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.

 

Large parts of Mars 'habitable', scientists say.

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 09:30 AM
link   
Step by step, something leak from the laboratory. The Scy-Fi hypothesis about an "Habitable Mars" became strong Theory in scientific astrobiologist laboratories and develope in astounding claim: "large martian regions" could sustain terrestrial life! www.telegraph.co.uk...


Australian scientists who modelled conditions on Mars to examine how much of the red planet was habitable said Monday that "large regions" could sustain terrestrial life.

"What we tried to do, simply, was take almost all of the information we could and put it together and say 'is the big picture consistent with there being life on Mars?'," the astrobiologist told AFP.

"And the simple answer is yes... There are large regions of Mars that are compatible with terrestrial life."


ASTROBIOLOGY

Potential Martian Biosphere


After the evidence of Water on Mars, evidence of "Life" on the horizon?


edit on 9-1-2012 by Arken because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


You left something out:


While just one percent of Earth's volume - from core to upper atmosphere - was occupied by life, Linewaver said their world-first modelling showed three percent of Mars was habitable, though most of it was underground.


Your source.

Concluding that terrestrial organisms could survive under the Martian surface is not the same as saying that Mars is inhabited. In any event, this isn't exactly news.
edit on 9-1-2012 by DJW001 because: Edit to polish style.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


As usual you point at the straw and not at the pole in the eye!



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 



As usual you point at the straw and not at the pole in the eye!


As usual, you see what you believe, not what's really there.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


I don't see, I smell....


METHANE, my dear. A HUGE mysterious amount of METHANE on Mars!



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 



METHANE, my dear. A HUGE mysterious amount of METHANE on Mars!


Yes, quite possibly due to micro-organisms below the surface. No-one is debating that. Micro-organisms don't build cities or carve gigantic faces out of mountains, however. Your OP is clearly distorting things to validate some of your more, er, controversial research.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   

While just one percent of Earth's volume - from core to upper atmosphere - was occupied by life, Linewaver said their world-first modelling showed three percent of Mars was habitable


1% of earth, but 3% of Mars is habitable. Hmm, I wonder what kind of model was used in determining 1% of earth. Lets explore.

Earth's Diameter at the Equator: 7,926.28 miles
Earth's Diameter at the Poles: 7,899.80 miles

Lets go with an even 7,910, in feet that's 41,764,800, times 1% is 41,764.8 feet.

We discovered life at Challenger Deep 35,840 feet below sea level, we know microbes in the sky aid in the creation of rain, easily could be about 7.000 feet up, from sea level. Conveniently looks like a zone of at least 41,800 feet of earth sustains life.

But that is a linear measurement, not volumetric, so I don't buy 1% of earth's volume sustains life. I don't need fancy math to prove that point.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


It could be created by either active geological processes or micro-organisms. Science is about establishing facts through evidence, not getting excited and jumping to conclusions wherever they be right or wrong.
If/When we find evidence of microbial life on Mars won't make 'you right and us wrong', it's simply important to make sure any assumptions are firmly backed up by solid data and evidence. Otherwise you may as well believe in the Bible or any other equally nonsensical belief system.
edit on 9-1-2012 by AgentSmith because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Depends what sort of life we are talking about. Ones capable of either living deep underground or withstanding a daily dose of cosmic rays?

Mars no longer has a magnetic field sufficent to protect organic life as we know it. Though it would have done in the past when it also had a denser atmosphere and water on the surfaces (the loss of magnetic field means the solar wind is able to slowly blow the Martian altmosphere into space). Magnetic fields are handy things if you want to live in a planet's surface!



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Arken
 



METHANE, my dear. A HUGE mysterious amount of METHANE on Mars!


Yes, quite possibly due to micro-organisms below the surface. No-one is debating that. Micro-organisms don't build cities or carve gigantic faces out of mountains, however. Your OP is clearly distorting things to validate some of your more, er, controversial research.


So you agree that micro-organism could lie below martian surface and produce Methane?
YOU know what this mean DJ?
LIFE!

Who distort? You, not me.

I "quote" the Australian scientists claim and even the Journal title article.

Are you hiddenly try to derail the thread DJWho?



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


Well as long as you're clear we're talking about microbial life and not some sort of complex creatures with intelligence I'm sure no one's going to complain. You're not expecting some sort of vast civilisation living underground are you?



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   
The term 'terrestrial life' needs a bit of narrowing down. Is it talking about plant life like grass, or is it strictly talking microorganisms?

Also, in terms of a human colony on Mars, do you think that an electromagnetic shield generator of some sort could be created to protect the colonists from excessive solar radiation?

And I wonder what the probability that the methane-producing organisms were brought from earth on our probes by accident.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by AgentSmith
 

Arken seems to think that the presence of life on Mars is well known an that any theorizing about it is actually redundant. He thinks that such speculation is "conditioning" the world for the big reveal.

Step by step, something leak from the laboratory.



edit on 1/9/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by AgentSmith
 

Arken seems to think that the presence of life on Mars is well known an that any theorizing about it is actually redundant. He thinks that such speculation is "conditioning" the world for the big reveal.

Step by step, something leak from the laboratory.



edit on 1/9/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Are you my personal hagiographer or biographer, Phage?



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Mkoll
 




And I wonder what the probability that the methane-producing organisms were brought from earth on our probes by accident.


= ZERO.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Mkoll
 



The term 'terrestrial life' needs a bit of narrowing down. Is it talking about plant life like grass, or is it strictly talking microorganisms?


There is not enough sunlight below the surface to make photosynthesis viable for any organism there. They would require other energy sources. By "terrestrial life" is meant something carbon based that can somehow metabolize and reproduce. This means micro-organism or extremely simple multi-cellular or colonial life forms.


Also, in terms of a human colony on Mars, do you think that an electromagnetic shield generator of some sort could be created to protect the colonists from excessive solar radiation?


They're working on it:

www.thespacereview.com...


And I wonder what the probability that the methane-producing organisms were brought from earth on our probes by accident.


An intriguing possibility, that certain "open minded" individuals will reject out of hand.


Edit to add: I knew it!
edit on 9-1-2012 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Oh right, I didn't realise it was all supposed to be so secret. I thought we were just waiting until we had ability to carry out the required analysis on Mars wherever it be using a suitability equipped robotic craft or a manned mission. I should be reading what must be the 'super secret' section in my Astrobiology book regarding Mars fairly soon so hopefully I will know a bit more by then.
Perhaps if the OP spent more time perusing actual scientific textbooks and perhaps undertook a qualification in the subject he'd realise that a) There are no secrets being kept and come to understand why there is no definite yes/no answer and b) That we actually already know a lot of exciting information that may even point in the direction that he's hoping anyway... And it's common knowledge.....



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Arken
 



As usual you point at the straw and not at the pole in the eye!


As usual, you see what you believe, not what's really there.

As you have been there and know everything that exists on the planet???
I think until man actually steps foot on the planet and gets a real look for himself its all speculative and anyone formulating any opinion should just remain silent



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by AgentSmith
 




That we actually already know a lot of exciting information that may even point in the direction that he's hoping anyway.


"We"? Who "we"?
An ATS group or other Offices?


You already know a lot of exciting information?

Really?

Why don't you share to us (simple ATS members) your exciting information on Mars?



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by sweetnlow
 


We already have highly detailed data and imagery from several orbiters and rovers to form opinions from. However to jump to assumptions and make claims without all the required evidence to back it up is completely unscientific and slightly religious.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join