Quote:
Originally Posted by renormalised
Not necessarily and actually a rather hasty conclusion based on very little evidence from one particular spot. It would be akin to landing in the middle of the Atacama Desert and then saying this planet has no life on it.
|
Quote from Wiki ..
Atacama Desert
Quote:
|
In 2008, the Phoenix Mars Lander detected perchlorates on the surface of Mars at the same site where water was first discovered. Perchlorates are also found in the Atacama and associated nitrate deposits have contained organics, leading to speculation that signs of life on Mars are not incompatible with perchlorates.
|
Interesting that you chose the Atacama as an example .. this is the exact model they've designed the MSL/Curiosity detection technology on.
The issue here is what the distribution of life may (or may not), be like on the surface of Mars. If life has evolved there, when say liquid water was supposedly 'abundant', then its primary distribution method was the liquid water (and wind, etc). Its dispersion in the immediate vicinity of Gale Crater should be fairly even .. if it emerged on Mars, based on what all our theories and models tell us, they should either (a) find it or; (b) not find it … otherwise why look there in the first place ?
So, if they don't find it, there must be some kind of definitive conclusion or statement .. and consequences therefrom.
Cheers