


Well, no. Fiction is the way artists ignore reality to entertain us
or send an emotional message.



Please provide a cite for these 'fossils' on Mars.


A crucial discovery was done by Mrs Nora Noffke, that identified similar
microbial mats in the surface of Mars as she knows from fossils here on
earth. Incredible but true, NASA hasn't even cared to answer that paper
(published in a peer reviewed journal), so this is one more lost
occasion for NASA to discover life on Mars.

http://www.astrobio.net/mars/potenti...-rover-photos/


Note that your own cite says this is not definitive, does not call it
'fossils', and notes that it would take a sample return mission and
tests on a mission to be named later with instruments that aren't in
the pipeline.

So yeah, we should redirect everything based on something one person
has speculative evidence for.



But it is most likely nothing at all.


What is the source of the methane then? As you may know, methane is NOT
stable under marsian conditions. Then, something must be regenerating
methane in spring...


So far it looks like a one-time event. Even if it is not, there are
all sorts of non-biological paths that explain it.




Mars life has adapted to much more difficult conditions because of the
cold in the surface. It lives underground and in spring, when everything
restarts, breathes methane. It could be bacterial life only, but even
that, it would be an unknown kind of bacteria for earth life.


Please provide a citation for this 'Mars life'.


Besides the fossils above,


No fossils. And the geological structures that ONE PERSON is
SPECULATING may indicate microbes indicate them SEVERAL BILLION YEARS
AGO, NOT NOW.


the methane production,


We don't know that there is any 'methane production'. It's more
likely it's a methane sink release.


we have the discovery of magnetite in marsian meteorites,


ONE meteorite and that has nothing to do with life.


the photographs of McKay of the
marsian life forms in a meteorite from Antartica,


McKay doesn't characterize it as "marsian life forms". Even if what
they found indicates life, it's three and a half billion years ago.


the spectral analysis
of the rock in face of the Viking lander (similar to lichens, the rock
would go "green" in spring), the results of the viking experiments (that
show a circadian rhythm), but obviously:


This is so speculative that it's not even worth commenting on.


There is no worst blind man as the man that doesn't want to see.


Of course there is. The man who is so eager to see that he obsesses
over things that aren't there is ever so much worse.




Exomars is a bad idea. Sending people is a bad idea too, since they
would come back.

I am not pleading for stopping any mars exploration but let's play it safe?

Let's keep it one way until we know more. Everything that goes to Mars
never comes back here.


If you were running things, we'd still be waiting to get samples back
from the Moon.


There isn't any signs of life in the moon. There are a LOT of signs of
life in mars.


Bull****.


As I told you: if you do not want to see it, you will not see it.
Even if it is in front of your face.


As I told you, if you want to see it, you will see it, even if it is
not there.


--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

Le 28/04/2017 à 05:43, Fred J. McCall a écrit :
NASA has recently acknowledged that there is a lot of organic compounds
in the soil of Mars.

Cite? The closest thing to that I've seen is the detection of
non-life related nitrogenous geology.

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard...organic-matter
The organic molecules found by the team were in a drilled sample of the
Sheepbed mudstone in Gale crater, the landing site for the Curiosity
rover. Scientists think the crater was once the site of a lake billions
of years ago, and rocks like mudstone formed from sediment in the lake.
Moreover, this mudstone was found to contain 20 percent smectite clays.
On Earth, such clays are known to provide high surface area and optimal
interlayer sites for the concentration and preservation of organic
compounds when rapidly deposited under reducing chemical conditions.

While the team can't conclude that there was life at Gale crater, the
discovery shows that the ancient environment offered a supply of reduced
organic molecules for use as building blocks for life and an energy
source for life. Curiosity's earlier analysis of this same mudstone
revealed that the environment offered water and chemical elements
essential for life and a different chemical energy source.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4413
NASA Rover Finds Active and Ancient Organic Chemistry on Mars

NASA's Mars Curiosity rover has measured a tenfold spike in methane, an
organic chemical, in the atmosphere around it and detected other organic
molecules in a rock-powder sample collected by the robotic laboratory's
drill.

"This temporary increase in methane -- sharply up and then back down --
tells us there must be some relatively localized source," said Sushil
Atreya of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, a member of the
Curiosity rover science team. "There are many possible sources,
biological or non-biological, such as interaction of water and rock."

Researchers used Curiosity's onboard Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM)
laboratory a dozen times in a 20-month period to sniff methane in the
atmosphere. During two of those months, in late 2013 and early 2014,
four measurements averaged seven parts per billion. Before and after
that, readings averaged only one-tenth that level.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

As I told you: there is no worst blind person as the man that doesn't
want to see.

jacob navia wrote:

Le 28/04/2017 à 05:43, Fred J. McCall a écrit :
NASA has recently acknowledged that there is a lot of organic compounds
in the soil of Mars.

Cite? The closest thing to that I've seen is the detection of
non-life related nitrogenous geology.


https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard...organic-matter


One core sample in one place is NOT "a lot of organic compounds in the
soil of Mars".

snip


While the team can't conclude that there was life at Gale crater,


So no life, then.

snip


As I told you: there is no worst blind person as the man that doesn't
want to see.


And as I told you: there is indeed a worst blind person, that being
one who is so eager to see that he sees and obsesses over things that
are not there.


--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

In article , says...

This is a good film, showing us the dire consequences of bringing mars
samples back to earth. A good movie actually, much better than "Alien".

You've got to be kidding. The film was almost universally panned by
anyone with any knowledge of manned space travel and biology.

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.