5 ms·
As a very casual observer who hasn't thought long and carefully on this topic, it seems we've been looking for life on mars since the 70's with nothing conclusi
by nescioquid 5y ago
As a very casual observer who hasn't thought long and carefully on this topic, it seems we've been looking for life on mars since the 70's with nothing conclusive having been found (not that we've applied exhaustive efforts over the last 50 years).
> At some point someone has to call it.
With humility, why would that point be anywhere prior to actually finding a Martian organism? I recall people seemed willing to "call it" after President Clinton's remarks on rock 84001, and so on.
Genuinely curious if there is some criteria to conclusively show past/present life on Mars in the absence of the discovery of an organism. I'm thinking also of the headline-grabbing announcement of biological processes on Venus owing to phosphine observations.
- plutonorm 5y agoIf you are genuinely asking - there has not been a concerted effort to find extant life on mars. Missions since the viking era have been strictly geological in nature. As so often happens in science, certain theories become taboo. Martian life was one of these and as a result the targeting of the missions became ultra focused on geology. It is only as the sophistication of instrumentation has improved that these signs have emerged as incidental observations outside of a targeted search for life. By saying "call it", I am fighting against the prevailing taboo of seriously considering and acknowledging the possibility of life on mars. As regards phosphine in Venus's atmosphere, the jury is most definitely still out on that one.
- nescioquid 5y agoThanks, I was genuinely asking and I see I misunderstood what you were saying. I hadn't realized that looking for Martian life was scientifically taboo, though I vaguely recall seeing something about funding sources being skittish about it at some point (maybe that's tantamount to the same thing). At any rate, I agree this shouldn't be closed to inquiry, though I imagine there's close competition for which experiments and observations to run on Mars. If that's true, does that amount to a taboo or does it just indicate that other lines of investigation have a higher expected utility? Or perhaps you are just saying that at this point, you feel there is enough evidence to warrant a more full-bodied investigation? Again, genuinely interested.
- areoform 5y agoKnowing people at NASA, this hasn't been the case in my life-time. Most of the flagship rover missions have been designed principally to find evidence of water and life on Mars. Those "geological" missions have been dedicated to finding the evidence of water (something that has been done in my lifetime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_information_from_the_Mars_Exploration_Rover_mission#Water_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_information_from_th... Once detection was confirmed, the mission brief for Curiosity and Perseverance has evolved to finding life. One of the largest science initiatives at NASA right now revolves around sample return to perform a more exhaustive search for Martian life using Earthen laboratories. https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-moves-forward-with-campaign-to-return-mars-samples-to-earth https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-moves-forward-with-c... I have had the good fortune to get to know some of the senior scientific leadership at NASA. I can confidently say, based on their budget and talking to them, that detection of life in the solar system and other planets is the #1 scientific priority at NASA.
- plutonorm 5y agoPast life. Not extant.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]