Life On Mars..?

[Gordon Hundley]

There seems to be quite a lot of skepticism on this list, which is very
healthy, and which is needed when dealing with such extraordinary news.
However, there's a few misconceptions about... First, the meteorite
apparently fell to earth 13,000 years ago, having been smashed off Mars
1.5 million years ago. The age of the rock is close to the oldest crust
of Mars - 4.5 billion years, and the carbonites are some 3.5 billion
years old. The dating is not disputed.

The "bacteria fossils" are very tiny - smaller than any "fossil"
biologically identified as the result of life yet. However, based on
quite meticulous research, and examples where nanobacteria have been
non-biologically identified from Earth samples (of similar age), it seems
extremely likely that the NASA scientists are presenting the first
extra-terrestrial fossils. It isn't concievable that this is the result
of life on Earth (from the dating) - if it isn't life from Mars, then
it's something else entirely, but nobody's thought up a very likely
proposal. Certainly, there is sufficient evidence that it should be
brought forward to the general community, so that scientists and thinkers
of other disciplines can examine that evidence. I dont think that
"appropriate timing" is something planned here.

The chances of a manned mission to Mars before the end of the millenium
are indeed slim. The next worthwhile launch window for any of the sort of
technology we could deploy would be in 1999. The trip would take longer
than what was left of the millenium. If, however, you mean the odds of
such a programme being announced before the end of the millenium... then
just maybe...

Gordon.