Curiosity might prove we've already found life on Mars

Interesting read. Just wondering what some of you on here thought about it?

GILBERT LEVIN aims to appropriate the Mars Science Laboratory for his own ends. "Since NASA has disdained any interest in MSL looking for life, I'm taking over," he says. "I claim it."

He is only half joking. If MSL's rover Curiosity finds carbon-based molecules in the Martian soil, Levin - who led the "labelled release" experiment on NASA's 1976 Viking mission - will demand that his refuted discovery of life on Mars is reinstated.

Levin, a former sanitary engineer, will make this call next week at the annual SPIE convention on scientific applications of light sources in San Diego, California. He wants an independent reanalysis of the data.

Source


I don't know enough about the experiment to say one way or the other, but will hopefully keep a good track of what Curiosity is finding out there and also hope that they can repeat the experiment to check. Not even sure if there's a plan to try and repeat it?

This was at the end too, surely they could've sent a response?

New Scientist tried to reach NASA for comment on Levin's claim, but without success.

This is what makes me angry about this whole mission in the first place. We send a $2.5 billion rover to Mars to see if conditions might have been suitable for (Earth-based) life so that we can send another $2+ billion rover back in 5-10 years to actually test for life IF NASA determines that this one particular spot on Mars was habitable to (Earth-based) life in the distant past. Should have just made Curiosity a $3 billion rover that could test for life NOW.

reply to post by Charizard
The Curiosity rover is not just a test to find signs of former life, it was also a test to see if they could land the thing flawlessly and make it work for a period of time flawlessly.
They could have spend 10 bill. dollars on an do it all rover, but if anything goes wrong it's a pretty big loss, small steps gets the work done.

So far they succeded and the next two years is going to be interesting.

reply to post by robhines


It really doesn't matter in my eyes. Even if they do find something us normal people will never know about it anyways!! We have to dig ourselves and hopefully find out for each other......Pathetic really, that we are never told anything!

Once someone in the public releases the information they have gathered, then and only then, do TPTB release data confirming or denying the claim.

Originally posted by robhines
Levin, a former sanitary engineer...

wait. What?
Is that a euphemism for a janitor, or...

Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by robhines

 

It really doesn't matter in my eyes. Even if they do find something us normal people will never know about it anyways!!

Why would that be?

I have no doubt in my mind if we find 100% evidence for past (or still existing) organic life on Mars it will be BIG news - why would NASA hide this? Absurd...it's one major goal of this mission and most experiments on the rover are designed for exactly this purpose, to find out whether life once existed on Mars and confirm (or not confirm) the inconclusive results of the Viking landers.

If you say "they wont release this info", this is pure speculation, doesn't make any sense. There are hundreds, maybe THOUSANDS of scientists directly involved, having a good interest in the findings of Curiosity...no reason to hide anything. (Only in the minds of some conspiracy people, of course.)

reply to post by Chrisfishenstein

It really doesn't matter in my eyes. Even if they do find something us normal people will never know about it anyways!!

Scientists need to be very careful when they announce a discovery. If there is any ambiguity, they need to err on the side of caution. If they cannot determine with 100% certainty that they have discovered life on Mars, they will hedge. After all, as all the Moon Hoaxers (and, now, Mars Hoaxers!) point out, no-one is really there to see with their own eyes. Ironic, isn't it?

Wait, what? Something that cost $2.5 billion can't do some tests to see if life is there? Sorry but no matter which way you put it I think that's pretty insane.

Originally posted by Awen24

Originally posted by robhines
Levin, a former sanitary engineer...

wait. What?
Is that a euphemism for a janitor, or...

No, He worked in a waste treatment facility.
en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by flexy123

Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by robhines

 

It really doesn't matter in my eyes. Even if they do find something us normal people will never know about it anyways!!

Why would that be?

I have no doubt in my mind if we find 100% evidence for past (or still existing) organic life on Mars it will be BIG news - why would NASA hide this? Absurd...it's one major goal of this mission and most experiments on the rover are designed for exactly this purpose, to find out whether life once existed on Mars and confirm (or not confirm) the inconclusive results of the Viking landers.

If you say "they wont release this info", this is pure speculation, doesn't make any sense. There are hundreds, maybe THOUSANDS of scientists directly involved, having a good interest in the findings of Curiosity...no reason to hide anything. (Only in the minds of some conspiracy people, of course.)

i have to totally disagree, there are way to many images that show artifacts but they are never clear!
Images in rocks that are fogged such as pips, structures and the list goes on to the thousands. , it is obvious to me and I know countless others,

Even mass media is starting to understand something is up, wether or not what they locked on to is in fact dirt on a lens etc. Is not the real issue. The fact is MASS MEDIA is truly smelling something fishy.


www.nbc.com...

Originally posted by robhines
Wait, what? Something that cost $2.5 billion can't do some tests to see if life is there? Sorry but no matter which way you put it I think that's pretty insane.

Testing for life is not that simple of a prospect. We have a tough time even testing for life even under laboratories conditions on earth. "Is there life" is not a cut-and-dry test.

Levin has been carrying a very large chip on his shoulder for a very long time.

If organics are found by Curiosity a new look at the Viking data may be in order. But it still wouldn't resolve the issue. It won't prove there is life on Mars.

reply to post by Phage


There is life on Mars. I watched John Carter so I know what I'm talking about. You can bet your bottom dollar that NASA will not go anywhere near those birthing centers that are scattered around the Martian landscape.

Was or is Mars even in what is considered the Goldilocks zone? Was it ever in a zone compatible to life?

Here's my theory, the suns gravity is pulling us in ever so slowly - when Earth is moving out of the zone, Mars is moving in...

Perhaps, by the time the Earth is becoming inhabitable, it will be time for us to move off of the dying planet and onto a new one? Is that possible? Would Mars change enough to support life, if it eventually moved into the Goldilocks zone?

reply to post by CirqueDeTruth

Mars already IS in the Goldilocks zone. If it had a thicker atmosphere/higher atmospheric pressure, it could support liquid water...

...In fact, it almost certainly DID have large amounts of liquid water in the past (which means it probably had a thicker atmosphere/higher atmospheric pressure. The part of Mars where Curiosity landed shows signs of once being a very wet place.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


I wish they had some way of Terra-forming the planet then, so that it could eventually harbor life. That would be a sight to see, wouldn't it? I didn't know Mars was in the Goldilocks zone, but then, it's not really my area of interest either. Thanks.

This is what NASA is saying about Curiosity mission:

"Curiosity was designed to assess whether Mars ever had an environment able to support small life forms called microbes. ...The rover's onboard laboratory will study rocks, soils, and the local geologic setting in order to detect chemical building blocks of life (e.g., forms of carbon) on Mars and will assess what the martian environment was like in the past."

marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov...

"...can detect a fainter trace of organics and identify a wider variety of them than any instrument yet sent to Mars. It also can provide information about other ingredients of life and clues to past environments. ..."If we do find detectable organics, that would be an encouraging sign that the immediate environment in the rocks we're sampling is preserving these clues," he said. "Then we would use the tools we have to try to determine where the organics may have come from." Organics delivered by meteorites without involvement of biology come with more random chemical structures than the patterns seen in mixtures of organic chemicals produced by organisms." "Even if we see a signature such as mostly even-numbered chains in a mix of organics, we would be hesitant to make any definitive statements about life, but that would certainly indicate that our landing site would be a good place to come back to," Mahaffy said. A future mission could bring a sample back to Earth for more extensive analysis with all the methods available on Earth."

marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov...

Oh they are going to prove alot here. They supposedly landed this probe in the most barren spot going. And have the most hideous black and whites? They're just bursting at the seems to increase our knowledge of the solar system! Said through gritted teeth.

I can think of a lot more interesting places to go and of course in HD full color.


TREES, WATER, + STRUCTURES ON MARS

www.popsci.com...

"I'm now convinced that Mars
is inhabited by a race of demented landscape gardeners," Sir Arthur C. Clarke announced recently.

The author of 2001: A Space Odyssey was only half-joking. He claims that an image produced by the Mars Global Surveyor satellite shows "large areas of vegetation . . . like banyan trees." Most experts dismiss the idea. But Popular Science loves a free thinker, especially one as talented and charming as Sir Arthur. We questioned him in Sri Lanka via e-mail....

Arthur C. Clarke The image is so striking that there is no need to say anything about it -- it's obviously vegetation to any unbiased eye.

PS What about animal life?

AC If there is vegetation, it seems probable there are other life-forms as well.

Enough Said!

It hurts me that you all aren't convinced about people alive on Mars right now,much like people you meet every day.I hate typing so just see the 1000 images of people,animals,fossils on Mars at my Photobucket "Jlehane3" or google Images " Jerry Lehane Mars" and scroll down the first 10 pages to find them sporadically.I have posted a hundred or so images already archived on ATS,so why bother if a whole GAGGLE of you are clueless of that fact since 6 years or so ago I started posting them here.Ignorance is bliss.If you are still thinking MICROBES on Mars MAYBE,you are woefully mislead and misinformed.I try to correct the laggards LOL.Thanks.