Is there a Life On Mars Conspiracy?

Michael Brooks, consultant for New Scientist and the author of 13 Things That Don’t Make Sense, sends us a new perspective on the riddle of the empty planet next door

 

Some pesky scientists have just pointed out an appalling design error in NASA’s latest attempts to find life on Mars. This is beginning to look like a conspiracy. Does someone not want us to find life on Mars?

NASA has tried looking for signs of life on Mars precisely once, in the 1976 Viking mission. The result was positive. The reason nobody says there is life on Mars is that another experiment, part of the same mission, couldn’t find any carbon-based “organic” chemicals in Martian soil. This, NASA decided, overruled the other result: with no carbon present, there could be no microbes living on or under the surface of Mars.

Last year, the Phoenix lander repeated the carbon search and failed to find organic molecules. The problem is, we know that there ought to be organic molecules on Mars. Asteroid and comet impacts will have put them there. So what’s going on?

Both of the searches for organic molecules, it turns out, have been deeply flawed. In 2000, the chief engineer on the 1976 experiment finally admitted that his experiment was simply not sensitive enough to overrule anything. Put bluntly, it didn’t work properly – and it never had, even during testing on Earth.

Now a handful of brave NASA scientists have exposed a problem with the latest attempt to pronounce that Mars was dead.

The best argument for why no one has even found carbon brought in on asteroids and comets is that chemicals called perchlorates, also thought to be in the Martian soil, have destroyed it all. When perchlorates get hot, they burn up carbon-based molecules. That’s why NASA uses them in rocket fuel.

 The problem is, as NASA's Douglas Ming (the Merciless) has pointed out in a recent paper, the experiments to search for carbon involve heating soil samples to a few hundred degrees and sniffing the vapours. If the soil contains carbon molecules and perchlorates, the carbon molecules will simply burn up. No wonder they couldn’t find any.

Gilbert Levin, who ran the 1976 experiment to search for life, the one that got a positive result, thinks it’s all down to a religious conspiracy dating back to the early 1960s. When I was researching my book 13 Things That Don’t Make Sense, I travelled to Levin’s Maryland offices and listened to his account of the run-up to Viking.  In 1961, he told me, the Executive Director of the American Institute of Biological Sciences, invited him to attend a meeting in Washington. When Levin arrived, he found himself among fifteen of the top scientific minds in the US. None of them knew what the meeting was about until John Olive told them he had been charged by NASA with directing an effort to look for life on other planets.

 “Phil Abelson, editor of Science magazine, was sitting next to Dean Cowie, a nuclear physicist,” Levin told me. “He grabbed Dean by the arm and audibly said, “Dean, let’s get out of here. The Bible says there can be no life on Mars.”

 I was skeptical at first. No one likes a conspiracy theory more than I, but John Olive died in 1974, Dean Cowie died in 1977, and Philip Abelson died in 2004. There is no independent written source on this secret Washington meeting. And it’s not like the search for life didn’t go ahead.

But I have to admit there is a troubling history here. Rocket scientists joke about the “curse of Mars” because the success rate of spacecraft bound for Mars is lower than 50 per cent. The most famous failure is perhaps the 1998 Mars Climate Orbiter mission, which crashed onto the surface because one team of engineers used imperial units in their design, while the other team used metric.

 So, the question remains: have attempts to explore Mars been secretly scuppered by religious scientists keen to keep planet Earth “special”? Have they been hiding their sabotage under a veil of incompetence? Or is it that scientists really can be astonishingly incompetent without any outside help? Only Dan Brown’s next novel can tell us.

 

Comments

[Al]

Of course, these kinds of experiments are based on the scientifically dubious assumption that life can arise and develop by purely natural means without the need for any kind of external organising influence. This naturalistic view is not a scientific but a philosophical hypothesis. It's about time the scientific community owned up to this.

[Tatiana Covington]

Stupid christians. Nero was right!

[CreationistDuchebags]

Wow, creationist nut balls are starting early today.

[Jack Digsby]

I cannot believe that I wasted 5 minutes reading this.
From the outset I thought I would be some intelligent argument, only to find on reaching the end, that it was a plug for someone's book.

This really isn't good journalism.

No, the Martians or US Govt., aren't paying me to say this. Elvis is.

Thankyaverymuch uh-huh

[Alfred Burdett]

The suggestion that Philip Abelson, one of America's most distinguished scientists, had religious reasons for sabotaging the search for life on Mars is idiotic.

The evidence consists in a something overheard by Gilbert Levin, Executive Director of the American Institute of Biological Sciences, at boring meeting in Washington, DC.

When Abelson said to his close colleague and collaborator Dean Cowie: "Dean, let’s get out of here. The Bible says there can be no life on Mars," he obviously meant let's get out of here and go for a beer. Levin simply failed to understand the joke.

In a paper entitled Abiogenic synthesis in the Martian atmosphere, Abelson states explicitly that "The biological exploration of Mars is a scientific undertaking of the greatest validity and significance."For good scientific reasons stated in this paper, Abelson was skeptical that life could have arisen in the Martian atmosphere, i.e., on that planet's surface.

What Abelson does not discuss in that paper is (a) abiogenic synthesis below the Martian surface and (b) the possibility of the colonization of Mars by life from elsewhere. Both are realistic and exciting possibilities to which Abelson would undoubtedly have been ready to apply his wonderfully logical mind.

[Jonny Hero]

Our understanding of physics precludes an "unnatural" external organizing influence. If an organizing influence were to exist, it would be completely natural. That influence, however, would beg the question of "what organized it?"

[Cal]

As they say, never assume malice when incompetence will suffice.

These scientists really were just that incompetent.

[R.G. Frano]

I DON'T know if there exists that which humans call 'life', elsewhere in the universe.
It would seem extreamly likely.
These life forms, if they exist, probably will/would laugh at human notions, like 'Christianity', 'Islam, 'Judeisim', etc.!!!
But...We're all forced to realise that, if there is life
'elesewhere', (other then Earth), it can't be hidden from scientific discovery forever, unless we export the 'human-genocidal-religious' impulse, right?

[Paul]

Sounds exactly like the conspiracy to hide Sasquatch, living dinosaurs (Africa & South America), extra-terrestrial bodies and vehicles, and Nessie. You (believers) should bend all your efforts to exposing these crimes, and continue to ignore terrorists, politicians, clerics, GM farmers, and evil clowns.

[Ugly American]

@Al

That's right!

We know it's a fact that Odin created life!

Then, Loki deceived mankind by fabricating the whole 'god' of the bible to encourage people to fight & kill eachother.

It's clear as can be.

We know it's true because the sagas tell us it's true.

[Hmm]

AL: you should google "emergent behavior." Perhaps the very nature of our physical reality is such that it easily leads to self-organizing organisms.

[Terry Hansen]

This is nothing. They are still denying that an ET craft crashed near Roswell, NM, too, despite hundreds of first-hand witnesses and related sources who say it did. (Read "Witness to Roswell" by Thomas J. Carey and Donald R. Schmitt (2009).

The U.S. government just can't seem to tell the truth.

[S]

Isn't it obvious by now? David Icke is an elaborate act to cover for the fact that he is in fact Xenu. Ready to pile us all up into caverns in mountains, whilst he encourages Korea to launch the bombs...

Either that or the universe is utterly teeming with life and NASA has it's work cut-out airbrushing the evidence out of existence.

It's Gary McKinnon I feel sorry for.

[Robert]

What is this shameless plug for yet another conspiracy theory book doing in the science pages of a respectable newspaper?

[Al]

Johnny Hero: 'That influence, however, would beg the question of "what organized it?"'

Whatever your worldview there will always have to be some pre-existing reality, from which the universe derives; so your irrelevant question should be directed at every thinker who espouses any conceivable theory of origins.

Hmm: 'Perhaps the very nature of our physical reality is such that it easily leads to self-organizing organisms.'

I'm glad you use the word "perhaps" and are therefore acknowledging that your idea is nothing more than a hypothesis. It's a pity some scientists can't tell the difference between "fact" and "theory".

Tatiana Covington: 'Stupid christians. Nero was right!' / CreationistDuchebags: 'Wow, creationist nut balls are starting early today.'

Well done, you two. Since all you can come up with are (unscientific) insults, I have to assume you are tacitly conceding the argument.

[Richard]

Are the people who think this is a 'plug' for Dan Brown's next novel really so devoid of a sense of humour? Please tell me I'm wrong, that they're just being wittily ironic, and save my faith in humanity.

[J Poitiers]

I still can't believe there is one engineer out there less than 75 years old that uses Imperial units.

You have to be able to come up with a better excuse even if one was falling down drunk.

[XY]

Why are comments moderated? I though this was an open forum.

Read Richard Hoaglands book, "Dark Mission". It explains NASA's history of failed missions (or missions that we were told failed but went on anyway).

Science is subjective. And it changes everyday. It amazes me how scientists can be so arrogant to think that life should evolve in such a way that it fits their scientific models of organic life.

We only have a slight understanding of our evolution on this planet and it's diverse lifeforms. Why do we think we can understand Mars at all?

[Jeowulf]

That's it? The dubious evidence for a conspiracy is some a single, nearly 50 year old hearsay comment in regard to one particular scientist's religious belief? From that one can deduce sabotage of missions and results for the next 50 years? Yes, Nero was apparently right. When looking for a scapegoat, blame Christians.

[Johnny]

lol, Dan Brown.

[Richard]

There is a lot of evidence of ancient civilisations on Mars, such as pyramids, sphinx, and footings for city walls. They look similar in structure to ancient Egypt, Mayans' and Persepolis. There are also NASA photographs of large pieces of wood. I'm sure google will find them.

[iseenem]

Speaking of things that don't make sense.

How about three lunar orbiters around the moon and no closeup images. The chinese, the japanese and the Indians have orbiters but the best closeup images are from the Apollo years, 35 years ago!

If imaging the "face on mars" was good for science wouldn't we want to image the alleged structure sites on the moon? George Leonard, Alan Sturm and others have a short list of sites for the LRO to image (if it doesn't malfuction wink wink)

[frenzy]

Hello? Did a science journalist write this? Where have the real investigative journalists who have courage and integrity gone. How about addressing questions regarding mars such as 1. Perchlorates exist on earth - is there life here? 2. If the martian atmosphere is so thin how do the parachutes work to float down the machines we send there? How come there are such huge storms in such a thin atmosphere? NASA isn't telling us it straight, how about some mainstream journalists following the real leads?

[Gus Grissom]

here is footage of the Apollo 11 crew faking part of
their alleged mission to the Moon back
in 1969... Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xUGRngAhBI

the money shot of the fakes is between 7:00 and the
end of the clip.

[gavincurtis]

Good.

About time some brave people step forward.

Eventually it will become mainstream knowledge that humans did exist on Mars.

[Victor Connor]

Could this reporter be more ignorant of basic science?

[Peter]

The point of this story is that people need to wake up and stop arguing over religion and focus on how we can be better as species. The world was not created in seven days and dinosaurs did exist before the so called "creation". Religion is control and those in control dont want to give it up!

[Andrew Johnson]

To resolve this issue, it's best to look at the available evidence.

Here's some of NASA's own:

http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=33

Gosh - why is no one talking about the fossils on mars? Why is no one talking about the already photographed (multiple times) liquid surface water effects?

But let's just argue about creationism and evolution instead - or whether someone was religious or not....

[reevesAstronomy]

I have to point how poorly written this article is. Here are just a few of my reasons:

A) NASA ruled that they hadn't found life in the 1970's because there are other ways the results they got could be made.

B) This article is essentially a biased report written to advertise for a book.

C) The success rate for Mars missions and ALL space missions USED TO BE 50 percent. This is now above 90 percent.

[Brian]

So much potential for sharing scientific ideas at the layman level, or making a dang good conspiracy theory - interesting either way to me - wasted. Lame writing made worse by being a long, and ultimately pointless article.

[Danner Omerick]

The bible never says that there isn't life on other planets.

[James]

First of all, There they go misquoting the scriptures. The Bible doesn't only say that there is other forms of life(other than our own), It says that a number of them left the spiritual realm to mate with the women of earth. This highly intelligent creatures materialized themselves and produce these "hybrid" race called the "Nephilim" which caused havoc on earth but were destroyed in the deluge.(Genesis 6: 1-4) These rebel angels where called demons. In another part of the scriptures it says that they have great power. And can transform themselves into angels of light. It is my opinion that these "UFO" sighting are nothing short than the acts of these "Demons" attempt to mislead mankind into believing the mystical and the unknown. Something that T.V shows including kids programs are emphasizing like crazy. (Again, a plot to mislead). I am sure some will read this comments as ludicrous. But if there is anything that I am stating that you should not, and will not forget is this: "In the very near future, the world governments...(Inspired by God, whether they realize it or not) will act in his(God's) interest and will attack and destroy religion.(Rev. 17:16,17 -*Religion is looked upon as a harlot for its constant meddling in political affairs) This will be the judgment that it will deserve for misleading and misrepresenting his name. When this occurs, it will be the start of a series of events called "The Great Tribulation"..Again, some may read this statement and just laugh..But when these things happen. You will remember that you read it here. Unfortunately, it will not seem so funny then.

[Franz hambersplut BB craft proxy]

A tiny inter-dementional craft the size of a BB flew up my anus and now controls my thoughts and actions.
signed, inter-dementional BB craft

[ricky mcfarlan]

I dont beleive that Franz guy is real. I think he's a goverment obfuscator of maybe an AMWAY salesman!

[David Smith]

The Times hasn't been a respectable newspaper for years!

[SteveM]

It's funny, but when the grauniad do a conspiracy column, say for example the recent 9 part bilderberg group, its really quite gripping, yet this seems to be TO's lame attempt..Times, good to see you're sticking to what your editors bosses want you to feed us with. Go Globalisation, on with the Alien Agenda..

[Emily Cragg]

As a former Xerox digital tech, now retired, I have closely examined 3000 NASA Mars photos for faults in skew, hue, contrast and scale. NASA photos are loaded with them. I have 500 photos in my database that show human figures, housing, agriculture, serpents, sacrifice rituals, roads, vehicles, buildings, you name it.

NSA (who runs NASA) doesn't want us to know the whole solar system is settled and populated, so they get the Jason Group to make everything and everybody look like a rock. And that's how it is!

[enemyof NWO]

This discussion about life on Mars is a tiny bit " passe' " .
I am sorry too that NASA cannot be trusted and it is just a front
to show to the public the continuing space exploration with rockets , which in itself, is an oximoron due to the payload . There is life on Mars , one only has to read Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara book - Dark Mission - page 440 ,
and according to Author William Cooper there is a joint USA /Russia base on it for many decades . From "Behold a Pale Horse " page 213 . I am afraid official science is totally controlled and not worth talking about it .

[christophe]

Wow. I can see that sometime in the future, when Mars is colonised, we will have ski resorts at the poles. On day, an earth archaeologist is vacating at a ski resort, when he comes a cropper. Upon picking himself up, he sees a rock sticking out of the snow and ice. Upon it are strange markings...finally he realsies its a pictogram.
The Earth Council is notified and soon the Saturnian federaton and the Venusians and Neptunians are also brought in. They all exclaim "there WAS life on mars!!!"
I just knew it would be announced one day.

[TheHolyCrow]

I was wondering where I left my beach chair.

[Peter Pan]

I would've thought it obvious that those Mars probes that 'supposedly' crashed in fact never crashed but are doing what they were designed to do.

They either send their data secretly back to earth or they were sent to Mars to be used by whoever lives there at this time (or both)!

Wake up people, we are being lied to just one more time.

[Mike Franklin]

Common sense tells you that NASA has little interest in finding anything on Mars. Except for the Viking missions, each succeeding mission has purposely NOT looked for life. They've scanned for ice, signs of water, and then more ice.

Wow! So impressive!

I agree with the slant of this article. We have not nor will we ever find life on Mars, past or present, because we have no desire in finding it.

[Jimmy]

My opinion can be found in my new book: "STFU"

[Arthur Guy]

Life on Mars? Of course, they are called Humans from Earth and they probably reside in NASA's or is it the NAZI'S underground bases via their secret space program, give me a break, chemical rockets? this is for public consumption only. They must keep their technology secret you know, keep the rest of us from seeing what space is really like. You don't believe anything the NAZI'S, sorry NASA; slip of the tongue, tells you? do you?

[Cliff]

It is simple. The MILITARY calls the shots at NASA, not Elvis ok?

They have been calling the shots on the UFO scam for decades to hide their secret underground base building programme and anti-gravity technology while stealing TRILLIONS.

The top brass are scared to death of the aliens....so the lie about it.

[Wayne Herschel]

As an author on the subject of Mars and references to it found in ancient civilizations, I have presented an interesting collection of some very compelling cases on a few very important 'unrecognised' findings on Mars.

These findings not only suggest that Earth-like biological life is being hidden, but something a lot more important apparently worth hiding by churches through the ages... Hidden Records of advanced life associated with Mars.

I have presented all this material on line due to its importance and the Vatican has a lot to answer for.

Firstly, the coincidence that the layout of the so-called Mars pyramid cluster, 'face' anomaly and five-sided mountain are a perfect replica of how the Tikal pyramids of the Maya in Guatemala are laid out. This in turn duplicates the stars positions of the Pleiades cluster within the sacred bull constellation and the position of a few nearby Sun-like stars that correlate with prominent structures in both the Mars and Tikal layout plans.

The pattern matches were recently aired on the History Channel documentary 'Ancient Aliens' but quite surprisingly historians and astronomers decline to comment.

What is more, it is worth mentioning that the latest high- resolution satellite image of the Mars face was released to the public in a format not possible for regular computers. Only a powerful university computer was able to download it without crashing. The image is breathtaking and begs the question whether what can be seen on it is definitely a natural phenomena. It is strewn with a debris field of thousands of loose 'rocks' that are all more than 3 meters long and oblong (image now available on line on my website).

The Vatican City duplicates this mysterious layout plan and so does Washington DC.

There is a bigger conspiracy theory to consider here because it involves a Freemason document recently released by the UK's Bradford University.

Namely, the historical rendition of the original First Degree Tracing Board... and yes it produces the very same star chart diagram. The sun-like star correlating with the face on Mars anomaly in this document has a ladder/beam of light coming down from it with a hand holding the Holy Grail.

But if this sounds coincidental ponder on why the 4000-year-old Senmut Tomb mural in Deir El Bahri in Egypt under lock and key would reproduce the very same star map and beam of light coming down from the star to Earth. More importantly, why all the Egyptian 'gods' would be standing at the bottom of the ladder on terra firma!

Michael Brooks put the lid on the story for me in his last line and this is probably just a coincidence here. Could the universe have been tinkering with his typing as he wrote the article, resulting in a Freudian slip:

"Only Dan Brown's next book can tell us"

The fact is that Brown is working with the Solomon key, probably the mysterious Hebrew parchment copy in the British Library. He is also writing about Freemason secrets in his next book called 'The Lost Symbol', and yes... the Hebrew Solomon key parchment repeats the very same star pattern after a very interesting ancient star spangled puzzle is pieced together!

Wayne Herschel.

[george from denver]

google - the big picture by max igan

[JC]

I would like to see the true color of the Mars pics instead of the rust color that they paint...no dark sky=water in the air

[Suzanne Rose]

Please tell me where the Bible states that there can be no life on Mars. I believe the Bible, so tell me...please?

[pete]

Here's his argument:

1. A mistake has been made in an experiment. The experiment neglected an effect so every time the experiment was run it gave unreliable results.

2. Someone told another that someone else said they heard yet another say to yet someone else something that indicated the one overheard was a Christian fundamentalist.

3. The Mars mission failure rate is high.

Hypothesis: "attempts to explore Mars been [sic] secretly scuppered by religious scientists".

Rebuttal:

#1: Homo sapiens has a rather complete record as an imperfect cognitive engine -- we make mistakes quite regularly. This is a single mistake repeated N times... the value of N is irrelevant.

#2: The witnesses are dead, no record. Utterly unverifiable, not worth arguing, sloppy to have mentioned it at all.

#3: The shear number of missions to Mars we have attempted as compared with other missions would suggest that Mars mission failure rates are closer to the statistical average than the others, that is, the set of Mars missions may be a better statistical sample. Rather than "astonishingly incompetent" we have likely been very lucky with other mission targets given the astonishing difficulty of the efforts. The evidence supports *that*, not the opposite.

Hypothesis: cum hoc ergo propter hoc -- the fallacy of believing that happenstance implies causal relation. Also, a fundamental misunderstanding of statistics.

What really gets my goat is this...

"Or is it that scientists really can be astonishingly incompetent..."

The Scientists at NASA are not astonishingly incompetent -- the universe is a very complicated and messy place, we know "astonishingly" little about it all, and as a result experiments (and missions) almost never, if ever, go exactly to plan. That much we *do* know.

As to exactly where this jackass (aka Brooks) gets off putting down an entire, and large, population of professional people, in print, based on innuendo, unverifiable claims, and "astonishingly" faulty (actually missing) logic I am happy to leave as an exercise for others... I am simply relieved to now have him on my black list.

[chipsaucer]

all questions and answers
have been arranged for easy answers.
one needs look deeper for lasting
knowledge.the cards have already been delt.its great were all talking
but keep your eye on the ball.
if you wish to know more go to meetup.com/lcflyingsaucerclub

[chipsaucer]

for more info go to
meetup.com/lcflyingsaucerclub.
k;lato barba nickto
soory im drinking wine!

[Klem]

So, when the very first picture from one of the Rovers came up, the sky was blue. Now, most, but not all, of the pictures taken on Mars shows a red sky. Red sky at night, sailor's delight. AND, you get a red sky on earth because of a DENSER atmosphere. Mars's atmosphere is supposed to be 1/10th that of earth. NO WAY could any conditions on Mars produce a red sky. Uh, uh, sweetie, no way.

[Andy Fell]

It's very interesting the points raised in this article. I would suggest to anyone that's interested to watch in full a news conference conducted by Tom Van Flandern (former head of the US Naval Observatory)in 2001. The video is on Youtube and not a hoax and it's very eye opening in to see what NASA have openly done to alter certain images from Mars. Throughout his news conference, Flandern puts links to the original images on the NASA/JPL website and in my view, there can't be much doubt in his findings. Just be sure to research his findings for yourself and keep an open mind.

[Andy Bond]

Can we just assume for the moment that life s on mars and lots of other places.
Now we come to the announcement;

Huerr, clear throat.

Life has been found on Mars. None of the religious texts really told us this was going to happen, so they probably made the rest up as well, took a good guess, under a starry sky and decided a big brother was a useful means to control the population. After all if someone you can't see, knows you are breaking the rules you may think he reports to the boss right?
Someone, must have the courage to get this nonsense over with, can the world take anymore zealots?

[Brian]

Well now, let's not jump into any conclusions involving religious people. Anyone working in the science department wants to know the truth I'm certain. What interests me about this article is that NASA really does kind of glimmer over the really strange facts when it comes to anything strange that can be nailed down, and when they are forced to confront it, they reply with a dodging statement,
"Oh, we weren't aware of that ANOMALY in that image..." Or... "Yes, that definitely is a STRANGE PHENOMENA"
What makes matters more interesting, (and I'm not attacking the writer or anything, you clearly have earned your job, I mean you're writing for these guys, but) why attack religious people when involving the pursuit for truth? I mean, I'm known to be wrong on occasion, but I don't think there is a sleeper cell of Christians in the NASA department sabotaging all experiments to decipher whether or not there is life in and on Mars. But there are a few things one has to consider when deciding whether or not the planet is habitable -

1 - A portion of the planet's ice caps have been recorded to melt in the spring and freeze again in the Winter. This implies that the weather is somewhat habitable for life.

2 - What about all the strange images which have recently been taken that, yeah, hard to explain, but they REALLY indicate that there WAS at least life on Mars, I mean, DAMN - they have pictures of trees from satelites, I'm not kidding. And what about the "glass tubes" NASA took photos of. It's a real strange oddity, but look it up.

My point is this - Don't blame a religious group. We all want to know the truth.

[Emily Cragg]

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=309172&l=f161791a48&id=1550556217

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=19332&id=1550556217

There's no reason people shouldn't know Mars is settled with humans just like ourselves.

[Lucian]

Here is the 'freedom of speech' wallowing in the gutter of failed rhetoric...

Tatiana Covington: 'Stupid christians. Nero was right!' / CreationistDuchebags: 'Wow, creationist nut balls are starting early today.'

Lets change it to: Stupid atheists. God was right.

Wow, materialsit nut balls are starting early today.'

[Kermonk]

A fool named Al wrote

"Of course, these kinds of experiments are based on the scientifically dubious assumption that life can arise and develop by purely natural means without the need for any kind of external organising influence. This naturalistic view is not a scientific but a philosophical hypothesis."

Rubbish, that's you preaching religion. So far there has been no proof at all, that things don't develop naturally without the need for your god.

[John]

@ Alfred Burdett

Can you spell H-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e?

I'd learn it if i were you mate.

You claim because someone is or was a 'distinguished scientist', that they are somehow elevated above common human failings. Obviously, this is nuts.

Then you go on to say, that anyone who questions Abelson's integrity, is an idiot. Bit of a blanket, baseless statement, but...

Then you go on to claim that you, not the guy in the room..at the time..who actually heard him talking..with the inflections and intonations of voice, doesn't understand what he really meant...but you do?! Have you any idea just how idiotic that sounds?

You have the bead on what was said almost fifty years ago, not having been in the room, whereas someone who was there in the room, at the time, doesn't?! And you base this on what? Because you say Abelson was a distinguished scientist?! Pathetic.

You're living proof that an outwardly intelligent person, can be just as much an idiot as anyone, you're kind of disproving your own point really.

[Clive Burghard]

Our entire Solar System is absolutely teeming with life, and always has been, only a complete fool would deny it after all the evidence that has been witnessed by thousands of perfecly sane rational people. Not only are we not alone, we never have been!

[Richard D]

Do you really have to waste perfectly good space on this drivel! Stick to facts and news please.

[jonathon]

guys and girls, you are missing the point to which you have read this. The Main stream media are supporting one of the biggest questions and most of you jump on it and rip it to shreds. If you all just read it properly you would understand. You people who have only the tv to feed them with junk and cant read for them self's a fantastic article...well this is what is wrong with the uk today no common sense!!!

[kermit101]

well it seems my comments are being censored. not surpirsing the msm is part of the illuminati/reptile poeple and want to keep the sheeple in the dark about their plans for a NWO. In partnership with the greys of course!

[Dave]

Thats the worst advertisement I've ever read.

[DLCrocket]

I've read quit a bit of the Bible and can't think of anywhere it rules out life on other planets. On the contrary, Jesus said "I have other flocks of which you know not".

[dave hall]

Of course there's life on Mars - look at the picture... there's a giant gerbil about to consume the Rover!

Is it too late to get a message to the driver?

[Jason]

There is software that determines how artificial something is similar to an infrared camera by imaging it in black and white with the more artificial (instead of warm) something is the more white it shows up. Well the Face on Mars is more artificial than a military tank on Earth!!!
NASA has lied about EVERYTHING! Read Dark Mission for absolute proof.

[Raphael]

Hi

I'm from Brazil and we, brazilians, know that everwhere may grow up life. And MARTE (Mars, in portuguese) is not different.

[Neil B ♪]

The religious angle is dubious, but still: contamination of soil by perchlorates makes dubious the conclusion there was no life on Mars. We need to keep looking, and I for one would be thrilled to find it there.

[Prince Harley]

Stupid stupid stupid.
The real reason that we have been unable to find life on Mars is that, being very clever, the Martians have decided to remain un-discovered.
What's that? How do I know the Martians are cleverer than us?
Get real, they cannot be less clever.......

[Clearhead]

Ohhhh - those mean ole religious people! Seems like they'll do ANYTHING to try to spread common sense!

[MS]

Sabotage doesn't have to be conscious - I self-sabotage all the time, and so do you. A primate that believes even looking for evidence of something might offend some big glowy presence is in a compromised position as a scientist. Yes, a religious objection to life on Mars has an effect on what you'll find - that's rather the point of religious belief.

Bias isn't exclusive of incompetence; they fuel one another.

[S. Steinberg]

I see several intertwined issues here: Brooks’ reportage, and the actual facts re the controversy over the existence of extra-Terran life.

As to Brooks' journalism as displayed in his above article:

Intriguing opening-question, worth pursuing. But it is far from new; this issue has been under debate and intensively pursued for many years. However, to keep the issue in the public eye, and if some of Brooks' presented-information is both accurate and new, then I would say that the article -- except for its flaws (see below) -- is welcome.

Article presents some interesting views – which Brooks presents as newly revealed – as to the reliability or unreliability of the carbon-tests as a methodology for finding life-indicants. Useful information. BUT THEN the article launches into making context-poor interpretations and assumptions of various issues regarding Abelson, NASA, and failures of Mars-exploration missions, and excludes broader contextual information that might otherwise have shed a clarifying light on some of these issues. In my view, that flaw is a significant journalistic failing.

But there’s more: Then, using poorly-or-invalidly-based innuendo to imply that there has been & is an official "cover-up" of the truth (-- regardless of whether or not there is a “cover-up” or whatever that "truth" may be --), Brooks adds the following:

“Now a handful of brave NASA scientists”, says Brooks’ article – note Brooks’ use of the word BRAVE – “have exposed a problem with the latest attempt” – note his use of the phrase THE LATEST ATTEMPT – “to pronounce” – note his choice of the word PRONOUNCE – “that Mars was dead”.

What, kind of objective, innuendo-free, factually accurate, “journalism”, is this, journalism that so intrusively weaves-in what appears to be Brooks’ personal conclusion that NASA, and the scientific community in general, is actively, imperiously, and threateningly seeking to hide “the truth” about Martian life from the people of Earth?

The answer: it is, in my view, bad journalism: Brooks has woven into his reporting what seems to be a personal, and unsubstantiated in this article, bias; and in his doing so, he has either unjustifiably twisted the facts or failed to provide us the factual basis upon which he has constructed his presented views.

In terms of the form of journalism that Brooks presents in this article, whether or not NASA et al have been or are continuing to seek to conceal information regarding non-Terran life – while that’s certainly a valid question – is beside the point.

On an additional factual point, it may be interesting to note that Brooks, in his article, lauds these “Brave” scientists who have “now” – note his use of the time-sensitive word NOW – “exposed” – note his use of the loaded word EXPOSED rather than REPORTED – NASA’s alleged efforts – note that he provides no foundation for making that allegation – to “pronounce” (as though by decree?) Mars a dead planet. Yet, those “brave” scientists – again, Brooks provides no factual support for his use of the term “brave” – presented their findings – which contain no accusations a cover-up – openly, at the 2009 Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2009/lpsc20093rd.shtml), an event which took place nearly THREE MONTHS AGO.

So what is Brooks, in this article, seeking to do?

I do not fault his entire article, only parts of it, because he does present some apparently valid information and viewpoints about a topic of great interest and value, and he apparently seeks to present those points in an engrossing, thought-provoking manner. And he paints a good mystery.

However, should it really be that difficult to write a fascinating, or at the very least informative, article that is instead thoroughly and solidly grounded in accuracy and objectivity, and which excludes unsubstantiated innuendo and hype?

Now, as to the controversy over the existence of Martian, or extra-Terran, life, and whether or not NASA (or the ESA, or the space agencies or major scientific bodies of other nations, for example) is seeking to hide “the truth”, I can only suggest that there is such a fund of knowledge and viewpoints (valid or otherwise) available now – via the internet and other public sources – that I get the impression that the issue is far broader and far more complex than most people imagine.

I just find it hard to believe that such issues are still under debate; for me – and this is purely a personal view – it’s akin to debating whether or not air exists or whether birds can fly; it’s a debate that ought long ago to have been consigned to what we humans – just “babes” in the scheme of the posited universes, timelines, and humanly-unimagined “dimensions” of existences – call “prehistory”.

Just imagine: even within the frame of reference of our own planet’s history, its geology, its ecology, its almost-every-other “ology” you can think of – and even within the framework of the myriad-levels of our own evolving human cultures and societies and the machinations that go on within them – how much do we NOT know?

So: life on Mars? Probably. Life on Titan, Ganymede, Europa? Conceivably. Other definitions of, and locations of life, elsewhere – and elsewhen? Why not? Interplanetary, or interconstellationary, or intergalactic, or interuniversal, or interdimensional, communication, influence, travel, life-seedings, trade, farming, observations, you-name-it: who knows? Note: For those readers who may immediately reject these concepts as so much poppycock, do the research: you’ll find pro, and con, views about these concepts, many being presented by very credentialled scientists in a variety of fields of research. Then draw your own conclusions.

“There are more things in Heaven and Earth than are dreamed of in your philosophy, Horatio”, wrote Shakespeare – more than 400 years ago. This admonition still applies today.

My suggestion:

As with conducting good journalism – much as with conducting good detective-work – the only way to begin unraveling these multiple and intertwined mysteries is to go into the research with an overriding commitment to the truth: with an open mind, seek out as many potentially legitimate sources as possible and from as many sides as possible, dig objectively for verifiable and substantially supportable facts, see if (and how) any of the information either fits or conflicts with other pieces of information, recognize and view unsupported innuendo with great caution (but, where relevant, consider using it as a guide that may be able to lead you to uncover relevant verifiable facts), and, regardless of where you might desire the information to bring you, go with honesty to where the information actually leads you.

I certainly hope, that in this commentary, I’ve fully followed these rules myself. If I’ve erred in that effort, I apologize for that; but at least I’ve tried to do my best. And I hoe that what I’ve presented here offers something of value.

To all my friends on Vulcan, by the way: Live long and prosper! ;-)

– S. Steinberg
16 June 2009

[Kevin's G-Portal]

The reason why so many Mars missions fail is because it's, on a human scale, exceptionally far away.

Try throwing a stone as far as you can, while still hitting a chosen object. Then make it deploy intricate equipment to do experiments and take measurements!

Quite impressive what these people have achieved, despite the failures.

[Stephen R. Leach]

I hate it when idiots think the Bible tells us there was no life on any other planet than just earth.
What we do know, is that there was a calamity of unknown magnitude that occurred before the creation of man on earth and this is shown to us in the first chapter of Genesis. This is evidenced by ancient bones of animals and humanoid forms which point to this event, but in no way does the Word of God say life on Mars doesn't or did not exist. We're just not aware of it at this time and with scientific proof, it will once again prove the Word of God to be verified and true. :)
BTW...the 6 day creation didn't mean a 24hr period of time; never did His word state this. A day is as a thousand years and the 6 & 7 days of creation is prophetic to the line of THIS current history we're living in.
Let the gnashing of teeth begin.

[Lord Delaval of Sluice]

Not one of the above comments makes any sense.

[ophiuchus]

there are hundreds of images suggesting life..... why not show some here...if you are interested: lionheart_rsn@hotmail.com

[Lizzie]

The second comment from the top said :

"Stupid christians. Nero was right!"
Posted by: Tatiana Covington | 11 Jun 2009 21:24:13

IF A CHRISTIAN HAD MADE A STATEMENT LIKE THAT ABOUT YOU MARTIAN WORSHIPPING BONEHEADS ATTACKING CHRISTIANITY AND THE BIBLE, YOU WOULD HAVE A LIT THE MATCH AND BURNED US YOURSELVES, JUST LIKE TATIANA.

You're in no danger of a "theocracy", evidenced by the fact that no Chrsitian commenting here demanded YOUR LIVES for differing with our beliefs. In fact, WE are most definitely in danger of you bloodthirsty totalitarians. AGAIN. AGAIN. and AGAIN. YOU are the ones who drive and justify tyrants and despots.

[botfly]

Whatever there is on Mars I hope
it is more interesting than all
this drivel

[notHoagland]

Quick everyone! Read Hoagland's book "Dark Mission". You know, the one that been disproved a billion times because it's absolute cack.
Are the comments here for an advert masquerading as a story just an advert for Hoagland's pish? Now there's a conspiracy theory

[Dragon]

Part of my family is "Native American". (I hate that term). They still repeat the same story handed down fom generation to generation. They originally came from another Star System. Interestingly enough they believe they came from the Pleiades System. They were settled on a Red Planet with Red skies, but later moved to a neighbouring planet because the conditions on the Red Planet became hostile. They also say, of Earth, that this is the Garden, and we are the Gardeners. No-one owns the Earth which is why white Settlers cheated them out of their homelands.

[pknut]

I used to think that we ought to make all the religious nuts move to their own continent (e.e. Antartica) and they can then love,oppress, repress or do whatever they want to each other. Now I think we could move them to Mars and thus we would have proof that there is no intelligent life on Mars

[Nick]

Wow - this was an interesting article at first, then really started to suck. This is why nobody pays for news anymore.

[Matt Langley]

I've always known about the Viking experiment but not the fact that the other experiment was known to be flawed. This explains a lot.

With regard to the creationist's comment at the start, science does not assert that "life can arise and develop by purely natural means without the need for any kind of external organising influence", it simply tries to determine either (and any) way by a process of elimination and proof.

Currently all the evidence suggests that life is just a self replicating chemical reaction with no deliberate design, and lots of evidence of trials and errors over time. Surely any creator would not make such mistakes, and if he did he would not be infallible?

I think I just proved the non-existence of an omnipotent God.

[Challenger]

I'm not happy: My stimulus check was late, so I had to wait until the weekend to by an iPhone.

I know who's behind all this, though--there must be a super-secret cabal of churches and priests who may *seem* like quiet nobodies minding their own business and leaving others alone, but are really plotting to take over the world!

They already control everything--it explains why I was denied unemployment! It's all a big conspiracy to keep people from sleeping in on Sundays! They're out to kill "Science", which is bad, because "Science" gives me new toys and crap.

When we do find intelligent life, they definitely will "laugh at all the religious people", because they'll be above that, and be just like us: Needlessly persecuting a minority and blaming their life choices for our problems, only now we're not doing it in German.

[This is Nonsense.]

“Dean, let’s get out of here. The Bible says there can be no life on Mars.”

That's just rank nonsense.

The Bible says no such thing.

Biblical illiteracy is every bit as embarrassing as "scientific" illiteracy [or innumeracy or whatever you wanna call it].

You really should be ashamed to post nonsense like that.

[Ivan]

He should change the title of the book to "14 Things That Don’t Make Sense" now that this article has been written...

Terrible..

[Hal]

Tell you what - why don't you get some cash together and start your own space exploration? Then you can whine about the experiment parameters all you want.

I swear.

[Kryten]

It's not too many years ago that most scientists would deny the very idea of life existing in the universe,other than on planet Earth.

Now the common,(and mathematically probable),view seems to be that life,microscopic of course,may,just may exist in abundance throughout the universe.

When will our arrogance allow us to accept the probability that we just one among potentially 'millions' of civilisations that have developed in the vastness of space,and that it's our ignorance and limited knowledge that is flawed.

We could have (probably have!,) been visited by advanced civilisations many,many times.

We need to evolve into much more open minded beings,methinks

[cheap spirit]

and not a single post about hot green chicks on mars?

[Aristotle]

Interesting article but please refrain from using the terms "conspiracy" or "bible" in future as the nutcases have learnt how to use google.

[brian]

Some pesky scientists have just pointed out an appalling design error in NASA’s latest attempts to find life on Mars.

No offence, but you obviouly read the Beano when younger.

Pesky crows ? loved it myself.

cheers

[Al]

Kermonk: "A fool named Al wrote..."

Please, Kermonk, allow this humble "fool" to remind you of the small matter of overwhelming complexity arising and being sustained for millions of years in an environment totally inimical to life. Of course, the more time you give nature to perform this (actually impossible) experiment, the greater the improbability that it will be able to pull it off. It is a bit like having to throw a vast unbroken series of sixes with a dice - the improbability of sustaining the sequence increases with every throw.

The complexity of life set against the laws of nature (in particular the second law of thermodynamics) is proof of the agency of an external organising influence (and this is despite what a certain popular Professor, loved by the BBC, may say!)

So, yes, you can accuse me of preaching religion. But I detect that you are not preaching science, but your own inverted religion - a philosophy called naturalism - which you are reading into science.

Therefore I prefer my "foolishness" to your "wisdom".

[Matt]

Al,
Do you not see the absurdity of your statement?
You are saying that because you don't understand the chemical and biological processes, then you have a real answer - God did it!

Although the actual initial process is still unknown, there have been research papers as far back as 2001 explaining how protocells can absorb nucleotides.
Protocell growth is also understood and it is not beyond imagination (unlike the religious answer), that primitive DNA like structures were encapsulated within a membrane, giving then a survival advantage.
Progress is being made and when the true answer is known, which gap will you hide you philosphy in then?

[Matt]

The US can't find Bin Laden. What chance of them finding bacterea on another planet?

[Matt]

Al,
The 2nd law of thermodynamics is not proof of an "outside agent" i.e., a god, intervening in the universe.
This is a creationist argument for misunderstanding how order comes from non-order.
You have been well schooled in the falacies of your cult, but your "answer" answers nothing.
your preferred 2nd law of course would rule out the creation of an ordered being to interfere in the universe in the first place.

[David Hubbard]

Where in the bIble does it say that there can be no life on Mars? I am a Creationist and I feel that it is very possible there is life elsewhere in the Universe and that we should explore and find this out.

[Rick]

I you hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras.

[Ed]

science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind
-Albert Einstein

Would like to note that the story of creation in Genesis, follows evolution and even begins with the Big Bang (Darkness and Void, then there was light).

One need not be conflicted when studying science or believing in God.