'Alien fossils' found on Mars, claims scientist

[UM-Bot]

Geomicrobiologist Barry DiGregorio maintains that the Curiosity rover has found evidence of alien life forms.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/316200/alien-fossils-found-on-mars-claims-scientist

[Stiff]

I was really hoping that this was going to be 'it' but judging by the fact NASA don't seem to be overly enthused, I can't see it really being 'it'.

('it' being proof of life beyond earth, past or present)

[aearluin]

Very hard to make such a bold claim based on a simple phtograph. Also, if NASA didn't bother to wast much time on this it seems unlike it would be the real deal.

[ChrLzs]

There are many natural processes that cause globules, inclusions and other shapes that look like life, plus of course contamination also has to be ruled out.  I've seen nothing compelling, and if NASA (or ANY of the many competing space agencies) did find life, imagine the increase to to their funding....!  It's just silly to think that NASA or any of the agencies would cover it up - they couldn't (at least not for long).

As an example - shortly we'll have private entities on the Moon returning HD imagery from landed rovers, and I'll bet one of their first targets will be the Apollo landing sites...  That sort of verification will follow on other planets, too.

[Sundew]

Interesting, IF they are indeed footprints. Now we need to find what made them. If these were made by living soft-bodied creatures, they do not have a habit of fossilizing all that well. 

[qxcontinuum]

NASA's refusal to investigate and to utilize the Rover to take better close-ups is already legendary. Repeatedly the Rover Curiosity has been set to an ignorance status whatever it was coming across strange features. In fact NASA's mission on Mars has been already criticized in scientific circles as being poor at providing scientific data. 

Edited March 6, 2018 by qxcontinuum

[+Not A Rockstar]

I am convinced that our best chance to find a fossil or proof of alien life (microbes, mosses, some type of simpler fossil) seems to be Mars but I do not expect it until we get something more advanced than Curiosity up there to be doing it. It might even not be confirmable until we get a manned effort or some sort of return of rocks or items from there. Not as if I would know, but, this is what I think about it all. I have real intense hopes, but this is not it, I think :/

[ChrLzs]

2 hours ago, qxcontinuum said:

NASA's refusal to investigate and to utilize the Rover to take better close-ups is already legendary. Repeatedly the Rover Curiosity has been set to an ignorance status whatever it was coming across strange features. In fact NASA's mission on Mars has been already criticized in scientific circles as being poor at providing scientific data. 

Cite the 'scientific circles' to which you refer, qxc.

 

Please consider that a formal question that will result in a report to the mods if you have made a false claim to the forum.

[Unfortunately]

1 hour ago, ChrLzs said:

Cite the 'scientific circles' to which you refer, qxc.

 

Please consider that a formal question that will result in a report to the mods if you have made a false claim to the forum.

Honestly, there is no need for the last sentence in your post. Qxc posted something that can be rebuffed in a debate if there is no correlating evidence for the claims, hardly something to make a threatening gesture. I understand it can be frustrating when no supporting material is given, but some people are like that. 

Just seemed a bit extreme.

[Noxasa]

Such weak evidence.  Peer review will tear this guy apart!!!  Oh wait, it already has.

[psyche101]

4 hours ago, qxcontinuum said:

NASA's refusal to investigate and to utilize the Rover to take better close-ups is already legendary. Repeatedly the Rover Curiosity has been set to an ignorance status whatever it was coming across strange features. In fact NASA's mission on Mars has been already criticized in scientific circles as being poor at providing scientific data. 

What more do you expect? The Rover is only capable of so much and it doesn't take days and days to take photos. It's not like it's been covered up, NASA announced the find and put the pictures on twitter. Unless something so stupendous shows up that warrants a fetch mission I reckon you've got your hopes up too high. If there was life moving on and finding more samples to confirm the find is the best way forward, and if Crustaceans did live there the find of an actual fossil possibly awaits discovery in the lake that the Rover is roving. 

You seem to expect science fiction from science. Seems like NASA is following logical procedure to me. 

[Almighty Evan]

5 hours ago, seanjo said:

I disagree, our best chance is Europa.

ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS -- EXCEPT EUROPA. ATTEMPT NO LANDINGS THERE.

[bison]

15 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Cite the 'scientific circles' to which you refer, qxc.

 

Please consider that a formal question that will result in a report to the mods if you have made a false claim to the forum.

NASA has been seriously criticized for their conduct of the Curiosity mission. A senior review panel found, among other things, that NASA had made inadequate investigations, using the available instruments.

Please find a link, below, to an article with further details. Scroll down to the section headed 'Criticism of Curiosity'.

I'm not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with the criticism. I merely point out that scientific criticism of the mission exists, just as was claimed in an earlier post.

https://www.space.com/28049-curiosity-rover-is-historic-success.html 

[ChrLzs]

21 minutes ago, bison said:

NASA has been seriously criticized for their conduct of the Curiosity mission. A senior review panel found, among other things, that NASA had made inadequate investigations, using the available instruments.

Please find a link, below, to an article with further details. Scroll down to the section headed 'Criticism of Curiosity'.

I'm not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with the criticism. I merely point out that scientific criticism of the mission exists, just as was claimed in an earlier post.

https://www.space.com/28049-curiosity-rover-is-historic-success.html 

Was that all?  Qxc referred to 'scientific circles' as if it was a groundswell of scientific opinion, rather than some internal criticism from a small panel.  Reading that article seems to suggest that the 'reviewers' were puzzlingly ill-informed, in fact the article seems to be strongly defending the mission and pointing out misinformation from that panel.  Perhaps they need a review panel to review the review panel..

[ChrLzs]

14 hours ago, Unfortunately said:

I understand it can be frustrating when no supporting material is given, but some people are like that. 

Just seemed a bit extreme.

QxC does have a bit of a history of this same approach, over and over and over.....  so yes, frustrated is me...

[stereologist]

I read an article in which NASA suggested these are marks are likely caused by the growth of gypsum crystals. They are also supposed to be quite small. The size was not given.

[+Not A Rockstar]

14 hours ago, seanjo said:

I disagree, our best chance is Europa.

well, our best, first chance, IMO. Europa may take more time to get there. JMO. 

[Timothy]

21 hours ago, qxcontinuum said:

NASA's refusal to investigate and to utilize the Rover to take better close-ups is already legendary. Repeatedly the Rover Curiosity has been set to an ignorance status whatever it was coming across strange features. In fact NASA's mission on Mars has been already criticized in scientific circles as being poor at providing scientific data. 

Curiosity actually does have an 'ignorant' setting, where it will automatically and slowly roll past any possible evidence of life.

[ChrLzs]

2 hours ago, Timonthy said:

Curiosity actually does have an 'ignorant' setting, where it will automatically and slowly roll past any possible evidence of life.

And it's the default mode, of course.  NASA doesn't need to search for life, as it already found it (and brought it back) during the top-secret 'Olympus' mission in 1969.  That's the mission they brilliantly covered up by running the fake moon landings..

 

Note (for Qxc only) - I'm joking.

[psyche101]

6 minutes ago, seanjo said:

 

[Merc14]

On 3/5/2018 at 11:26 PM, Not A Rockstar said:

I am convinced that our best chance to find a fossil or proof of alien life (microbes, mosses, some type of simpler fossil) seems to be Mars but I do not expect it until we get something more advanced than Curiosity up there to be doing it. It might even not be confirmable until we get a manned effort or some sort of return of rocks or items from there. Not as if I would know, but, this is what I think about it all. I have real intense hopes, but this is not it, I think :/

Then you will be happy come 2020 when the follow on to Curiosity is scheduled to lift off for Mars because it is being designed to specifically look for life, past and present.  It is based on the Curiosity chassis with some upgrades and an new suite of instruments and tools built to do this different job.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_2020

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bridaineparnell/2017/11/29/the-mars-rover-2020-is-a-curiosity-2-0/#43ced78152d4

https://www.space.com/38645-nasa-2020-mars-rover-23-cameras.html

13 hours ago, Timonthy said:

Curiosity actually does have an 'ignorant' setting, where it will automatically and slowly roll past any possible evidence of life.

Oh please, it rolls past things that are easily understood to be nothing out of the norm except by people living in a fantasy world where every rock that loooks like a lizard was actually a lizard in the past.  If NASA didn't want to find life then why are they building a 2.1 billion dollar rover designed to do just that?

[imrunningthismonkeyfarm]

im wondering what theyve been lookint for all these years before 2020 if it wasnt for proof of live?

[Merc14]

9 minutes ago, imrunningthismonkeyfarm said:

im wondering what theyve been lookint for all these years before 2020 if it wasnt for proof of live?

The Mars Science Laboratory, Curiosity, had a primary mission of "assessing whether Mars ever had an environment able to support small life forms called microbes. In other words, its mission is to determine the planet's "habitability."  Its suite of instruments was designed to study the climate, geology and geological history of Mars, a job it has accomplished admirably.  Once it was established that life was indeed possible, at one time, a rover designed to look for that life, the 2020 rover, was designed and is now being built.   I believe the design philosophy of both rovers is/was do one main job and do it very well and very thoroughly rather than try and do a little bit of everything (just my take on it).

Edited March 7, 2018 by Merc14

[imrunningthismonkeyfarm]

13 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

The Mars Science Laboratory, Curiosity, had a primary mission of "Curiosity was designed to assess whether Mars ever had an environment able to support small life forms called microbes. In other words, its mission is to determine the planet's "habitability."  Its suite of instruments was designed to study the geology and geological history of Mars, a job it has accomplished admirably.  Once it was established that life was  indeed possible, at one time, a rover designed to look for that life, the 2020 rover, was built.   I believe the design philosophy of both rovers is/was do one main job and do it very well and very thoroughly rather than try and do a little bit of everything (just my take on it).

Maybe. but it seems to be a huge effort, well thought out, billions of dollars, thousands of specialists, in advance, and to go a long way to then say.. Huston we have a problem.. we forgot to pack the shovel?... and then say 'well take one next time!

Its not like this idea ot microbes on mars is a new idea. this is old news and theres been various failed attempts also. i dont believe the most important mission of the biggest question of all time resulted in a boat without a paddle. we know room and weight is an issue but come on.. they did have onboard testing equipment and instruments to test the composition of various materials.

Edited March 7, 2018 by imrunningthismonkeyfarm

[Merc14]

14 minutes ago, imrunningthismonkeyfarm said:

Maybe. but it seems to be a huge effort, well thought out, billions of dollars, thousands of specialists, in advance, and to go a long way to then say.. Huston we have a problem.. we forgot to pack the shovel?... and then say 'well take one next time!

That's from your perspective which I assume is one of the only thing that NASA should be doing is looking for life but there is no life on Mars and if there was once life then we should determine where is the best place to look for it and what is the best way to do the actual looking, what tools should we send and how should we get at that fossil life.  We didn't have answers to any of those questions, not really, and also we needed to know if manned exploration is even possible.  In other words, once man is on the planet can we use the available natural resources to make water and oxygen for humans, can we use the soil to grow plants or do we need to bring a ton of soil to do that, etc.  Curiosity was designed to answer all those questions and every square inch of deck space was needed to do that job thoroughly.

Doesn't the above make more sense than simply shooting another multi-billion dollar rover, based only on our best guess, to look for life?  Plus we'd still  have to send a curiosity rover  because all those other questions still have to be answered.  The next Mars lander will  be one that sits on the surface and explores the insides of Mars with temperature and seismic probes and it should launch this year.  https://www.space.com/38868-nasa-mars-lander-insight-testing.html  It won't rove around at all since that isn't required 

Edited March 7, 2018 by Merc14