White House Briefed On "Potential For Life" On Mars 610
Veeoh writes "FTA: It would appear that the US President has been briefed by Phoenix scientists about the discovery of something more 'provocative' than the discovery of water existing on the Martian surface. This news comes just as the Thermal and Evolved Gas Analyzer (TEGA) confirmed experimental evidence for the existence of water in the Mars regolith on Thursday."
Big and black (Score:5, Funny)
It's always provocative when you hear they spotted a big black monolith in the regolith.
His first response was probably to ask if this meant Jenna was pregnant.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Is it really any wonder that elected officials care nothing for the opinions of the masses?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Big and black (Score:4, Insightful)
The form of government of the USA is not "fundamentally broken in design and philosophy." In its design and philosophy, it is one of the best models that has been yet tried by the species. The problems have resulted from two things: Firstly, an uninformed and overly-obedient populace resulting from excessive media control and from everyone being too in-debt and thus too over-worked to invest time in their own government. Secondly, violation of the "design and philosophy" of the system by governing parties that has gone unpunished. You want a fundamental design and philosophy that works, but you have it! The Constitution is an advanced and well-thought out thing and shows impressive foresight and intelligence on the parts of its authors. But certain governments have wiped their arse on it. It's not a failure of fundamental design and philosophy, but of enforcement. Get the telecoms companies punished for breaking the law recently, and you've made a good start to fixing things.
"Democracy is the worst form of government..." (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Big and black (Score:4, Insightful)
Punishing the telecoms WOULD go a long way towards dealing with the fundamental problem. Had AT&T done the right thing, and called CNN when they were asked to perform illegal wiretaps, then perhaps the government would think twice about asking corporations to break the law.
The government shouldn't work on the honors system. If we can't prosecute the telecoms, then we will never be able to get evidence against the real criminals who ordered the wiretaps.
Re:Big and black (Score:4, Insightful)
Even if this weren't the case, they are our servants and they knew that when they signed up for the job, so either way they are utterly failing to represent us. That's true even if you don't like a crude joke about Jenna.
I seriously doubt George W Bush... hell, ANY member of the Bush clan, has *ever* considered themselves civil "servants". They consider themselves the ruling class, pure and simple. I fear this is an entirely too common opinion of the "elite" nowadays...
Re:Big and black (Score:4, Insightful)
You hit it on the head. He's an elitist, and he sees the average American as a resource, not entirely unlike cattle, to be kept fed and reasonably happy, so long as they can be used profitably. I guarantee you that his lies to get us into Iraq and the way he's used our military as a tool to enrich himself is no more than a reflection of this mindset.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Big and black (Score:5, Insightful)
See if you can let this in. The legal definition of government corruption [wikipedia.org] does not require that you yourself benefit directly from actions you took while in office, in order to qualify for indictment.
It can be your family (Bush Sr., Carlyle Group), your circle of friends, coworkers, former colleagues, etc (Cheney, Halliburton.) Because after you leave office, there are many ways that the benefit can come back to you.
What does it sound like when a government that awards no-bid contracts to companies with direct, tangible connections to the most senior elected and appointed officials? In the beginning, we were told this was necessary due to time constraints; we've now seen nearly seven years of war, and war profits, billions of dollars into the hands of this administration's close friends.
Now we're seeing no-bid oil contracts in Iraq, going to good friends of this administration.
Do you need a Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos to make a determination of corruption, with visible caches of money, cronies spilling out their pockets? No.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Right. Absence of evidence is evidence of guilt. Gotcha.
By the way, stop torturing illegal immigrants. It's not right.
Re:Big and black (Score:5, Interesting)
No paper trail is required to prove corruption. All that has to be shown is that your people benefited, that friends, colleagues, former coworkers etc. gained from your decisions while in office.
The Halliburton no-bid contracts [halliburtonwatch.org] are an excellent starting point, with many more like them to investigate.
Re:Big and black (Score:4, Insightful)
Lobbyists that represent and monied interests that are, well, citizens entitled to petition government just the same as you.
I don't know which is scarier; the fact that you wrote this or the fact that it was modded insightful. It's not like your comment in any way reflects the actual state of affairs in government. At best, it should have been modded, "+1 ignorant yet wishful thinking". The sad FACT is, lobbyists bribe elected officials, effectively placing power over the entire country's policies and laws, in the hands of powerful corporations and select (wealthy/elite) citizenry. Lobbyists as they operate today have effectively created a hidden ruling class.
Your suggestion of creating our own PAC is laughable at best. The only REAL solution is to outlaw the practice; forcing our elected officials to actually communicate with the people that elected them i the first place. It is, after all, their fucking job in the first place. Despite it being their job, people somehow accept it is not. It's been suggested that fewer than 1% of our elected officials at the Federal level are not on the take in some form or fashion. This isn't surprising in the least considering it is almost impossible to get elected in the first place without some form of smudge on one's soul. Which is exactly why the system needs to be changed. All adults know the system is broken. The question is, which table will you be eating at tonight? The adults table or the children's table. The PAC suggestion is squarely at the later of the two.
As is, laws in the US are made three way. First and foremost, laws are made to benefit corporations, almost always to the detriment of the population, having been directed by lobbying interests. The second way laws are made is reactionary; which is to address the rare occasion the "ignorant" population actually objects. While there are quotes around "ignorant", it's not altogether inaccurate either. The third way is to create a meaningless law which benefits nothing but hopes to win favor from the ignorant, vocal masses whom like to see something done, even if the result is meaningless and shallow.
Long story short, the only solution is to prevent any form of lobbying in any semblance as is commonly practiced today. Your PAC suggestion only serves to become part of the illness that is our current government. Just because everyone else is looting doesn't mean it is okay for you to do it too.
It wasn't so long ago that our elected representatives would travel back and forth from Washington and their home state to shake hands, listen, and learn what the people wanted, and to determine how to best serve those that elected them. That's the origin of the town hall meeting. These days, that's rare. These days, that same time is usually spent vacationing; often with the monies and/or benefits provided for by lobbyists. And usually, the rare occasion a town hall meeting is held, it's sole function is normally to pacify, as lip service is the only intent.
Long story short, any system which allows lobbyists to function anything close to its current form in utterly broken and without merit.
The sad truth is, politicians do what we want. (Score:3, Insightful)
In fact, the politicians do exactly what we want. We as normal citizens tend to only talk to people that are "like" us and the Internet has only made this worse. If you spent most of your time on DailyKos, you might think everyone was a liberal. Similarly, if you hung out on the FreeRepublic, you might think everyone was conservative.
You and others of your bent complain about corporations, and how evil they are, but at the same token, there's a lot of people that actually LIKE corporations and see them a
Re:wrong (Score:5, Interesting)
Really? So the numerous agricultural combine lobbyist groups, comprised of small farm holders, is "big cash"? La Raza, the largest Hispanic lobbying group, is "big cash"? How about lobbyists from the ABA, or the AMA?
This notion that only "big cash" hire lobbyists is a myth. And its a myth perpetrated by the ignorant that can only rail against "the MAN" while sitting on their couches doing nothing.
Re:Big and black (Score:5, Insightful)
If your idea can't muster a few thousand supporters in your state or nationwide to donate $10-$100 each, then maybe it is your idea that is defective, not the lack of anyone hearing it.
Citizens freely associate and donate to mutual interests every day to accomplish local and national goals. Perhaps you should get involved and help out instead of sitting on Slashdot complaining.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Trying to cover up something like "life on mars" is futile and foolish.
Fancy that... The government to hide something. Not like any agent of the government, elected or not, has ever tried to do anything like that. Land mines in Central America (Iran Contra affair), Weapons for hostages (Iran hostage crisis), The The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, or the Lies of the Century [whatreallyhappened.com] (this site will tick some people off!). There are so many examples of people in government doing exactly what you are arguing they w
Re:Big and black (Score:4, Funny)
woo (Score:5, Funny)
Re:woo (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:woo (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe the life forms are some sort of stem cells and they're checking on the legality of bringing back samples?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously, why the run around. Did they go to the president when the viking Labeled Release [space.com] results ended up positive?
Well, according to the article you linked to, one experiment on the Viking missions indicated a possible presence of life; another indicated an absence of life. Furthermore, it is possible (again, according to the article you linked to) to explain the positive result as a false-positive. As such, the results were inconclusive, and to suggest that these indicate that there is life on Mars is crazy.
However, it's possible that the current results show the existence of organic compounds after all -- in other
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
He supports manned space explorations. Its one of his only controversial policies I agree with. Having all humans in one biosphere means that life and intelligence (so far as we know) could be wiped from the face of the universe by a single meteor impact. Manned space exploration is a necessary step in humanity's primary raison d'etra: the perpetuation of life.
Reminds me of Nixon (Score:3, Insightful)
Nixon also got "lucky" with a major scientific coup (the Apollo moon landings) happening on his watch. He despised JFK and killed the program just as soon as he could. Still, it is his name and not JFK's that is on the plaque affixed to the lunar lander descent stage. Hundreds/Thousands/Millions of years from now it'll still be there.
The low TV ratings didn't help either.
Re:woo (Score:5, Funny)
I know you're joking, but Bush did find an error in some Fermilab calculations [theonion.com] a while back. Don't underestimate him.
Re:woo (Score:4, Insightful)
Would you pass up such a golden opportunity for a large-scale, manned mission to Mars?
Re:woo (Score:5, Funny)
Re:woo (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, in the VERY unlikely event that Mars ever had large scale life, there could be oil fields under the surface.
I'd actually be in two minds about it were to be the case though and we considered sending people to go get it. On one hand I'd hope not - we need to get off oil for more than just the reason that we're running out. On the other, it'd SERIOUSLY pick up the world's space programs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, no. It would cost way too much to bring oil from another planet to ours. If Mars were made entirely out of oil (so once there you would spend $0 to obtain any amount of oil) it would probably still be several orders of magnitude more expensive than trying to manufacture oil on earth.
Anyone on slashdot who knows the cost of taking one kilo of stuff from Mars to Earth?
Re:2008 just called... (Score:4, Insightful)
Impeaching the bastard [cnn.com] would do wonders for our political system, regardless of how much time he's got left.
Re:2008 just called... (Score:4, Insightful)
That is a point that is too overlooked these days. In order to restore the checks and balances, Bush and Cheney much be impeached before leaving office. Failure to do so sets the precedent that a sitting president can ignore limits to his power and order his staff to ignore Congressional subpoenas [democrats.org] And after do so, that President can still complete his term of office. Allowing Bush and Cheney to go impeached finishes the process of turning the Constitution into "just a g*d dammed piece of paper" [rense.com] Bush hating isn't just about the temporary damages that occur during his presidency, but the lasting damages, like the destruction done to our rights and our Constitution. Bush hating is about the amount of freedoms we have lost because of his presidency and how it is very difficult to regain lost freedoms without bloodshed.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, if they were impeached, charged, arrested, and imprisoned (unlikely, but hey, one can wished) even after the term, that would set a nice message for future holders of the office as well.
Re:2008 just called... (Score:4, Informative)
What's more, Obama voted the same way that Bush did. And had he voted, McCain would have almost certainly voted the same way, too.
Reminds me of a South Park episode... [wikipedia.org]
Re:2008 just called... (Score:5, Insightful)
Um...it's still 2008, and Bush is still president. He's part of the news story. And it's damn odd that scientific results have to be 'discussed' with him before they're released.
Re:2008 just called... (Score:5, Funny)
Not at all. They're being kind and considerate. They know it's going to take him a lot longer to figure out than most people. It is really embarrassing when the "leader" of the "free world" doesn't get it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Not really. They knew he'd need more time than the average person to comprehend the news, so they're giving him a little head start.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
(Because) I spoke about Creationists and ID supporters.
In my world that's quite a difference with (Roman!) Catholics or main stream Protestants.
I fully agree the Bible does not at any point exclude other life.
And for me the Bible is not a fact book but a guide.
he's still in office torturing people (Score:3, Insightful)
he's still in office and defending things like torture
take a look at this book review
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/books/review/Brinkley-t.html?ref=review [nytimes.com]
still don't want to bash Bush?
U.S. is better than Al Qaeda (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you really wish to compare Al Qaeda and the U.S. in the same breath?
Because, if they are comparable, the terrorists really have won.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:2008 just called... (Score:5, Funny)
2008 just called...[...]and all some people can do is keep hating the past.
2048 just called, and they want their time machine back. Also, I just hung up the phone with 1987 and they want their fucking stupid joke back.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, I hope that the solution is better than the one Europe found for Serbia. Oh, wait, they didn't. They stood by as hundreds of thousands of people were brutally executed and dumped into mass graves as their wives and daughters were being raped.
If that didn't happen, then I might listen to your ragging.
they found osama? (Score:2, Funny)
damn, he hid good!!
Already? (Score:5, Funny)
Right to (Kill) Life (Score:2, Funny)
If there's life, we can kill it. If there's been life for a long time, it's probably left an oily residue somewhere.
Prepare for the Space War I! Spreading democracy throughout the Solar System!
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Don't worry, I'm making the call to the Republican Space Rangers at this very moment!
Amazing discovery (Score:2, Funny)
Why don't you link to the original article? (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/WH08018.xml&headline=White%20House%20Briefed%20On%20Potential%20For%20Mars%20Life&channel=space [aviationweek.com]
Re:Why don't you link to the original article? (Score:5, Interesting)
The key part is in the last paragraph, where it says the "provocative" results came from the experiment where they added water from Earth to a sample of soil. I bet they had a burst of oxygen like the old Viking lander experiments, which no one ever satisfactorily explained. The one that I remembered that made sense was some kind of dry peroxide in the soil formed by UV, which reacted with water to generate O2, but didn't repeat because the peroxide was used up.
I hope this indicates some kind of chemistry that makes it easy to extract breathable O2 from Martian soil, so that any explorers/exploiters won't have to take as much in consumables. Would be nice to find a nitrogen source, then you'd have CHON, which is most of what you need to live. In the right proportions, of course.
Sheesh (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Barney and Miss Beazley?
Re: (Score:2)
Colour me confused (Score:5, Interesting)
Heed my word, my brothers, for I have RTFA! It says that there's no way it has confirmed the presence of life right now or in the past on Mars. So what can be the big story they want to tell the President first?
Or if it's no bigger than "we found something that may or may not indicate the possibility that Mars may or may not have probably potentially hosted a form a life, maybe eventually?" then why the secrecy?
Re:Colour me confused (Score:5, Funny)
Heed my word, my brothers, for I have RTFA!
Mod parent down! Parent read the linked article and has an informed opinion. Alert! Alert!
That's Easy (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Colour me confused (Score:4, Insightful)
My guess is the latter: complex organic molecules.
Re:Colour me confused (Score:5, Funny)
They found an image of Jesus in one of the soil samples.
Re:Colour me confused (Score:4, Funny)
So what can be the big story they want to tell the President first?
My bet is that they've spent half a day trying to explain to him that "it's not butter"
Re:Colour me confused (Score:4, Interesting)
I think some of us are a little short on trust this week. Remember, the EPA didn't write a report detailing the dire consequences of global warming, the one and only anthrax bomber committed suicide so the case is closed, and a Brig. General connected with the "sloppy" nuke transfer from Minot to the Middle East staging area also committed suicide, "presumably" with a handgun. (They aren't sure?)
That was this week in America. Next week? Stay tuned.
Re:Colour me confused (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure if you meant that as a joke or if you were serious. Either way, it's been modded Insightful by someone. Oil would be too big of a discovery. If there were oil, then that would be definitive proof that Mars once did have organic life.
Re:Colour me confused (Score:5, Interesting)
Informative? (Score:3, Insightful)
Really?
Mods: The "Abiogenic Petroleum Origin Hypothesis" is garbage.
It's mainly used to comfort people by telling them there is a limitless supply of petroleum, and that energy crises are frauds perpetrated by the one world government in preparation for the arrival of the anti-christ. It's popular in the WorldNetDaily Hal Lindsey circles of charlatanism.
I think parent is kidding, btw... (apologies if you're not)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Phoenix capabilities? (Score:2, Insightful)
Does Phoenix have the ability to detect the building blocks of life in the water samples it's apparently found? Will it be able to detect the presence of complex molecules or even microbes within the water?
Re:Phoenix capabilities? (Score:4, Interesting)
that seems rather consistent (Score:4, Insightful)
they have always said that the existance of water would make the discovery of life more certain. if indeed they confirmed the existance of water, it seems to me very likely that they will also find at least the building blocks of life if not evidence that basic lifeforms once existed on Mars. It's still a long way from confirming the existance of advance life forms, and even a longer way from confirming the existance of civilization.
i would find it incredible if, after finding life, they did not find any traces of aminoacids or any other building blocks. frankly, i think not finding any evidence of life even though water existed on Mars would be a bigger discovery then finding that some single cell life existed once. but that's just me.
Not much life on Mars. (Score:5, Informative)
The Viking lander [spherix.com] checked for microscopic life on Mars back in 1971. It wasn't a very sensitive test; the lander shot out some "sticky strings" and wound them back in. The lander had a unit which tested whether anything collected assimilated any of a few simple compounds. It didn't.
This established that Mars isn't teeming with microorganisms, like Earth. That doesn't eliminate all possibility of life, or something like it, but it did establish that there's no pervasive ecosystem there.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Absent an ocean - which provides a gradient of temperatures and protection from Solar radiation for early unsophisticated life forms, it may be difficult for life to get started.
Sure we may be surprised by some new means of self-reproduction, but on our own planet - how many organisms got their start outside of the petri dish of vast body of water? AIK
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well... i dont think we know about the origin of life enough to make that broad a statement.
What if its the other way arround? Barring some primitive bacteria or virii that does this or that, you cant have an atmosphere thick enough to give oceans....etc.
Im just saying, the cause of the event "life on earth" is still unknown.
Re:Not much life on Mars. (Score:4, Insightful)
At least, not in top one centimeter of regolith near the Viking lander, whose landing spot was specifically chosen for its uninterestingness (i.e., flatness).
You can't really take ONE test of this nature and extrapolate it to an entire planet. That's sorta like landing a probe in the Sahara desert and concluding that the entire Earth is a desolate wasteland based on the tests you conducted on a few grains of sand.
Re:Not much life on Mars. (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, if you did the same test in the Sahara, it would come back positive; a gram of Sahara soil contains maybe a billion bacteria. Bacteria *are* our ecosystem, in a lot of ways. In the water, in Antarctic ice, miles beneath the surface of the earth, they are in their millions.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Very true.
However, Earth seems to have excellent conditions for life to thrive, allowing this diversity of bacteria in extreme places. Larger life forms do not thrive in so many extreme conditions. Mars does not appear to be great for life to thrive, as evidenced by the apparent lack of anything larger than bacteria. Who's to say that the conditions aren't so harsh that bacteria can only survive in really limited areas?
1976, actually. (Score:3, Informative)
Potential life? (Score:5, Funny)
Finally an iron-clad reason to keep the Republicans from aborting Mars missions...
At least until we find actual life, when I guess they'll stop caring and start suggesting that such life invest in its own individual retirement plan.
If there is water...... (Score:2)
.... they will come...
First question by the President (Score:2, Funny)
Meanwhile... (Score:5, Funny)
I hope it's DNA (or RNA) (Score:3, Interesting)
Since Phoenix can find organics and (I think) has a mass spectrometer perhaps it has found DNA? If they just found some carbon compounds that wouldn't seem that noteworthy, they find them everywhere in space (like carbonaceous meteorites). Of course if it's DNA (or RNA) then the possibility of contamination comes in (of course it if uses a totally different "code" that would make me believe at least it wasn't deliberate. A really sneaky scientist could put some DNA in there that didn't bear any resemblance to Earthian DNA thus leading one to believe it was martian. I say this in reference to some experiments where scientists are adding some new "letters" to the alphabet of amino acids that DNA codes for, the triplet codons in nature redundantly code for only 20 amino acids, not the 64 it could.)
Reminds me of the scene if "E.T." when during the capture of E.T. someone announces "he's got DNA!".
Of course this is completely idle wishful speculation on my part, the discovery is likely much more pedestrian. Feel free to ignore this post. ;)
Missed opportunity (Score:5, Funny)
If they'd just spent a little more time thinking it through, they could probably have come up with something more appropriate like Field Aerosol Recognition Thermal Sensing Nonionic Interference Failtested Frankly Erotic Robot. The resulting acronym would, I am sure, have been more memorable.
Organic molecules (Score:3, Informative)
Then the presidential cabinet convened (Score:3, Funny)
to discuss ways to combat Martian terrorism. President Bush said "The War on Martian Terrorism" has just begun. Billions will be needed for various agencies to fight against the interplanetary menace.
Reason for informing White House? (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.setileague.org/iaaseti/protdet.htm [setileague.org] "The discoverer should inform his/her or its relevant national authorities." This is in Step 2 of the protocol. The implication is that Step 3 will not happen, unless Step 2 is allowed.
This practice is not anything new. When Mars meteorite ALH 84001 was suspected to have fossilized life, previous White House administration was notified. Only after getting permission from White House (took about couple of weeks) was that news even published.
I hope there is no life on Mars. (Score:3, Interesting)
servant01 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:are the muslim? (Score:5, Funny)
Bush: What? The Martians have oil? Can we still extract the water to produce gasoiline?
Re:Short briefing (Score:5, Insightful)
While i realize you are just bush-bashing, that same statement holds true for a surprisingly large number of humans.
How little we've changed. (Score:5, Insightful)
While i realize you are just bush-bashing, that same statement holds true for a surprisingly large number of humans.
Which shows how little humanity has progressed in the last 2,000 years. The human race is just a bunch of superstitious bald apes with better tools than their cousins with fur.
Re:How little we've changed. (Score:4, Insightful)
Viva la differance!
Re:Short briefing (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The deepest part of the ocean floor has never been seen firsthand by human eyes without cameras, but it doesn't mean it's not there.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Short briefing (Score:4, Insightful)
"People tend to paint bush as some kind of Christian Fundamentalist,"
Probably because they form his political base and he tends to act, in an official capacity, in accordance with their beliefs and wishes.
"not his own beliefs to judge from his denominational affiliation."
He can believe whatever he wants, its his actions that we are to be concerned with.
Re:so which is it ? (Score:5, Insightful)
President Bush is the CEO of a large corporation called the Executive Branch. Failing to tell the CEO before a major announcement is bound to get you in trouble. I'm more worried about Mr. Bush quashing or modifying the announcement for religious compliance.
And we all know that someone does deserve to be fired; unfortunately, we have to wait until January for that.
Re:Am I the only one? (Score:5, Insightful)
On the contrary. We know of one place life originated. If we find a second, suddenly we know that life is almost certainly commonplace, and that intelligent life is almost certainly commonplace.
Right now we don't know anything because we've only got one data point.
Re:Am I the only one? (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, the GP has kind of a point. If we would find carbon-based life with DNA and the same mapping between triplet codons and amino acids as is found on Earth, the sensible conclusion would be that we still have not seen two instances of life originating, but only a single on that was capable of spreading to another planet. That is still interesting, but the amount of material that would leave a life-inhabited planet with enough velocity to ever get to another star system would be miniscule.
It would still be totally possible that the solar system would be the only inhabited system in the galaxy, or even the observable universe. If we find life on Mars, that is recognizable as such, but still radically different, THEN we are really talking.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, it would be MUCH more interesting if we find life with a clearly different origin, but even extraterrestrial life we strongly suspect originated on Earth would be revolutionary. It would mean that there are two places just in our solar system that can support life. You could still argue that the genesis of life is an extraordinarily rare event, but you could no longer claim that the conditions needed to support life were rare.
Re:Am I the only one? (Score:5, Insightful)
2 data points in this humongous universe isn't going to be very significant
The funny thing is that you are exactly wrong. You have the data, and you explain to us that you have the data, but you interpret it exactly opposite of what it is.
Life in livable parts of the universe is either very rare or it is very common, it is unlikely that it is something in between. If it is rare, it is extremely rare since so few areas of the universe can support life. Even our own galaxy, which is a rather peaceful place, can only support organic life in a very limited zone in the outer spirals.
So, why are you exactly wrong? If life is rare, ss the data set grows (or the universe becomes more humongous) the chances of finding life on any random planet drops off fast. If you assume that the universe is close to infinite, the chance of finding life on any one planet is exactly zero. Yup. You got it. EXACTLY zero. Now, the universe isn't infinite, but it is damned close to it for practical purposes, so finding life on any random planet is as close to zero as you can get. For any practical math, it IS zero.
Now do you see the significance of finding life on Mars?
If life on Mars developed independently of life on Earth, then that proves beyond any reasonable doubt, that life is basically omnipresent where it is supported.
One data point says nothing. Two data points says everywhere.
Now, if life on Earth and Mars is linked, that tells us something else significant, namely that life is hardier than first thought. It means it can survive for a long period in a fairly hostile environment (vacuum, extreme radiation etc). That would also imply that life can exist in far more places than we thought.