NASA Boss: ‘Life Did Exist On Mars, And May Have Life Now’

He really didn't say it had/has life, he said that Mars is the most likely planet in the solar system (other then our own rocky mother ship) that had or has life. So he said it in the context of talking about the reasons why NASA and others have sent so many missions to Mars.

I say land a rover in the Martian Zoo and be done with it. They just got two Giant Pandazions.

a reply to: JimOberg

It seems humans are devolving Jim , The biggest single chromosomal rearrangement among the four species is the unique number of chromosomes (23 pairs) found in humans as opposed to the apes 24 pairs

Panspermia It is described as a hurricane blowing through a junk yard and assembling the millions of pieces in a jumbo jet and it working perfectly ,

Here's the thing, if NASA has been completely upfront with the public with their findings on Mars, then this interview could just be a way for the chief to keep everyone interested and hopefully get additional funding from the U.S. government (certainly plausible). However, if NASA has found the smoking gun (in the form of ancient artifacts, remains of living beings, etc.) and is keeping this information private from the public, then they must currently be having serious internal discussions, especially considering that India has a probe orbiting the planet right now. Can you imagine that after 40 years of exploring the planet, NASA is upended by India on their first mission if they're able to capture high resolution photos of some ancient artifacts? Forget about aliens, Americans would be outraged that either A.) NASA has kept this information private from us for several decades, or that B.) India beat us to the punch even after 40 years of exploration by NASA. How embarrassing would that be, especially if NASA already had this information but chose to keep it secret.

My gut tells me that within the next 10 to 15 years we'll find out whether or not NASA has been telling us the truth all along. I'm sure by then China and the European Union would have sent their own probes to Mars, so the chances of any piece of evidence being kept private would be extremely low.

.. scientists say that we here on planet Earth are living in a goldilock zone and life as we know it wouldnt be possible elsewhere because it would be too hot or too cold for humans to survive
I think that might be a big part of the misconception that other planets are too cold or too hot or lacking water resources

a reply to: skybolt18

We only have to look at how the colour of Mars has changed over the years from red/ yellow / brown /blue to figure that not all is being disclosed to the public , the brooking report years ago spelled that out

a reply to: douglas5

He says it's " the most likely planet in our Solar System that had life at one time" , granted he could have phrased it better but he's saying it's likely (not did) that life existed on Mars , and it may still have life .... No gaff just what we already know or presume of Mars.

Why do threads like this make it to front page of ATS? And by "threads like this" I mean genuine time-wasters that are shown to have no value or significance immediately. It's not like an interesting debate has ensued, and there's no information here that's even remotely out of the common public realm.

a reply to: mulder85

The truth is out there moulder 85

I offered nothing in explanation to this article , i just posted this article and video for other members here and asked what they thought of it ,

I only hope that someone who had never come across this piece before is now a bit more enlightened to what MR Bolden of N.A.S.A thinks of things on mars .

Remember a year ago when NASA were going to make a big announcement - we all speculated and then it went flat.

Digging up the Viking Lander experiment in the 1970s that showed life on Mars. At the time, the technology meant that the scientists could only do a handful of experiments and so as the goal was to validate life on Mars -surely you would make sure that even one positive test meant that there was life. Interesting one of the scientist who created the experiment - Levin in an interview in 2000 - still believed that they found life on Mars - according to Wikki.

Back to NASA claiming that there was life here at one time -that I agree is a biggie. So here are the openings that this creates:
- Skeletons of the animals in the soil or at the very least composition of the soil to include some traces of elements from the animal remains (okay maybe nothing as dramatic as limestone but some anomalies in the soil )
- Fossils of the animals in the rocks (I must claim here my interest - to be an "Arkenite")
- A discussion on what could have eliminated ALL life on Mars.

The latter point is the most interesting as we know on Earth that fairly high level species as cockroaches would survive a nuclear war. So assuming that the life form never got to intelligence, then the disaster would have to be natural. Certainly, a short sharp disaster like a meteorites could do it. Meteorites are more likely to hit Mars as it is close to Jupiter and Saturn the vacuum cleaners of the Solar System (their gravitational pull means that they attract most of the stray comets and meteorites). If the end was over a longer period e.g. a long ice age/gradual reduction in oxygen or whatever, then there is a chance of evolution /survival by the smaller creatures (or microbial creatures).

Which comes neatly back to the Viking experiment

a reply to: douglas5

Wow!!

This if far from a gaffe. He just flat out said it. I'm glad there's video because you can see he didn't even stutter. If you listen to his words he was very definitive that there was life on Mars in the past. The only time he slightly paused is when he said, MAY have life now.



If you ask me, this is a HUGE, HUGE, HUGE admission from NASA.

yay mars! yay mars life then and now!

ps. the valles marinaris was the result of an arc from a passing charged celestial object (electric comet? - space weapon?) which resulted in the exodus to earth. cool.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: charlyv
I say, in the tight circles of science, those in the know believe in the research already done on martian meteorites that have been analyzed on Earth. They are not going to officially say anything as a group, until they are ready. You couple the research done by those that worked on ALH84001, NWA 7034 , (Nakhla and the list goes on...) with the discoveries now going on about how Mars had oceans, lakes and rivers.... Guess what is about to come out. I give it about another month or two.

You're about the last person on the planet that this news hasn't reached, so don't pride yourself on your exclusive insights. The most mind-blowing aspect of the plausible suggestion of life first on Mars is that scientists now accept the plausibility of spores spreading via impact ejection of rocks, to Earth, and growing there before any native forms had sprung up. It's controversial, it's exciting, it's never been secret except to folks in self-imposed intellectual isolation in UFO subcultures.

Come on OUT!!

What is controversial and exciting about spores ejecting somewhere.

Why is it that you always gravitate to the lowest common denominators, and refuse to realize that so much is held back , that you are playing with a system that is just plain useless.

a reply to: templar knight

I remember watching that viking experiment as a young boy and being all excited by it all back then , the shuttles was getting built and space was a exciting place , then the bomb shell that Mars was barren and Earth was the only place with any life around .

But is it was this all a distraction if Earth took a huge hit would some alien probe find signs of life after our planet was baked in radiation for eons and the crust displaced so that north is south and a volcano 27 km high one of 3 has finished spewing out obliterating the surface of the planet .

i to am a Arkenite


we can only hope that all is not lost to the cold depths of the web

originally posted by: skybolt18
Here's the thing, if NASA has been completely upfront with the public with their findings on Mars, then this interview could just be a way for the chief to keep everyone interested and hopefully get additional funding from the U.S. government (certainly plausible). However, if NASA has found the smoking gun (in the form of ancient artifacts, remains of living beings, etc.) and is keeping this information private from the public, then they must currently be having serious internal discussions, especially considering that India has a probe orbiting the planet right now. Can you imagine that after 40 years of exploring the planet, NASA is upended by India on their first mission if they're able to capture high resolution photos of some ancient artifacts? Forget about aliens, Americans would be outraged that either A.) NASA has kept this information private from us for several decades, or that B.) India beat us to the punch even after 40 years of exploration by NASA. How embarrassing would that be, especially if NASA already had this information but chose to keep it secret.

My gut tells me that within the next 10 to 15 years we'll find out whether or not NASA has been telling us the truth all along. I'm sure by then China and the European Union would have sent their own probes to Mars, so the chances of any piece of evidence being kept private would be extremely low.

My gut tells me when I'm hungry, my brain tells me your theory is silly and deflects you from thrilling from the real exploration results that suggest there are a dozen potential active biospheres in the solar system, all but one of them underground. Even my stomach likes digesting that idea. Enjoy!!

a reply to: neoholographic

If you listen to his words he was very definitive that there was life on Mars in the past.

He said "most likely" to have had life , not very definitive really.
How is it so many people can't hear what this man is actually saying

a reply to: gortex

Also, if NASA had any proof at all that life had once been extant on Mars or that it was present now, they would announce it with great fanfare. Such evidence would guarantee a huge increase in funding for NASA. Instead, the space agency is withering away under accusations that it has no clear direction or purpose.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: charlyv
I say, in the tight circles of science, those in the know believe in the research already done on martian meteorites that have been analyzed on Earth. They are not going to officially say anything as a group, until they are ready. You couple the research done by those that worked on ALH84001, NWA 7034 , (Nakhla and the list goes on...) with the discoveries now going on about how Mars had oceans, lakes and rivers.... Guess what is about to come out. I give it about another month or two.

You're about the last person on the planet that this news hasn't reached, so don't pride yourself on your exclusive insights. The most mind-blowing aspect of the plausible suggestion of life first on Mars is that scientists now accept the plausibility of spores spreading via impact ejection of rocks, to Earth, and growing there before any native forms had sprung up. It's controversial, it's exciting, it's never been secret except to folks in self-imposed intellectual isolation in UFO subcultures.

Come on OUT!!

You have to be kidding. If you read some of my posts on panspermia , probably 5 years ago, you would understand that I am no newcomer to these ideas. What I state is a general statement that unbelievably, many just think is garbage until the PTB come out and make it official. Please do not stand on your horse and call me a master of the obvious , unless you do a bit of research yourself.

Addendum:
You know Jim, I have actively defended many of your viewpoints in the past. I am a bit surprised that you would come out at me like this. I guess that with all those you talk to, you tend to forget who your friends are.

a reply to: douglas5
Devolving indeed, but maybe humans should have never evolved in the first place, and also why is it that people assume that more is better, presumptions have been the death of many a thing before even of whole civilizations, and will likely be the death of this one as well. Maybe like Mars earth will end in failure, in which case I am sure life will start up on another planet again.

As for whats on Mars, nothing more then you would not find in any other desert. If there really so interested why dont they go and see. Or dont. I mean does it matter?

a reply to: douglas5

I doubt there ever has been or still is life on Mars.

But on the off chance that there is...

We need to get there as fast as we can...!!

And Kill it..!!

Its taken them this many years to 'discover' that. Really?

We know enough about Mars as we do of our oceans.
We're still on the surface, and not looking beneath.