Organic molecules, essentially carbon based precursors to life, are found throughout the universe. They are on comets, they are in the atmosphere of Venus, they are in the atmosphere of at least one gas giant planet that orbits a nearby star.
Yes, it will be interesting to learn if such molecules exist on Mars.
However, if you go to the enormous trouble and expense to send a spacecraft to Mars, why would you not equip it with the ability to detect cellular life, or the remains of cellular life?
Drammach says: “When one considers the amount of scientific instruments packed into a 5 ft. diameter, 700 lb. lander, your complaint sounds like someone receiving a 60 in. flat screen for his birthday and complaining that he didn't get a full entertainment center.”
If it took 10 years and $400 million to get the 60 inch flat screen, but 12 years and $450 million to get the full entertainment center, then, yes, I'm complaining.
To me this seems an obvious issue that is being deliberately ignored by the scientific press.
Why does Phoenix not have instruments that can specifically detect cellular life?
The neighborhood medical clinic across the street from me has those instruments.
If detecting cells on Mars would take 20 years and $1.5 billion, then that's a problem, but no one in the media is even asking the question.
Like a microscope? Or something more complete like a tricorder?