# Life on Mars? (new evidence!) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 27, 2001, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058 "2001-02-27T14:59:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Phobos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Phobos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Phobos)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2001, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/1 "2001-02-27T14:59:55Z")
[CNN article](http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/02/26/mars.life.ap/index.html) about… > [@](#): > > Scientists at the Johnson Space Center in Houston say that a crystallized magnetic mineral, called magnetite, found in a Martian meteorite is similar to crystals formed on Earth by bacteria. > > “I am convinced that this is supporting evidence for the presence of ancient life on Mars,” said Kathie Thomas-Keprta, an astrobiologist at the space center and the first author of a study appearing Tuesday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. > > Thomas-Keprta said there is no report of such magnetites being formed by any but biologic means. The article talks about how other scientists are still skeptical about it, but these JSC folks seem convinced. Whaddya think? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2001, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/2 "2001-02-27T15:37:52Z")
We’ve heard the same thing before, but the evidence has not been clear. I share your hope that this is real proof, but skepticism has to be strong. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2001, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/3 "2001-02-27T16:09:33Z")
They may be right, they may be wrong. Only onw way to find out for sure - send a couple of guys up there to check out the source. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2001, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/4 "2001-02-27T17:46:17Z")
Er, I don’t understand why this is in the news again. From last December, [http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/pao/media/rel/2000/J00-84.html](http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/pao/media/rel/2000/J00-84.html) > [@](#): > > December 13, 2000 > John Ira Petty > Johnson Space Center, TX > NEW REPORT OFFERS EVIDENCE OF PRIMITIVE LIFE ON MARS > A new scientific report offers compelling evidence that primitive life existed on Mars. Tiny magnetite crystals, identical to those used by aqueous bacteria on Earth as compasses to find food and energy, have been found in the Martian meteorite ALH84001. The report on the finding is in the December issue of Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta. > > Written by a group of scientists led by Kathie Thomas-Keprta of Lockheed Martin at Johnson Space Center and funded by the NASA Astrobiology Institute, the report strongly supports the primitive life on Mars hypothesis of David McKay and coauthors in 1996. > > Magnetite (Fe3O4) is produced inorganically on Earth. But the magnetite crystals produced by magnetotactic bacteria are different – they are chemically pure and defect-free. Their size and shape is distinct. Magnetotactic bacteria arrange these magnetite crystals in chains within their cells. > > Their characteristics make the magnetite crystals very efficient compasses, which are essential to the survival behavior of the bacteria. No one has found terrestrial inorganic magnetites, produced either naturally or in the laboratory, that mimic all the properties displayed by biogenic magnetites. I suspect Thomas-Keprta’s up for a grant review or something, since the new press release doesn’t mention anybody who was in the first press release. [http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/pao/media/rel/2000/J00-84.html](http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/pao/media/rel/2000/J00-84.html) > [@](#): > > Coauthors of the new report on a four-year investigation are Dennis Bazylinski of Iowa State University, Joseph Kirschvink of the California Institute of Technology, Simon Clemett and Susan Wentworth of Lockheed Martin at the Johnson Space Center, David McKay and Everett Gibson of NASA’s Johnson Space Center, H. Vali of McGill University in Montreal, and Christopher Romanek of the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory. Or is it just that CNN is just now finding out about it? Somehow I doubt that. I’m such a cynic. ---
**Author:** ![Kyberneticist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dc4da7/32.png) [@Kyberneticist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyberneticist)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2001, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/5 "2001-02-27T18:00:13Z")
I think it is that until now that had not had good proof of the magnetite crystals being arranged into chains on the meteorite? ---
**Author:** ![jab1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee7513/32.png) [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2001, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/6 "2001-02-27T21:13:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Alessan \* > \*\*They may be right, they may be wrong. Only onw way to find out for sure - send a couple of guys up there to check out the source. \*\* I support manned space flight as much as anyone, but it should be possible to send an unmanned probe with a much better automated and/or remotely-controlled science lab aboard, better than the ones we’ve already sent, I mean (Viking, Pathfinder, etc.). And let’s hope they don’t commit another english/metric screw-up. ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2001, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/7 "2001-02-27T21:20:16Z")
“There’s life on Mars!” “Oh, wait, no there isn’t.” “Yes there is!” “No there isn’t…” “Yes!” “No…” “Wait… Mars itself is just a hoax, created by the ancient Greeks!” ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2001, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/8 "2001-02-27T21:45:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jab1 \* > \*\*I support manned space flight as much as anyone, but it should be possible to send an unmanned probe with a much better automated and/or remotely-controlled science lab aboard, better than the ones we’ve already sent, I mean (Viking, Pathfinder, etc.). > > And let’s hope they don’t commit another english/metric screw-up. \*\* You misunderstand me - I don’t see this “discovery” as a reason to put a man or woman on Mars, but as an _excuse_. Perhaps in can be used to convince those misguided fools in Washington to pump more money into the Space Program, as well as give those lazy bums at NASA a much-needed shot in the arm. As far as I see it, we’re about 25 years behind schedule. [sub]Note - in no way do I intend any disparegement of the U.S. Congress, NASA or the scientists researching the rock in question. It’s just that it’s 2001, damn it, and we haven’t even reached _Mars_ yet! What the hell have we been doing with our time?[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2001, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/9 "2001-02-27T23:49:50Z")
> [@](#): > > I don’t see this “discovery” as a reason to put a man or woman on Mars, but as an _excuse_. I hear that. As far as “What the hell have we been doing” goes, not much. NASA spending is a pittance compared to the total budget. Because it does not deliver “direct results,” however, those kind of things get canned. Unfortunately, private industry cannot keep up the space end of it either, specifically _because_ they operate for a profit. The only institutions which could currently spend that kind of dough would be the government and the universities. And only the government actually has the funds. Check out the [Planetary Society](http://www.planetary.org). They publish, IIRC, every other month and keep us schleps not in the field up-to-date on programs and such. And they are a non-profit organization dedicated to furthering space exploration. Plus, I think they’ve got t-shirts 😉 Great reads, anyway, if you can tolerate the mails soliciting extra funds and donations. 😃 Public television taught them well. ---
**Author:** ![Tristan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tristan/32/18058_2.png) [@Tristan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tristan)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2001, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/10 "2001-02-28T02:35:14Z")
**Alessan** - See, first someone thought up the idea for a space shuttle, which is limited to only orbital trips, and then some other folks forgot that Space is a frontier, and folks die in frontiers. So now we’re to afraid to step to the plate and do what we need to do to get there, and we’re hampered by a restrictive gov’t. When the space industry is privatized, then we will see some real progress… but not until then. Sad, but true. ---
**Author:** ![barbitu8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/839c29/32.png) [@barbitu8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/barbitu8)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2001, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/11 "2001-02-28T02:43:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Kyberneticist \* > \*\*I think it is that until now that had not had good proof of the magnetite crystals being arranged into chains on the meteorite? \*\* Read the December 2000 article again. It said that magnetotactic bacteria arrange those crystals into chains. It also said that only those bacteria are responsible for the crystals, altho magnetite can be found on Earth non-crystalized. ---
**Author:** ![Mekhazzio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b38774/32.png) [@Mekhazzio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mekhazzio)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2001, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/12 "2001-02-28T02:47:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tristan \* > **When the space industry is privatized, then we will see** …then we will see people being even more unwilling to risk lives and, more importantly to business, money on exploration UNLESS it means they get exclusive rights to exploit anything they find. If it’s not an “investment”, they don’t want anything to do with it, and frankly, I’m not at all keen on the idea of signing over space to big business, lock, stock and barrel. We’ve done too much of that with Earth already. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2001, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/13 "2001-02-28T03:09:37Z")
Please explain how you are ‘signing over space’ to big business. It’s not like it’s a finite resource. What, are you worried that the moon will be all developed by the time the government gets there? NASA has been one of the biggest limiters of space development in the last 20 years. When NASA was a research and exploration agency, it did a world of good. Unfortunately, with the Space Shuttle it transformed a good chunk of itself into a commercial transport agency. As such, it has actively worked to prevent commercial interests from getting into the heavy lift business, and of course the presence of a government-subsidized shuttle has made it very hard for other companies to compete, especially when the market for heavy-lift cargo is small. NASA should limit itself to solar system exploration, near-earth space science, deep-space research, and basic science and engineering work in aviation. It should turn all research results over to the public, for anyone to use as they see fit. The military needs heavy lift capability. Let it contract that out to companies who can go into competition to win it. NASA needs heavy lift too. So there is already a market for such vehicles. And if you feel the government should subsidize space, let them do it with a space prize. If NASA feels it will cost 1 trillion to get to Mars, then let them offer a prize of 500 billion to the first private company to make it to Mars, carry out a pre-set list of required experiments, and return with X amount of Martian soil and rocks. The notion that businesses will not undertake long-term projects, or very large projects, has been shown to be wrong time and time again. Especially in aerospace. Boeing bet the entire company on the 747, an airplane that had no established market, took billions to develop, and wasn’t expected to reach market for ten years and not turn a profit for perhaps ten years after that. Airbus Industrie is doing the same thing with the new giant Airbus, which will be the largest airplane in the world. And companies can also form consortiums to spread the risk and cost. We have examples of that already with ArianeSpace (admittedly, with government involvement), etc. There are already a number of private companies in the satellite launch business, who have been gaining all kinds of experience operating in space. The concept of using prizes to foster innovation has a long and successful history. Modern aviation advanced rapidly in a race to win the various prizes offered for aviation ‘firsts’, and more recently the ‘X’ prize may lead to the first private rocket that can lift a man into space, bring him back safely, then turn around and do it again within a week. People like Burt Rutan are building entries for this, and it WILL happen in the next few years. Once the X prize is won, the government (or a wealthy individual or a foundation set up by a group of them) should offer a larger prize for the first practical SSTO rocket, then the first commercial moon landing. Then, off to Mars! ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2001, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/14 "2001-02-28T03:26:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > Please explain how you are ‘signing over space’ to big business. It’s not like it’s a finite resource. What, are you worried that the moon will be all developed by the time the government gets there? Space, and the rest of the stuff therein, by existing world government agreements, cannot be claimed by any country, mainly to help foster peace. Carl Sagan’s “Pale Blue Dot” detailed this, if you have it handy. Also, nuclear devices are prohibited from detonation in space (how this doesn’t outlaw the sun, I’ll never know ;)). Unfortunately, this is one of the best existing methods for propulsion that we as a species have access to. For details, check out, erm, another Carl Sagan book, probably Pale Blue Dot again but it may have been Cosmos. Shit. Maybe it was that Kip Thorne book where he outlined time travel. Those wacky astrophysicists. But anyway, I don’t know that anyone would be allowed to claim anything as property in space, and so would not have any rights to the fruit of their labor _in_ space. Hence, no possibility, until some backyard astrophysicists make their own spaceship, travel to Mars, build their own colony, and claim it as their own planet. Heh. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2001, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/15 "2001-02-28T03:41:40Z")
Oh, and the notion that corporations won’t engage in basic research is also flatly wrong. Go look at the Nobel prize list, and see how many of those recipients were employed by private companies. Bell Labs, for instance, used to spend more money on research than did the entire National Science Foundation. And we’re not talking about commercial research into profit-making products, but astronomy, quantum mechanics, etc. Bell labs scientists discovered the 3 degree background radiation from the big bang. They invented the transistor. In fact, scientists at Bell Labs alone have won six Nobel Prizes in physics. They were won for things like demonstrating the wave nature of matter, Radio Astronomy (Penzias and Wilson for discovering 3K background radiation), understanding the fractional Quantum Hall effect, and trapping atoms with laser light. Overall, the money spent on basic research by private institutions (and with grant money provided by private institutions to universities) dwarfs government spending. ---
**Author:** ![wevets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9a140/32.png) [@wevets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wevets)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2001, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/16 "2001-02-28T03:53:28Z")
Is this a debate about life on Mars or government/private exploration and colonization of space? Re: the findings in the Martian asteroid, I haven’t been following this as much as I should be; back in 1996, I remember some objections to the Martian life hypothesis were based on the size of the alleged fossils, that they weren’t large enough to have sustained metabolism in any form we’re familiar with… Is this still an objection, or has it been addressed in some form? ---
**Author:** ![wevets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9a140/32.png) [@wevets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wevets)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2001, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/17 "2001-03-01T22:44:17Z")
Dang, I didn’t mean to kill the thread. Does this mean there are no responses to the above objection? Or that no one has heard of it? Or that the incredibly clever AI that posts as everyone on this board except me has broken down? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Fiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e274bd/32.png) [@Fiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiver)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2001, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/18 "2001-03-02T17:24:45Z")
**wevets** > [@](#): > > I remember some objections to the Martian life hypothesis were based on the size of the alleged fossils, that they weren’t large enough to have sustained metabolism in any form we’re familiar with… > > Is this still an objection, or has it been addressed in some form? It has been addressed. The structures seen on the Allen Hills meteorite were 800 nanometers long, much smaller than any other biotic structure yet seen (as of 1996). But that got researchers wondering if they just hadn’t found any cells that small because they’d assumed there couldn’t be. So they went looking, and sure enough, they found some. Do a google search on “nanobacteria” and you’ll find a bevy of info about them. I don’t know why this story is back in the news. I heard a talk by Everett Gibson at the 1999 [Mars Society](http://www.marssociety.org) convention, and he talked about the magnetites and everything. It’s exciting, but it’s not news. ---
**Author:** ![Snickers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@Snickers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snickers)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2001, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/19 "2001-03-02T17:47:34Z")
I just wanted to pop in to say how happy I am that Phobos was the one to start this thread. Spot on, Phobos–very appropriate! As for life on Mars–how could there not be? The very earliest questionable signs of life showed up here on Earth at 3.8 billion years ago, according to my Evolution and Extinction professor. At the very least, signs of life that seem more solid and unquestioned by most of the scientific community exist as far back as 3.5 to 3.2 bya. Remember, this is when the Earth was an incredibly inhospitable place. Liveable, apparently, but barely. Two–the components of amino acids (what we consider the basic building blocks of life) are widely available in the universe. Scientists have routinely created amino acids using these elements and some electricity. Granted–this may not be “Life,” but most scientists agree that the elements necessary for life to assemble are widely available. It’s the conditions that matter. Recent pictures returned from Mars by the orbiter indicate that the planet was indeed once warm and wet. Water may still flow there, under special circumstances. It’s my opinion that life on Mars is a given. It’s just a matter of us finding it. Snicks ---
**Author:** ![Phobos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Phobos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Phobos)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2001, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058/20 "2001-03-02T18:50:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Snickers \* > I just wanted to pop in to say how happy I am that Phobos was the one to start this thread. Spot on, Phobos–very appropriate! 😃 > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Snickers \* > …as far back as 3.5 to 3.2 bya. Remember, this is when the Earth was an incredibly inhospitable place. Liveable, apparently, but barely. I suspect that Mars was subject to some of the same problems as Earth during that timeframe…heavy bombardment from comets/asteroids, lots of volcanic activity, etc, > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Snickers \* > Recent pictures returned from Mars by the orbiter indicate that the planet was indeed once warm and wet. Water may still flow there, under special circumstances. It would certainly be interesting if Martian life, should it exist, still had a foothold in subsurface aquifers. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Snickers \* > It’s my opinion that life on Mars is a given. It’s just a matter of us finding it. That would certainly be amazing. My opinion is that, of the other possible places for life to form in this solar system, Mars (along with 3 of Jupiter’s moons) presents the most likely possibility. I certainly advocate the idea of further robotic & human missions to Mars to find out! I think it would be good if NASA spent a little less on the ISS and a little more on actual space exploration…especially since the ISS does not have a clearly defined goal. But I do agree that the ISS will provide valuable experience & info about the affects & problems of long-term space travel. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-on-mars-new-evidence/56058.md?page=2)