posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 03:19 PM
so here's proof that Martians have been stealing beans and beer from Earth for millenia!
I understand the need for fact checking and double checking, and verification before making claims, and the whole "extraordinary proof for
extraordinary claims" thing.
But I'm getting this impression that the scientific publishing establishment does not want to find life on mars (or anywhere else). They seem to try
so very hard to explain away every sign. First the Viking probe results, now this...it seems they change the definition of what the "Proof of Life"
needs to be, as soon as it is met. Keep raising the bar, and keep pointing out that the evidence doesn't meet that bar.
Now that I think of it, is it a way to get more funding? If a given test points to life, simply explain away the results and say there is another test
that needs to be made. Send that one, and explain away it's results. Continue for the duration?
Kind of like the definition of AI. used to be just the Turing Test. Now machines beat it all the time. And to be honest, I honestly have met humans
who could not pass as sentient under many of the requirements now set forth to jusge "true"AI.