NASA Scientist Sees Possible Mat of Martian Microbes (Space.com)

[On the Road]

NASA Scientist Sees Possible Mat of Martian Microbes
By Leonard David
Senior Space Writer
posted: 09 August 2004
04:00 AM ET

---snip

The NASA-funded team found the first organic molecules thought to be of Martian origin, several mineral features characteristic of biological activity, and possible microscopic fossils of primitive, bacteria-like organisms inside of an ancient Martian rock that fell to Earth as a meteorite – the often-called "Mars Rock" or as scientists like to professionally label it: ALH84001.

"I’ve seen the saga move from 20 or 30 years ago when virtually no one believed there was life on Mars…or that there was even water on Mars," McKay said last week at the International Symposium on Optical Science and Technology, the 49th annual meeting of Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). "Now the whole pendulum is swinging."

---snip

The Mars rovers represent an incredibly successful mission, McKay said. Moreover, they seemingly have "uncovered" a major find. He points to pictures taken by the rovers that show areas of the martian surface disturbed by the retraction of landing airbags.

Patches of surface "acted as a cohesive blanket of some sort" when the airbags pulled back, McKay explains. "It wrinkled…and pulled along rocks with it. It didn’t simply crack apart like a dried-up crust."

Why the soil reacted in such a manner remains obscure, McKay admits. "But one possibility is that this is the fossilized remains of a biological mat of some sort," he speculated. The mat would be made up of bacterial parts and pieces.

---snip

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_040809.html


Opportunity rover pictures show result of airbag retraction. Pattern of perturbed martian soil might be indicative of a microbial mat that covers the landing area, claims a NASA Mars researcher. Credit: NASA/JPL/Cornell


Scanning electron microscope image shows an unusual tube-like structural form found in Mars meteorite ALH84001. This structure and other data gleaned from the so-called “Mars Rock” triggered heated arguments as to whether or not the meteorite contains fossil evidence of primitive life on Mars 3.6 billion years ago. Credit: NASA


=============================
This is getting really interesting. The methane and ammonia. The microstructures in the meterorites. Now the cohesiveness of the soil. The landscape features that change colors seasonally. We may already be staring at extraterrestrial life.

[pmbryant]

1. Pure speculation

This is wild speculation from an interested party, so I am not inclined to fall for it. (I can't really fault McKay for speculating like this, though, even though it makes me personally uncomfortable, as wild ideas can often lead to good science, even if wrong.)

But how come the author of this article didn't talk to anyone besides McKay about this?

Peter

EDIT: added parenthetical statement

[On the Road]

2. No, Saying the Mountain in Cydonia is a Face is a Pure Speculation

This is a hypothesis trying to explain one of the findings by the Mars landers. I'm sure there are other explanations for why the soil would be cohesive -- they just need to be put on the table and thrashed out.

With methane, ammonia, liquid water and organic-like microstructures, microbes are no longer in the realm of wild speculation. You can now argue that they are the best explanation for a range of different observations.

Scientific revolutions begin when anomalies from existing theories start to accumulate. I think we're seeing one in the process of happenning right now. Only time will tell.

[pmbryant]

3. What do other scientists think about the cohesive soil?

I didn't say speculation was bad (in fact, I think I explicitly stated it can be good). I do think that it is a rather large jump from "cohesive soil" to "fossilized biological mat". Enough of a jump to be labelled speculation. (Yes, it is also a hypothesis; but, to be precise, so is the claim that the mountain in Cydonia is a sculpted face.)

My main problem is that the article only talks to McKay. I called McKay an "interested party, because he has let his whole reputation become so intimately tied up to the supposed "fossils" found in a Martian meteorite back in 1996. (As far as I know, his group's interpretation is still extremely controversial, and virtually no one outside of his group believes that the meteorite contains compelling evidence of biological activity.)

It would have been very helpful to get a broader range of scientific opinion on this matter of the cohesive soil. But the author dropped the ball, unfortunately.

:-(

Peter

[On the Road]

4. A Lot of Articles on Space.Com Only Interview One Person

It wasn't supposed to be a comprehensive review of the topic. I think it's just a small low-budget news service that puts out bite-sized daily articles. I hope an article comes out of the kind you suggeted that interviews a whole range of people and discusses both pro and con arguments.

As far as other explanations, I think that surface water or frost is also being put forward. Don't know how well either of these stack up.

And yes, you are correct, hypothesis and speculation cannot be disentangled. Sorry to make you frown. :)