More results for the possibility of Life on Mars - Page 10

Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 ... 26 Next
Author Message
MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 181



PostPosted: August 8, 2011 9:29 AM 

I just found a relatively new Wikipedia article focusing on the life on Mars issue with updates (edits) frequently:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_on_Mars

Short but straight to the point summary of data points (old and new). Quite good for newcomers in this field to get interested. Also a big list of interesting references so its by far not prose only.

I espeically like the "Gillevinia straata" part of the article. Smile

Also quite new for me is that meanwhile 3 different meteorites (I only been aware of 2) from very different Martian ages points to life on Mars (references in the article).

Barsoomer your re180: I totally agree

nosnake


Posts: xxx

Reply: 182



PostPosted: August 8, 2011 11:09 PM 

DNA building blocks found in meteorites
[link]

MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 183



PostPosted: August 9, 2011 5:24 AM 

More ammunition for N. Chandra Wickramasinghe ( http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.1314 ) and in some respects for the Viking biologic results which detected clear signs of metabolism (Dr.Levin) or exotic chemistry (NASA) in Martian soil:

[link]

I think although it is a revolutionary and significant discovery it may be a double edged sword in respect to Mars science. Unfortunately this could be used by NASA for again denying life on Mars despite all the additional evidence as they could argue in the case DNA or the generic building blocks of life will finally be found on Mars it has been delivered by meteorites so the cycle begins again - and another generation of theoretical NASA astrobiologists workplace is secured. Confused

But the major paradigm shift is almost at hand and NASA may somehow get out of this mess keeping a clean vest by slowly abandon its no life beyond earth trenches which they occupy and stubbornly defend since 1976.

Shamefulmoderator


Posts: xxx

Reply: 184



PostPosted: August 9, 2011 7:13 AM 

Added on Aug. 9, 2011:
Meteorites are post-solar, not pre-solar;
Mars meteorite contained DNA container

There is no good evidence that meteorites existed before the formation of our solar system, although theorists keep on saying they have such evidence. Meteorites existed after our solar system was formed, because meteorites contain numerous fossilized cells, tissues (note 1), and molecules. Again, theorists say the molecules are not biological remains as they existed in “pre-solar” meteorites while the same molecules are biological in origin if they exist in terrestrial fossils, no matter how complex or how essencial to DNA they were. In a word, “no fossil” can be allowed in meteorites. How could there be life before our solar system was formed?

Inconvenient facts: 1. Most meteorites contain fossils (note 1); 2. Mars meteorite ALH 84001 contains chromatin fibers which contained DNA (note 2).

Note 1: [link]

Note 2: [link]

Serpens


Posts: xxx

Reply: 185



PostPosted: August 9, 2011 7:50 AM 

This is again linliangtai. Take care with links. Crying or Very Sad

Mars Travel


Posts: xxx

Reply: 186



PostPosted: August 12, 2011 3:46 PM 

Reply to MSJ in 183:

The 'paradigm shift' that you you and many others keep talking about has already happened. You see people currently working at NASA come out and say that they sincerely believe life could be on Mars. They are afraid to say they have found something for sure because if they say that and it is later proven incorrect they will deflate the whole world and the magnificence of such a find would be tarnished.
If they wrongly say they have found life, then when they actually do people will be desensitized and disbelieving. It is better to deny it until they are 100% certain.
Many NASA astro-biologists have great hope for finding life on Mars and think it may be just around the corner. As recent as the briefing about evidence of flowing water on Mars they discussed this.

Mars Travel


Posts: xxx

Reply: 187



PostPosted: August 12, 2011 3:47 PM 

And I meant in reply to MPJ. Sorry don't know what I was thinking!

MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 188



PostPosted: August 12, 2011 4:19 PM 

Mars Travel, its not that easy as it don't explain why NASA in 35 years after Viking never made another attempt to explain the Viking results (eg. send other live detection experiments to Mars).

Because of NASA's - with quite a high probability wrong - conclusion there is absolutely no life on Mars after Viking a whole generation is totally convinced about it and shows not much interest in Mars (NASA's life-less desert wasteland).

One could question what is better: to be incorrect about there is life or there is no life on Mars (which NASA has chosen despite intriguing results of the Viking biologic experiments). To be incorrect is part of science when the opposite can be proven (more life detecting experiments in this case) - fear for reputation should not.

Imagine how much further we could have gone on Mars meanwhile if NASA had considered the positive LR results in 1976 to kick off a real life on Mars campaign not the fearful "safe" approach of follow some water etc.

Yes i recognize NASA's attempts to more or less silently abandon its trenches regarding Mars lately (maybe it needs to secure some funding now?)... Smile

Yet still no direct search for life on Mars missions despite all the additional evidence meanwhile - why?

sorry for the long answer but this topic which should not be about believe but hard facts makes me angry as we all wont get younger and want answers Confused

Kevin


Posts: 13

Reply: 189



PostPosted: August 13, 2011 7:12 AM 

Throughout our Galaxy and the Universe itself we see many things that are constant i.e. similar types of Stars, Solar Systems etc. To me there is no question about the abundance of life. Just as rocks form so does life, Panspermia is part of this process just the same as a Bee transporting Pollen. I love some of these links here, thank you for catching and sharing them. CM2 Meteorites caught my attention here is more on that.

http://astrobiology.gsfc.nasa.gov/analytical/PDF/Glavinetal2006.pdf

John Henry Dough


Posts: xxx

Reply: 190



PostPosted: August 13, 2011 1:01 PM 

Good work Niven,,,,glad to see you here.I am also
a friend of Bill and Bob,Since 1985. I too (try to)
write Science Fiction....although one must keep
a strong line between fact and fiction.
Example this red rain bullshit,,,has absolutely nothing to do with Mars.

MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 191



PostPosted: August 15, 2011 9:40 AM 

Here is a very very interesting recent paper about a proposed new life detecting mission to Mars called BOLD:

http://autonomy.caltech.edu/publications/journals/BOLD_SPIE_submitted_final.pdf

Abstract:

The Viking mission was the only mission to date that conducted life detection experiments. It revealed ambiguous and still controversial results. New findings and hypotheses urge a re-evaluation of the Viking results and a re-evaluation of the evidence for the possible presence of life on Mars in general. Recent findings of abundant water ice on Mars, the presence of liquid contemporary water on the Martian surface, and the detection of methane in the Martian atmosphere
further support this possibility. Current missions to be launched focus on habitability considerations (e.g., NASA Phoenix, NASA Mars Science Laboratory), but shy away from directly testing for life on Mars, with the potential exception of the ESA ExoMars mission. If these currently planned missions collect positive evidence toward habitability and the possible existence of extraterrestrial (microbial) life on Mars, it would be timely to propose a new mission to Mars with a strong life detection component. We propose such a mission called BOLD: Biological Oxidant and Life Detection Mission. The
BOLD mission objective would be to quantify the amount of hydrogen peroxide existing in the Martian soil and to test for processes typically associated with life. Six landing packages are projected to land on Mars that include a limited power supply, a set of oxidant and life detection experiments, and a transmitter, which is able to transmit information via an existing Mars orbiter back to Earth.


Guess what? Allthough the authors also acknowledge that the Viking biologic experiments needs reexamination due to the new data available now (WOW) they also TOTALLY ignore the Viking LR experiment mentioning it with no word Shocked

But at least some scientists inside NASA now pressing for a second life detecting mission 35+ years after Viking!

MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 192



PostPosted: August 17, 2011 7:42 AM 

Microbial life on Mars: Could saltwater make it possible?

[link]

...and so the circle is nearing completion and the brave old man (who not wants to wash out a word of what he has written about this topic since Viking) Levin will be and ever was right in the end. Smile

Hawkins


Posts: xxx

Reply: 193



PostPosted: August 17, 2011 8:03 AM 

soon there will be life on Mars and it's us! Very Happy

I'm working on a plan to send to congress to hit Mars polar caps with
"clean bombs" Hydrgen Bombs, the radiation disapates fast but warming
mars enough to start a chain reaction of the release of carbon dioxide
from the soil allowing the frozen water to be released from buried glaciers!

within 1 year you could walk around on Mars with just an oxygen tank! Razz

ya might need Sun-Block with an SPF of 500 tho! Shocked

with 7 billion people on Earth it's time to open up Earth 2.0

which is Mars (Humans first Baby-Step to the Stars)

MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 194



PostPosted: August 22, 2011 8:08 AM 

Oldest Fossils on Earth Discovered: Life on Mars Theoretically Possible:
http://uk.ibtimes.com/articles/201550/20110822/oldest-fossils-earth-discovered-life-on-mars-nasa-news-mission-research-space-alien.htm

MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 195



PostPosted: August 23, 2011 3:54 AM 

The Dirt on Mars' Soil: More Suitable for Life Than Thought

[link]

Of course the Viking mission had to be mentioned in such an article but as usual along the lines of this:
"Scientists had reason to think that Martian soil might be highly oxidizing, Quinn said. In the mid-1970s, for example, NASA's Viking landers mixed some organic compounds into Martian dirt, and the chemicals appeared to decompose."

Decompose? Very Happy

Kevin Author Profile Page



Posts: no

Reply: 196



PostPosted: August 24, 2011 4:22 AM 

New computer models suggest Comets were perhaps more influential in spreading life throughout the Solar System. Panspermia has long been thought to have brought life to Earth, I have no reason to believe Earth was the only Planet or Moon where this took place.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14637109

MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 197



PostPosted: August 31, 2011 4:46 AM 

Epic search for evidence of life on Mars heats up with focus on high-tech instruments

[link]

Its getting hot in here or what? Very Happy

Barsoomer


Posts: 344

Reply: 198



PostPosted: August 31, 2011 11:34 PM 

Thanks MPJ for pointing this out.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-08/acs-esf080311.php

The above link has the same article, but also includes the abstracts.

By the way, I was wondering about the elemental composition of fossils. Suppose a fossil has eroded so much that it is no longer recognizable from its shape, and has also lithified. Would there nonetheless be enhancements of certain elements that might be detectable by the APXS? Are there any non-carbon elements that tend to be more concentrated in fossils than in rocks?

MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 199



PostPosted: September 1, 2011 4:47 AM 

Thanks for the link Barsoomer. I did a fast search yesterday for more detailed informations about the MarsDaily article but came up empty. Smile

Very interesting abstracts. It looks like after decades of doing only geology research on Mars we now enter an age of chemistry research there at last - which is the only way to ultimately detect life by more or less indirect methods.

The first abstract made me smile a little stand off: "Instruments with exquisite sensitivity for nitrogen-containing organic compounds and nondestructive extraction techniques have been developed"

Looks like something has been learned from the Viking GCMS ( http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ac071972t ) experiment which failed to detect organics which eventually led to the dismiss of positive results from the biologic experiments like the Viking LRx.

I wish they would even go another step ahead and reconsider the Viking bio-experiments (especially the LRx of course) taking into account the Viking GCMS pyrolysis problems to detect organics under the surface conditions of Mars (and even in Antarctica in tests after Viking)...

Btw they often talk about higher sensibility of new high tech instruments - can they beat the about 10 microbes in a small sample detection limit of the Viking LRx? Very Happy

Kevin Author Profile Page



Posts: no

Reply: 200



PostPosted: September 1, 2011 11:23 AM 

Earth could have spread life across the Solar System and beyond.

http://www.universetoday.com/88583/earth-could-spread-life-across-the-milky-way/

Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 ... 26 Next


Join the conversation:















Very Happy Smile Sad Surprised
Shocked Confused Cool Laughing
Mad Razz Embarassed Crying or Very Sad
Evil or Very Mad Twisted Evil Rolling Eyes Wink
Powered by MTSmileys