It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The results come from Curiosity's SAM instrument, and were presented at the 46th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (LPSC) in Texas.
Nasa scientist Daniel Glavin described the results from the first "wet chemistry" experiment carried out by Curiosity.
A long-chain carboxylic acid, or fatty acid, was a good fit for one of the data peaks detected in a mudstone called Cumberland, he told an audience at the meeting. A form of alcohol molecule may also be among the compounds analysed.
www.bbc.co.uk...
Only Earth is known to host life, and life on our planet requires water. Though life could conceivably evolve without relying on this precious liquid, scientists can only work with what they know.
Although it's conceivable that azotosomes could be produced amid Titan's cryogenic conditions, the real point of the research is to suggest that planets beyond our solar system need not have water to have life.
originally posted by: gortex
Although they have been quick to point out that there are other non-biological explanations for the result.
isn't that a little too convenient?
originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: gortex
It is such a long and winding excursion for them to take us on to acknowledge the fact that the Viking experiments in the mid-1970s already found evidence of life on Mars. But that would have been too soon. I'll bet many of the younger set here have no knowledge of that fateful mission. But then, that was before they got serious on the subjected and embarked on finding remote planets that are earth-like, etc. It is all a carefully orchestrated plan, folks, done in safe incrementals. They could tell you tomorrow the whole truth of UFOs and related details if they were inclined. But the time isn't right just yet. You are not quite ready.
originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: gortex
It is such a long and winding excursion for them to take us on to acknowledge the fact that the Viking experiments in the mid-1970s already found evidence of life on Mars.
originally posted by: charlyvIt astounds me that this still has not been done, irregardless of the expense, as the major existing expense is in the science, mechanics and logistics of just getting the package on the planet.
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: gortex
It is such a long and winding excursion for them to take us on to acknowledge the fact that the Viking experiments in the mid-1970s already found evidence of life on Mars.
False. Non-biological explanations can account for Viking. That means Viking did not find life. Life is AN explanation for the findings, but as long as other explanations are valid life can never be assumed to be the cause.