May 23, 2008
Spirit the robot finds signs of Martian life

Lewis Smith

Hot springs capable of sustaining life once bubbled away on the surface of Mars, researchers say after Spirit, a robotic explorer vehicle, detected tell-tale deposits of silica on the surface of Mars. Jack Farmer, a professor of astrobiology at Arizona State University, said: “On Earth, hydrothermal deposits teem with life and the associated silica deposits typically contain fossil remains of microbes,” said Jack Farmer, a professor of astrobiology at Arizona State University in the United States.

“But we don't know if that's the case here because the rovers don't carry instruments that can detect microscopic life.

“What we can say is that this was once a habitable environment where liquid water and the energy needed for life were present.” The silica was in the Gusev Crater and would have been formed when volcanic stream or hot water burst through the surface. Nasa's Phoenix probe is due to land on Mars on Sunday.

Source: The Times

I think the title of this thread (which I know is taken from the article and is not the fault of questionmark) is a bit deceptive. Spirit has not found signs of life. It has found silica which can be as the result of life. even the article states that Spirit is incapable of determining whether life was responsible for this silica, thus disproving their own headlines.

I really wish newspapers would learn to take a more responsible attitude when reporting scientific discoveries. If this discovery turns out to have nothing to do with life then it will be the scientists that the public blame, not the idiot at the Times that wrote the headline. I suppose sensationalism sells more papers than the truth.

To say the truth I suspected something like that, if there is only one paper reporting this it is either a duck or somebody understood something wrong... in any case I decided to post it so you guys could have something to laugh about.

[quote name='questionmark' date='May 23 2008, 10:44 PM' post='2312694'I decided to post it so you guys could have something to laugh about.
[/quote]

Don't get me wrong, this is an important discovery on the way to finding out if there ever was / is life on Mars, it is just not what the headline claims.

It was well worth you posting here, and thank you for that. My displeasure is aimed entirely at the headline. This sort if misrepresentation or poor reporting happens time and time again and it only leads to the accusations that scientist don't know what they are talking about.

Anyway, sorry about the moaning. I hope that we get more discoveries like this. With Phoenix Mars Lander due to touch down on Monday and begin a search for water near the Martian North Pole I hope we will see some major breakthroughs in the coming months.

Totally agree. It's a sad indictment when such a prestigious paper as The Times has to resort to sensationalism like this. I just wish they would choose another subject to sensationalise. It's going to get to the point where, when/if life on another planet really is ever discovered, the newspapers will report it and the rest of the world will yawn amid bored comments of "what, again?" and "Yeah yeah."

Oh yeah! I am biting my nails, hoping and waiting to hear it landed safely. I can't imagine the stress at NASA LOL! I'd feel alot better if it was using those big balloons to soften the impact, but I guess we have to try to learn how not to need them if we hope to land men on the planet later.

Still, poor reporting or not, this is a nice boost to hopes to learn if Mars once did have any life, or maybe still does. Would what we know of the atmospere allow for some form of bacteria or microorganisms to be there still, in potential?

NS

this also opens alot of other new questions or the same questions could apear more frequently about this. like "wouldnt it have been too cold for martian life?" or "how did martian life end on mars?"

Vikings 1 and 2 managed very well without air bags 32 years ago.

Of what POSSIBLE importance would be discovering that 'life' existed on Mars a couple million years ago???????????????????

If you have to ask the question then I doubt you would understand the answer. Although judging by the other posts you have made in this section today I doubt that it is answers you are after you seem to be trying to provoke an argument.

it proves that we were never alone in the universe.

And that is just for starters.

Finding life on Mars would offer huge insights into how life formed and evolved on Earth, for example did life originate on Earth or, as some scientists believe, did it originate on comets and arrive here during impacts (a theory called "Panspermia").

It would advance the fields of biology and astrobiology and would be one of the single most important scientific discoveries ever made.

and my mum thought sending robots into space were a waste of money, i hope the robots prove her wrong!.