View Full Version : Life on Mars?
Lindy
23rd March 2004, 11:29 PM
With the recient news that mars may have had salty seas, and the rocks the're looking at are sedimentary, what do you think? Life on mars?
Here's a link to a NASA atricle:
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/Mars-more-water-clues.html
mhelios
24th March 2004, 01:27 AM
I always keep an open mind on such topics. Where there's water there's life. And all life started in the sea here on Earth. I feel there's every possibility life may have existed when these salt lakes and seas where at one point in the past much more voluminous and expansive.
ckr
24th March 2004, 01:39 AM
Of course, my vote is that there may have been something very primitive. Seems unlikely that anything very complex (higher than say bacteria) could have developed.
But what do I know?:D
Bana
24th March 2004, 03:02 AM
I think it is statistically unlikely. Possibly some agregates of organic materials though...
ewdi
24th March 2004, 03:18 AM
where are the little green mans :p
yeah, if they could prove there were water, they should have life in tht planet
tchung
24th March 2004, 03:57 AM
Have you seen this funny animation for Mars Rovers? It will make you laugh!
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/video/movies/mer_rovernav_240.mov
The title is "Navigation 101: Autonomous Rover Navigation" and it was posted on 01/13/2004
Thomas
Lindy
24th March 2004, 06:55 AM
I know that I should be more of a pragmatist .I should agree with Bana that the possibilities are statistically unlikely. It's just that my right brain is flush with the possibilities. When Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon I think I must have read H.G. Wells First Men In The Moon a dozen times over. Guess I'll have to go to the library and checkout some Edgar Rice Burroughs books. Mmmm.... Mars maids!
tchung
24th March 2004, 08:15 AM
Speaking of H. G. Wells, I have the original "The Time Machine" made in 1960 on DVD.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0790747324/104-5603867-0528768
Pesonally I like it better than "The Time Machine" made in 2002. :)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00005JKLZ/104-5603867-0528768
Thomas
Ug
24th March 2004, 10:49 AM
It's possible that there might once have been life there, but I think it could have been very different to what we think it could have been.
Lindy
24th March 2004, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by Ug
I think it could have been very different to what we think it could have been.
That's the part that captures the imagination, or atleast my imagination
Prometheus
24th March 2004, 08:57 PM
I figure if life ever existed on Mars it was prolly some little protist or worm of somekind, i dont imagine anything of real biological complexity lived there.
PeTzZz
26th March 2004, 08:51 PM
Life on Mars? No, I don't think so. If they find a skeleton of some bigger animal, I will stay sceptic. Why? I have read some books about astronomy and after that I just don't think so.
Avatraxiom
29th March 2004, 12:16 AM
Sure, I think there could be life on Mars.
We have a lot of theories about how life works in the universe, but not as much hard data outside of Earth as we do inside of Earth.
Things could have highly different biologies.
Even water is just a coolant. :-) It's very convenient, though, since hydrogen seems so plentiful.
I think that Arthur Clarke pointed out that there could be gaseous life, and it would be totally different from us, invisible to superficial examination. That might be far-fetched, but it's just an example of what I mean.
-M
Lindy
29th March 2004, 03:45 AM
To add more fuel to the debate comes the news that some reasearchers think they may have found evidence of methane in the martian atmosphere.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_medical/story.jsp?story=505454
I'd take this with a grain of salt for right now. If it can be verified it would be ground shaking news indeed.
Jman
29th March 2004, 06:09 AM
Maybe there was once life on Mars. I think this depends a lot on when and how much water there was on Mars. Right now the only life we know of exists with H20.
Mars doesn't seem very hospitable now. I doubt anything more complex than microbes exist now (although that alone would be a spectacular find).
Of course you can't prove a negative. We could be digging in the red sands for a while.
Ug
29th March 2004, 09:40 PM
We're never been particularly successful with it either. The worst thing which we could do would be to somehow contamniate Mars in the process, of searching for life there.
Prometheus
29th March 2004, 09:44 PM
Im just wondering if there is anything to contaminate? It doesnt appear that anything is even there. Granted, to us it might be useless and to something else it might be the greatest thing there is, but still. It doesnt appear that theres much to contanimate.
Ug
30th March 2004, 02:40 PM
The whole planet is there to contaminate.
It would only take one bacteria to start reproducing on the surface of mars to mess everything up.
mars_hall
4th April 2004, 12:58 AM
If you call this life, then well....yes
mars_hall
Jman
4th April 2004, 04:19 AM
Bacteria are alive, and the most likely to be found on Mars IMHO.
Whatever the case, it's going to be difficult to terraform Mars and maybe send people there without contamination. When does the search start and the colonizing begin, if that's what will happen?
I wouldn't mind giving up the search in a few years and then sending adapted Earth plants and bacteria to start a bioshere on Mars.
Prometheus
20th April 2004, 11:25 PM
I personally think if there is anything on Mars, its just bacteria. Everything else just seems like rock, dust, and other, for lack of a better word, junk. Could we contaminate the red dust? Prolly, but its already dead, the planet's core is shutting down, and lets face it, the planets gonna die (mars i mean). I dont think contamination is too much to worry about. If we bring a few different bacteria, its not really so bad. Its not like there is a gigantic food web or something on Mars (that we know of). Maybe its my bio teacher talking through me, but i dont see the harm in going to mars. Even if we do contaminate, maybe itll give us better ideas on how to fix our own planet. Who knows.
sailor
21st April 2004, 03:21 AM
I think the real question is do we think we are the only living things in the universe?...I think not...
I think Mars may have had rudimentry life...due to the hostile conditions...but then again we tend to look at life as we look at ourselves.
mark
6th May 2004, 05:36 AM
Postulating that liquid water is a requirement for life is perhaps a bit terracentric. Sure, based on what we *know*, it's the way to bet. But there's a L-O-T of possibilities out there in the universe - and, "There is more in heaven and earth, Horatio, than is dreamt of in your philosophy."
And the day that life on Mars (past or present) is positively ruled out, some very old dreams of mine will die....
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.