[meteorite-list] Quarter of Mars Scientists at European MeetingBelieve Life Possible on Mars

From: Marc Fries <m.fries_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat Feb 26 16:00:45 2005
Message-ID: <4039.69.140.92.248.1109451640.squirrel_at_webmail.ciw.edu>

Howdy

   Keep me off that list, even if the NASA Astrobiology Institute is
paying my bills nowadays. Methane can be produced by geology,
formaldehyde is a natural by-product of methane in Mars' viciously
oxidizing environment, and hexaoctahedral magnetite can be produced
abiotically.
   I also disagree that the "yes, buts" are more strained. Quite the
contrary - the "yes, buts" are reasoned and impassionate as science is
supposed to be, and the life claims have been coming faster in the New
York Times than in Science or Nature lately.
   There will be proof of life on Mars when we prove that there is life on
Mars, not just that it looks like there could be life on Mars. This is
a serious question with a thousand important implications, and We can't
accept a partial answer or rushed judgement to it either way.
   Keep in mind that we still have not sent a dedicated life-detection
instrument to Mars excepting Viking, which was later shown to be
painfully insensitive to "life signs".

Cheers,
MDF

>
> --- Ron Baalke <baalke_at_zagami.jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> Quarter of Mars Scientists at European Meeting
>> Believe Life Possible on
>> Red Planet
>
> Add me, though I am a moon guy, not a Mars guy. We
> have methane, truncated hexaoctahedral magnetite in
> ALH 84001, formaldehyde...what do the critics want,
> to be hauled away by Martians kicking and screaming?
> The scientific criterion for the identification of
> new life was established by Linnaeus at the very start
> of modern biology: a type specimen, a fossil, or a
> reliable biomarker (a new kind of bird, for example,
> can be inferred from a new kind of bird's nest). This
> standard has now been met in the case of Mars, though
> barely.
> I guess we want more than barely because it is ON
> MARS, although it would have been sufficient for
> Earth.
> OK, OK. As time goes on, more evidence will come
> in...the "yes, but"s will seem more and more strained,
> as they are becoming...and the no-lifers will seem
> increasingly intractably dogmatic.
> I see their point of view. Like Lowell's canals, we
> have been fooled before. But this time, I think it's
> real. Seems so.
>
> Francis Graham
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
> http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>

-- 
Marc Fries
Postdoctoral Research Associate
Carnegie Institution of Washington
Geophysical Laboratory
5251 Broad Branch Rd. NW
Washington, DC 20015
PH:  202 478 7970
FAX: 202 478 8901

Received on Sat 26 Feb 2005 04:00:40 PM PST