Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ice "Oceans" found on Mars
BBC News - Science and Technology (Linked via DRUDGE REPORT) ^ | Monday, 27 May, 2002, 09:31 GMT 10:31 UK | By Dr David Whitehouse - BBC News Online science editor

Posted on 05/27/2002 8:58:45 AM PDT by vannrox

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 last
To: Exnihilo
Synchronicity rears its head again. I just found this in my inbox.

Is life a highly improbable event, or is it rather the inevitable consequence of a rich chemical soup available everywhere in the cosmos? Scientists have recently found new evidence that amino acids, the 'building-blocks' of life, can form not only in comets and asteroids, but also in the interstellar space. This result is consistent with (although of course does not prove) the theory that the main ingredients for life came from outer space, and therefore that chemical processes leading to life are likely to have occurred elsewhere. This reinforces the interest in an already 'hot' research field, astrochemistry. ESA's forthcoming missions Rosetta and Herschel will provide a wealth of new information for this topic.

See Is life the rule or the exception? The answer may be in the interstellar clouds for the rest of the article.

81 posted on 05/28/2002 8:19:07 AM PDT by callisto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: callisto
I still like Ward and Brownlee's hypothesis, that the earth is unique or at least rare in the universe as carrying higher animal life. At the same time, life itself is present everywhere in the universe inside all planets, in the rock, in the ice, but only as low forms such as bacteria.
82 posted on 05/28/2002 9:37:02 AM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
I think the life on Earth is unique also. When we confirm life elsewhere in the universe I don't expect to find humans like us. I think life will be unique to each planet, moon or asteroid from which it originates based on the conditions found there. It's also possible that by the time we do discover other 'humans' we may have spent so much time travelling the universe that we will no longer look human anyway. Just my odd thoughts for the day.
83 posted on 05/28/2002 12:36:32 PM PDT by callisto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
 Just because the government decides to do something
does not mean that I consent to it. Get it yet?

You consent to give them your taxes, particularly
if you authorize payroll deductions.  Your elected
representatives are giving consent to act in your
behalf when they are elected.  If you do not wish
to participate in democracy, you can always leave.
But that is how this republic works, by your
implied consent through elected reps and
taxation.
 
 

84 posted on 05/28/2002 12:42:42 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: callisto
There is another story in the news today about the Goldilocks Belt. That is where the planet is in the right position, near its sun, but not too near, not too big nor too small. Just right.
85 posted on 05/28/2002 12:42:54 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
To: exodus
Okay, say NASA does this, just a relatively simple trip to the surface and back. What would be the major payoff?
Political, I think.
Is it worth the money for the government to do this?
# 66 by RightWhale
********************

Yes, it would be worth the money.

The payoff would be in learning practical applications for the technologies developed in the last three or four decades, and in the new technologies that will be discovered as a result of the full use of our present technology.

You have an engineering management degree, RightWhale. Assuming that you're not an environmentalist, you would know even better than I do the benefits increased technology would being to our society.

86 posted on 05/28/2002 12:45:15 PM PDT by exodus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: exodus
Looks like pressure to go to Mars will contnue to grow and grow until they finally do attempt an expedition. But I would like them to plan on staying once they open the base. They would probably want a GPS constellation in place already, and commsats as well. There is much to do.
87 posted on 05/28/2002 12:55:15 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: gcruse; from occupied ga; BillofRights; christine11
To: from occupied ga
Just because the government decides to do something does not mean that I consent to it. Get it yet?

You consent to give them your taxes, particularly if you authorize payroll deductions. Your elected representatives are (given) consent to act in your behalf when they are elected. If you do not wish to participate in democracy, you can always leave. But that is how this republic works, by your implied consent through elected reps and taxation.
# 84 by gcruse
********************

"Consent" in the form of authorizing payroll deductions is compelled through threat of punishment by the government.

Also, "democracy" is not a form of republican government.

88 posted on 05/28/2002 12:55:52 PM PDT by exodus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Exnihilo
I don't care to debate theology. I'm just making a prediction. As I said, bookmark this post. Check back on it in a few years. Every time there's been a new claim of life found in outer space, I've said it will be proven false, and every time I have been right. :)

Let's not debate theology. Let's debate the science. NO scientist has CLAIMED to have found life on another planet. It is the bungled reporting by microcephalic reporters that makes it sound that way. They can't get a scientific story any straighter than they can a philosophical or religous issue. I would be most interested if you could provide direct quotes from scientist making such claims and the evidence that refute there statements. What typically happens is a hypothesis is formulated based on new found data and is subsequently refuted based on additional conflicting study. THAT'S HOW PROGRESS IS MADE. It is only seen as a claim and then disproof by the media.

That's why they call 'em theories, dude. Even the "laws" of gravity have been disproven on the quantum level with experimental evidence of relativities existence.

89 posted on 05/28/2002 12:56:13 PM PDT by WilliamWallace1999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
I agree, RightWhale.
Just going would bring great benefits,
but the major return would be in developing a self-sufficient colony.
90 posted on 05/28/2002 12:58:22 PM PDT by exodus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
I saw that. If true, why doesn't it anyway? What conditions need to be met to create a state of earth-like oceans on Mars?

How about temperatures warmer than the freezing point of water?

How about temperatures warmer than the boiling point of water? A lot more.

10 large nukes on each pole would create a lot of steam. Make for a nice start of a greenhouse effect. We can monitor if it was enough of a kickstart. Visit after the dust settles. Hopefully no ticked off martians to deal with. :)

91 posted on 05/28/2002 1:26:55 PM PDT by toast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: toast
10 large nukes on each pole would create a lot of steam. Make for a nice start of a greenhouse effect. We can monitor if it was enough of a kickstart. Visit after the dust settles. Hopefully no ticked off martians to deal with. :)

Or we could go the "natural" route and steer a two or three km asteroid to hit Olympus Mons right in the hot spot.
92 posted on 05/28/2002 3:01:27 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: exodus
It's interesting listening to Art Bell right now, Hoagland is on. The question seems to be: Why isn't NASA making a big deal about this? Why is the news coming from BBC? Hoagland thinks it is internal politics within NASA. What should be done?
93 posted on 05/28/2002 10:33:41 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
I didn't see your post in time.

I sometimes listen to Art Bell.
He would be more fun if he gave the impression that he believes in some of the subjects, but he often seems to be poking fun at his guests.

I believe, with very little evidence, that there IS life on Mars.
Not used to be, but life right now.
94 posted on 05/29/2002 12:38:22 AM PDT by exodus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
I think there is a study that shows what space technology/research returns back to our economy at least 3 times its cost?
********************

I remember something like that.
I believe that the economic return is much higher.

95 posted on 05/29/2002 1:47:30 AM PDT by exodus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: exodus;gcruse
exodus has correctly assessed the matter. You (gcruse)are confusing "consent" which is defined as

Acceptance or approval of what is planned or done by another

with "cohersion." Do you (gcruse) work for the government? You said,

You consent to give them your taxes, particularly if you authorize payroll deductions.
Wrong again. I pay taxes under threat of death. If I would not be murdered by the government's jack booted thugs for not paying them I wouldn't pay for anything that I didn't think was worthwhile. I would probably pay for the military. I surely wouldn't pay for the space program, the EPA, the Nation Endowment for the "arts", HUD, AFDC or any other form of welfare.

You said again,

Your elected representatives are (given) consent to act in your behalf when they are elected.

Wrong again, gcruse. This is a fiction that is used by statists to excuse all of the evils of government. By your (gcruse's) "logic" you approved of the murder of the Branch Davidians.

I just love this next lame statement. Statists frequently resort to this (fess up gcruse, you make your livelihood off taxes dontcha)

If you do not wish to participate in democracy, you can always leave.
The whole south tried to leave about 140 years ago, but was not allowed to leave peacefully. America's first dictator killed 600,000 Americans to make sure that the south was not allowed to leave. Furthermore the Constitution of the US does NOT set up our governmnet as a democracy (which is nothing more than mob rule) It sets it up as a Republic.

Further you confused issues again by first calling our government is democracy then a republic. (as pointed out by exodus)

But that is how this republic works, by your implied consent through elected reps and taxation.
Well that is how the Republic should have worked, but along with that the Constitution has very strict limits on what the government can spend money on. NOWHERE in the document is any authorization to take money from one group and squander it as largess upon another simply because the second group has more votes than the first.
96 posted on 05/29/2002 5:00:48 AM PDT by from occupied ga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: WilliamWallace1999
I'm looking forward to having my theory proven wrong then :)
97 posted on 05/29/2002 6:12:12 AM PDT by Exnihilo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson