/sci/ - Science & Math

what proof

>seasonal methane fluctuations
>high xenon-129 content in the atmosphere

if there was previously life on mars there is certainly at least a handful of microbe colonies somewhere there, life gets everywhere once it gets to a certain point

>>11837758
reminder that we already found proof of an array of numbers

>>11837874
What would it even matter if we found prokaryotes living on mars? I want to fuck alien women because earth women are whores

>>11837934
im sorry bro you gotta settle for 2D

>>11837898
unclamp

it would be cool if there were simple animals alive on mars
the ones we have on earth are already alien as fuck

What is that picture suppose to be a fossil or something? Need something better then this dude. What was the story behind it anyway?

>>11837758
That image is mostly a meme, there is no way of telling if it's a fossil or just a rock formation.

The real proof for life on Mars was the soil tests on the Viking landers that confirmed the presence of organic molecules that (as far as humans have observed) are only produced by life. Not only did both landers test positive on opposite sides of Mars, but Earth based recreations of the tests have shown it's nearly impossible to get a false positive in anything outside lab conditions.

The fact that additional Martian landers haven't been sent with more tests to verify this finding is crime against science.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aV9GAoncrsc

>>11839159
if they irrefutably found life, you would have homos that would ban any further research to "preserve the native life"

>>11839294
>Meanwhile China just goes and colonizes Mars anyways
Worst timeline

>>11838031
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allan_Hills_84001

>>11837898
based

>>11837934
All women are whores, even the alien ones.

>>11837934
What is the edifference between prokaroytes and jannies?

>>11839159
Wait a second, I recall the conclusion of those analysis were completely different to what you're talking about. They did show the martian crust had some calcium among other compounds but nothing grew after trying to incubate it.

>>11837758
>>11839159
It is al shit instead of sending many stupid robots we should have made a short Apollo style mission for Mars and get more work done than in all the decades of rover expedition

>>11839159
This paired with literal dry river beds and the fact that it has ice at its poles means you have/had liquid water.
Something bad happened to Mars and the Martians. Maybe there is a great filter and Mars is proof of it.

>>11840508
>short apollo style mission
Using chemical propellants it takes at LEAST 6 months to get there, 9 months or so for another transfer window, and another 6 months to get back.

Any human we send to Mars is facing a 2 year journey at a minimum, and probably longer using Apollo era equipment. Now consider that the Apollo spacecraft was only engineered with food, oxygen, and water, for a few weeks at best. There is absolutely no way Apollo hardware could get humans to Mars. At a minimum you would need to chain like 6-12 Apollo spacecraft together or something to have enough food, water, and oxygen. Another huge concern is radiation. The Apollo astronauts were not outside the Van Allen belts long enough to get serious radiation exposure. But a Mars mission will be exposed to solar radiation for 2 years or so, not even considering the effect of solar flares or CME's. It's also likely such an event would knock out the Apollo era spacecraft's electronics, which were highly sensitive. While we're on the subject of Apollo era electronics, the Apollo spacecraft's signal equipment would be no where near strong enough to transmit from Mars. You would need to outfit the Apollo CM with a dish like twice the size of the one actually on it. The fuel cells that powered the Apollo electronics would not last for 2 years either, and you can't replace them with Solar panels unless you want to bring solar panels half the size of the CM. On top of all that, the Apollo era guidance computer had multiple failures and bugs just trying to land on the Moon, which did not have an atmosphere to worry about. There is no way an Apollo LM could be reingeineered for Martian landing, the thing would get shredded and wouldn't have enough Delta V to make it back into orbit anyways. There is no scenario I can think of using 60's-70's tech to get humans safely to Mars and back. The best you could do would be MAYBE a flyby and orbit for 9 months.

TBC

>>11839159
>that confirmed the presence of organic molecules that (as far as humans have observed) are only produced by life.
vitalism was disproven in 1828, this is discussed in sophomore organic chemistry courses across the world.

>>11840672
At the time of Apollo humans had only been in space cumulatively for maybe a few weeks at most. Not the 2 years or so required for Mars. One of the major goals of every space station built by humans was to study the effects of long term micro gravity living; and the effects are NOT pretty. There are blood flow issues, bone density issues, muscle atrophy; the list goes on. It takes astronauts months to return to "normal" health after an extended stay at the ISS. What's more, they NEVER fully recover from the increased radiation they are exposed to in LEO. We've managed to mitigate a lot of these issues with diet and exercise routines, but micro gravity is still a fucking nightmare on the body and, currently, we CANNOT keep a person in space for more than a year or so before they risk serious and permanent damage. So a requirement for any Mars mission is some equivalent of gravity like a centrifugal wheel module on their spacecraft, something still in the realm of science fiction currently.

So, an Apollo style "one and done" mission is completely outside the realm of possibility.

That all being said, we could have conceivable gone to Mars by now if NASA had focused it's shuttle program money into building a Mars vehicle in LEO with a series of Saturn V launches throughout the 70's & 80's, along with a partnership with Russia to work on the "microgravity kills humans" problem. Basically let the Russian's play with space stations and instead of funding the ISS and shuttle program, use the money to design and launch a spaceship capable of getting humans safely to Mars and back. You would need to launch supplies, habitats, etc, prior to the Mars spacecraft leaving Earth orbit but it would be "do-able" with 70's-90's tech.

So basically, if you want to go to Mars and not die, you would need like 3 decades of NASA's primary funding and focus and it would still be wildly unsafe. Mostly because NASA sucks at budgeting and acquisition.

has anyone ever thought that we being alive is proof that aliens exist?