Is the paucity of Mars details due to fact findings threaten creationism?

[henslee]

I heard about meteorites and brine and evidence of water and whatever. I was sure we'd get a whacky fossil photo.

[Heyo]

1. I love all the exploration....

But for some reason I think they will find Mars is and has always been sterile...... I don't have much other than a hunch to base it on.... but I guess we won't know until homans can go, and we can dig way down below the surface. Also I wonder why don't we send probes to the polar regions?

Heyo

[benburch]

3. Polar probes.

We tried. It failed. I'm sure we will try again.

[Heyo]

9. That's right....

The infamous polar lander.....

Where they programmed in cubits, but had measuered in fathoms...? :dunce:

I hope they try again

Heyo

[benburch]

2. Any fossil would most likely be microscopic.

And much smaller than the "microscope" on the rover could resolve.

No, I think we are getting all of the details when the scientists are comfortable with them. It takes time to change data into information.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. Here's my problem with finding "life"

We always assume it's carbon based and needs water. Who says that has to be the case?

[Birthmark]

5. That fascist chemistry says it.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. chemistry is based only upon what is known on earth

There can be many, many things that we have no current knowledge of their existence.

[Lizz612]

8. Here goes...

There are properties of water that make it just the right thing for life. Its polar, and small, and ice floats and all sorts of things that seem really obvious at first but become more and more important as you study biochemistry. These properties are unique to water, nothing else will do. There is usualy a half chapter spent on why water is perfect in every intro college bio book nowadays.

If you think of atoms as being built out of other atoms squashed together, carbon is the first one to be able to have 4 bonds to other atoms. This makes it very versatile, while still being relativly common.

Oh I am such a bio geek... :P

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

10. Thank you for the post!

I appreciate the scientific insight. I still just think we're keeping too closed a focus when it comes to these things. We have such arrogance to believe that nothing outside our current framework could possibly exist. Maybe I'm just a lunatic. Okay, okay, I AM a lunatic, but that's beside the point! ;-)

[Lizz612]

11. I was thinking about that too

I was wondering why there isn't life based on say silicone, which is right below carbon on the periodic table. Then I realized that silicon is harder for the universe to make than carbon. That doesn't mean life couldn't be based upon carbon, its just much more likely because its more common.
The framework does seem confining at times until you set back and look at WHY the framework is there; this is science that is based upon centuries of observation and thought experiments and all that!

I LOVE science! Yay for geeks!

[henslee]

12. Geeks rule.

[Zero Gravitas]

6. Brine

the brine thing was just speculation as what might be causing some observations about the consistency of the soil, don't read too much (or anything for that matter) into it.

They found clear evidence for standing water in the rocks at the Opportunity site. A clear 100% scientific jack-pot! that was exactly what the MER missions were designed to find, so I don't know what "paucity of details" you are referring to. I very much doubt that anyone involved with the Rovers give a rat's rear-end about what Creationists think about Mars.