life on mars is impossible!! - Page 2

The question "how common is life?" is a valid one. Here Rocks has the right answer when he says we just don't have enough samples to answer that question. All I can say is that the more we discover about planet formation etc, etc, the better the odds are, but that is why what we are doing now is so fascinating - if there is or was ever life on Mars, even microbial life, then that makes it far more likely that there is advanced life elsewhere. So I suppose what I'm saying right now is that we can't answer that question yet. What I disagree with is the statement which forms the title of this thread: Life on Mars is Impossible

I think I choose an appropriate title...
Most of the people here seem to think that life is possible... Based on what? On personnal thoughts, feelings, maybe even urban legends...

The statement "life is possible" is not more valid in this case than the statement "life is impossible"...

In fact, is I base my statement on thoughts and feelings as well, it is as valid as the other ones...

What do you think?

I was reading this thread, and thinking about "the Odds" of life. So i was trying to think of a place Where life Does exist, as to places proven, that it does not. Not counting the dark vacuum of space, Wich it does survive, hitching a ride from one place to the other. Can you name a couple of places, serge, with no, life?

Mann, I don't know more than any of us..

Excluding the fact that i never heard of life in deep space, hitching from a place to another... Where did you get this idea?

Could it be the little "bacterias" found on a Mars meteorit? Which were questionned so much in the scientific world that they are now considered to be a geologic feature?
These could make a nice urban legend..

A proof where there is no life.? no.. I don't have any.. Does it mean I am wrong?
Does anyone have a better proof that there is some?

no, it doesn't prove you are wrong...but it doesn't prove you are right.

interesting that the one species to have achieved higher thought, cannot possible conceive of it ever existing elswhere.

mighty eco-centric of us, no?

no, it doesn't prove you are wrong...but it doesn't prove you are right.

interesting that the one species to have achieved higher thought, cannot possible conceive of it ever existing elswhere.

mighty ego-centric of us, no?

No, There's no proof, either way. But, from where i'm sitting, the Odds,..... favor Life.

i'm still ont he fence, myself.

but those "bird skulls" and other fragments all in the same field have me "rapt" with interest.

I am beginning to stand up and take notice.

Hydrocarbons and amino acids are differnt classes of compounds hence the different names.

Amino acids are known to replcate themselves. This is the basic requirement for life.

What is the difference between amino acids replcating in your cells or in an ocean? None really. Cells are just better organized and evolved.

To me, all the cavities inside these strange little features seemed to have been caused by gases.. Their shapes by erosion... Maybe water..

I would love to see ruins.. fossils.. But that is just a dream..

Why would the odds favor life? What are the odds of fish falling down the sky? It happened..I dont remember where and when) But would you bet on it? the odds favor "no-life" by far... So why so many people believe in this option? We all wish to see something new.. something strange.. but.. Are we realistic? I think am.. by saying that life on mars is impossible..

After looking at jdub site (http://marsunearthed.com/) I understand now all the money spent to reach and explore mars..

There are the most amazing features to observe, to study, to dicover..

however, why are they spending all this money in the middle of nowhere.. gusev crater?? meridiani plains???? To find life????? which they will not...??
Good thing it is not my money anyhow..

The mission, as 80 billion others have said already, was to find evidence of past water.. Thank you, play again.

If we're talking odds, what are the odds of finding life only on Earth? I would think almost nill. Through extremophile bacteria and other more complex lifeforms thriving in inhospitable conditions we know that the requirements for life are not as narrow as first believed. If you also consider the possibility of panspermia there is potentially an inter planetary or even interstellar transport mechanism in place.

I can't wait until we get to Europa.

Forgot to put my name on the previous post.

Serge, It rained fish, crabs, and starfish, in my backyard. Not kidding. It also rained Oysters. Funnel cloud/tornado. welcome to the oregon coast. To me the odds on mars are very good, from my observations. Or is it a strange form of chemistry. wait, is'nt that what life is?

For what it's worth, I see what you mean Serge.

To have aseparate evolution of an RNA based self-perpetuating system, that we can equate with life is extremely unlikely. To put a probability on that is next to impossible. We don't fully comprehend the mechanisms involved for the development of 'life' from organic precursors such as amino acids and peptides.

The very definition of life itself is subject to philosophical debate, but a self replicating system that tends towards a state of lower entropy is a common prerequisite for all life-forms.

However, aside from the independent evolution of life, there is an alternative. There are those who support the concept of Panspermia - the belief that life is everywhere, and the seeds of life can be found in any suitable environment. That in turn can be seeded to far flung parts of the galaxy.

They will argue that extremophiles will adapt to fit their niche, and that life will always survive somehow. This is backed up by extremophiles found on Earth today, and the rapid rate of mutation of certain bacterial strains to adapt to even toxic chemical brews.

The Martian meteorites from Antarctica sparked a controversy that has still not been fully resoved. The issue of contamination is the main objection.

Against the case, there is the argument that many hundreds of meteorites have been found with abundant organic material, yet none of these have yet have yielded traces of living organisms or once living organisms.

...and Karl. Amino Acids do not replicate themselves. Ask your teacher.

jdub.. Even if I am really impressed with the philophical thoughts from ancient civilisations, i would be surprised that panspermia still holds nowadays. if we dont count science fiction writers from the beginning of the last century..If it does, it is based on what????
Surely not proofs that it happens...
and europa... wow.. I cant wait.. no life will be found there as well.. but what a trip.. what a nice exploration in perspective...

mann.. If they ever find life on mars, I wouldn't be surprised that it may have come from Oregon.. or could it have come from Mars and migrate in the Oregon coast?

Aldebaran.. You were absolutely right to start your sentence with.. "for what it's worth.." It is meaningless.. pure rhetoric..

But.. why probabilities are impossible in this case? because the right combinations of element is still unknown? Can it be approximated?

And how can people support panspermia? Solely on a philosophical belief?

I appreciate your prudence..

Sometime I am wondering.. How much more expensive in dollar, energy, time, to prove that something is not true that something is...
if no life is found of mars the assumption will be: maybe we did not look everywhere.. maybe we did not look on the right planet.. the right solar system... To assume that life is somewhere else, and that is just an assumption, a dream, makes us want to go and see for ourselves... i love it...
However, if we assume that life is only here.. What would we do? it leaves us without nothing ahead.. no dreams.. We are stock to live on this planet ??? it would be dissapointing.. for me as well.. I love space exploration..

So.. let say it.. Life is somewhere else.. i dont have a clue why.. I just want it.. so it is....

QUOTE FROM PB:"Wow, what a bonanza of cliches!"

We have no evidence of life having arisen more than once on earth. Therefore, the default assumption must be, in the absence of further evidence, that all life on earth shares a common ancestor. This means we have one sample size of life. Since we have never observed life independently arising on another world, we can make no extrapolations whatsoever about the commonality of life on other planets.

So my points stand unrefuted.

That's it.
Sol 104 from spirit

Clams from the Oregon Coast..

Are clams alive mann?