It's Still Not Aliens: 'Mars Bug' Claim Could Damage the Search for Life

[Admin]

A professor suggests there are bugs on Mars, but this dubious claim could hurt the search for life, experts say.

It's Still Not Aliens: 'Mars Bug' Claim Could Damage the Search for Life : Read more

 

[Cjones1]

This will result in taking a closer look at objects along the way to determine if there is photographic evidence to support the researcher's suggestion that insect life existed on Mars.

 

[Susan]

Another contra-argument is the extreme unlikelihood that complex creatures on another planet with a totally different evolutionary history would in any way resemble complex creatures on Earth.

 

[Ron Marshall]

This article talks like scientific consensus is the reality check of science. Experiment is the sole reality check of science. The article raises conformity above freedom of speech. The scientist may be wrong because the evidence is misinterpreted. However there is no cause for panic.

 

[IQLessthan10]

Another contra-argument is the extreme unlikelihood that complex creatures on another planet with a totally different evolutionary history would in any way resemble complex creatures on Earth.

Why is that extremely unlikely?

I would find it more likely than not, if said life was on Mars.
The closest planet to Earth's specifications in our solar system, and only one planetary hop from Earth.

Sure, if you're talking interstellar life, yeah, way different, but Earth and Mars share material.

Meteoritic material from Mars makes it's way to Earth, and vice versa.

Past mega impacts, have undoubtedly shared material between these two celestial bodies.
(Chicxulub impact would have been able to put a mountain into orbit, no doubt some Earth material made it to Mars, and that wasn't that long ago. Who knows what ancient impacts of the past were capable of.)


Besides, life on Earth evolved as it has, because of advantages over hundreds of millions of years. Over a long enough time span, wouldn't all creatures approach similar advantages, with a similar over-arching specification.

"In a Universe with gravity. On a planet with a central sun. Same base elements and periodic table. etc..."


You would really have to prove to me, that there is some magical difference between life on planets... When we only have one data set.

I'm not making a sweeping generalization. I'm making observations based on our only data set.

 

[sb5k]

Reminds me of how Percival Lowell saw "canals" on Mars - and saw them better when seeing conditions were bad. Our minds fill in details when the details aren't present.

As for the possibility of insect life, insects do not get very big on Earth because their respiratory systems are inefficient. On Mars, with a much, much thinner atmosphere, and little, if any, available oxygen, they would have even more trouble surviving.
I think he is seeing clods of dirt and seeing in them what he wants to see.

 

[rod]

I suspect claims of life on Mars will continue for many years to come. Various claims of life on Mars, currently does not meet the same standard of scientific testing that Galileo used and applied to argue against the geocentric universe teachers. The observable and testable heliocentric solar system in astronomy - eventually falsified the geocentric teachers just like the spherical Earth observations falsified the flat earth teachers. The ability to test and falsify or show is true is the heart or foundation of the scientific method. Claims of life on Mars is still pending confirmation and verification.

 

[Susan]

This article talks like scientific consensus is the reality check of science. Experiment is the sole reality check of science. The article raises conformity above freedom of speech. The scientist may be wrong because the evidence is misinterpreted. However there is no cause for panic.

I agree that there is no reason to panic when the media play up stories with little scientific backing. They do that all the time because they are motivated by number of reads rather than rigid adherence to reality.

I disagree that controlled experiments are the only reality check of science. If that were the case, nearly all the sciences other than physics and chemistry would not be considered science. These other sciences must, by the nature of what they study, be observational sciences. There is no way you can experiment with the weather, climate, galaxies, paleozoic fauna, etc. And there can be moral issues with zoological experimentation.

 

[rod]

The scientific method requires the ability to test claims, e.g. show the claim or hypothesis is accurate and factual or false, otherwise the argument may never rise above a theory or a fact. If this methodology cannot be applied to life on Mars claims and is abandoned as it seems in some of the discussion here - there is no reason to consider the Earth is a sphere, it could be a flat disk and immovable with the Sun moving around the Earth. So far, the scientific method does not show life on Mars is there today, or even billions of years ago - *confirmed* like the tests and observations for the heliocentric solar system and round Earth.

 

[Susan]

The scientific method requires the ability to test claims, e.g. show the claim or hypothesis is accurate and factual or false, otherwise the argument may never rise above a theory or a fact. If this methodology cannot be applied to life on Mars claims and is abandoned as it seems in some of the discussion here - there is no reason to consider the Earth is a sphere, it could be a flat disk and immovable with the Sun moving around the Earth. So far, the scientific method does not show life on Mars is there today, or even billions of years ago - *confirmed* like the tests and observations for the heliocentric solar system and round Earth.

True, but my point was that the scientific method does not always require EXPERIMENTATION to test claims. For most science, observation must be sufficient. There is no controlled experiment that can prove that the Earth is a sphere. Nor is there any experiment that can prove that plate tectonics explains phenomena such as earthquakes, volcanoes, and continental drift. Evolution can be proven by selective breeding, but the age of trilobites can only be inferred through observation, stratigraphy, and radioactive dating.

 

[rod]

Susan, "There is no controlled experiment that can prove that the Earth is a sphere." We had the Flat Earth International Conference in Dallas TX this month (14-15th), these folks have much to say about the flat disk earth as the true shape. If we cannot show the Earth is a sphere, then the astronomical unit cannot be defined either because it uses spherical trigonometry in measuring the solar parallax and distance, just like other parallax measurements for the Moon, e.g. the lunar parallax determined by telescopes in the 1800s showing the distance to the Moon or how GoTo telescopes work on equatorial mounts and motors using the spherical Earth that spins (and the telescopes work). You said - "For most science, observation must be sufficient". From my thinking, life on Mars claims does not have the same standard of *observations* like heliocentric solar system astronomy or measuring the distance to the Moon. I do not place claims for life on Mars on the same footing as these other observations in astronomy. Someday astronauts may walk on Mars and confirm - or show life on Mars is not factual at all and never was there. Until those days, arguments for life on Mars remain very tentative based upon current observations published. This is my main point here.

 

[rod]

NFPC, my views about life on Mars are based upon the science and observations that led to the overthrow of the geocentric firmament and acceptance of the heliocentric solar system as my standard for testing. The claims presented for life on Mars do not rise to that level of scientific verification. Galileo used his telescope in the early 1600s and documented 4 lights moving around Jupiter that shocked the geocentric teachers. Using my telescopes today - I can still see this very observable evidence, more than 400 years later so no, life on Mars claims does not have this history of repeated testing. I note this about a comment you made earlier concerning life on Mars - "No, Susan, they did NOT evolve, but were actually seeded as hybrids from Earth thousands of years ago by the Nephilim. This is covered in the upcoming Solar Apocalypse series." The teaching of the Nephilim I find common among the flat earth community teachers and very much depends upon the book of Enoch. In the book of Enoch, the Nephilim giants on earth are some 4,000 or 5,000 feet tall. Until your comments today, I was not aware that the Nephilim played a role in life on Mars teaching.

 

[Susan]

Susan, "There is no controlled experiment that can prove that the Earth is a sphere." We had the Flat Earth International Conference in Dallas TX this month (14-15th), these folks have much to say about the flat disk earth as the true shape. If we cannot show the Earth is a sphere, then the astronomical unit cannot be defined either because it uses spherical trigonometry in measuring the solar parallax and distance, just like other parallax measurements for the Moon, e.g. the lunar parallax determined by telescopes in the 1800s showing the distance to the Moon or how GoTo telescopes work on equatorial mounts and motors using the spherical Earth that spins (and the telescopes work). You said - "For most science, observation must be sufficient". From my thinking, life on Mars claims does not have the same standard of *observations* like heliocentric solar system astronomy or measuring the distance to the Moon. I do not place claims for life on Mars on the same footing as these other observations in astronomy. Someday astronauts may walk on Mars and confirm - or show life on Mars is not factual at all and never was there. Until those days, arguments for life on Mars remain very tentative based upon current observations published. This is my main point here.

Here's one cute experiment that could prove that the Earth is a sphere. Place phone calls to many different places on Earth at the same time. Ask the person who answers,"What time is it, and what season are you in?" The only way to explain the different times and seasons is if Earth is a sphere. But for Flat Earthers, there is no point in such a demo. Their minds are made up, and no experiment, demonstration, or anything else will convince them that you are right and they are wrong. They're best ignored.

 

[rod]

NFPC, YouTube is no place to learn science and astronomy. I can see the Galilean moons and orbits today using my telescopes, the same moons that Galileo observed in early 1600s. There is no history of observation and verification like this for Mars life reports so until astronauts report definite yes/no - Mars life has no rigorous verification standard and no Nephilim on Mars or people visiting Mars in the 1970s or 1980s. I know viewing Mars like last year during the Mars opposition in July 2018 - I did not see Nephilim walking around but did see the dust storm

 

[rod]

Okay NFPC, we can wait here on the series of books supporting these claims that *will be independently verifiable* about Mars life, fossils, and complex life on Mars reports. I have seen all types of claims about life on Mars over the years. Meteorite ALH84001 is an example from the Clinton Administration time, this was a NASA effort. Others, a dog weeing on a rock on Mars during Viking landers in the 1970s. The latest report that sparked all the discussion here, was bugs on Mars. The scientific content you offer for life on Mars features Nephilim on Mars seeding the planet and an individual who visited Mars during the 1970s or 1980s. I started a Mars telescope observation campaign on 06-Jan-18 through March 2019, tracking and observing Mars using my telescopes from 10x with binoculars to 216x using my 10-inch telescope. I observed Mars during the opposition of July 2018 and documented my observations in my log. I have much more confidence in my observations of Mars as factual and valid science than social media reports of life on Mars or YouTube reports.

 

[rod]

FYI, during the period I mention about observing Mars, I viewed 57x observing Mars through its retrograde motion and visible, changes in the telescope and constellation position changes near the ecliptic as well as the close conjunction with Neptune on 07-Dec-18 at 200x in Aquarius. Both planets visible in the eyepiece view. I stand on these telescope observations as verifiable and valid that I mention in the discussion.

 

[Ron Marshall]

I agree that there is no reason to panic when the media play up stories with little scientific backing. They do that all the time because they are motivated by number of reads rather than rigid adherence to reality.

I disagree that controlled experiments are the only reality check of science. If that were the case, nearly all the sciences other than physics and chemistry would not be considered science. These other sciences must, by the nature of what they study, be observational sciences. There is no way you can experiment with the weather, climate, galaxies, paleozoic fauna, etc. And there can be moral issues with zoological experimentation.

I never used the term controlled experiments. It would not be wise to repeat the asteroid collision with the earth that killed the dinosaurs. However many observational experiments proved the result. Once again experiment is the sole reality check of science.

 

[Dwight Huth]

If that was a weapon then light would shine through the trigger guard area where the trigger is. How they got around the trigger guard was that the normal triggering mechanism had been replaced by a biometric authentication type device where you simple touch a spot on the trigger guard to fire the weapon.

Here is an image that looks like a blaster, it even has the the trigger guard area open to put your finger through. I found this artifact in the UV spectrum of a photo that I took of Vega a few months ago.

Is it a blaster? It has the shape of a blaster.
Handle, Trigger, Trigger Guard, Barrel, Scope.

What the images of the aliens on Mars really are is Pareidoila or wanting to see things that are not there. Its a method that the Flat Earthers and Hollow Earthers,most of whom have college degrees to reinforce their findings with, use to make people believe that what isn't real actually is real and what could be real as nothing more than an effect of light at different angles.

They are really part of the Fake Facebook Ad group that lures people to their websites where data is gathered on who visits their website. Political and religious ads are then generated based on the person accepting the image of a rock in the sand looking like a gun. If a person is dumb enough to believe that a rock looks like a gun or that a shadow is a creature on Mars then they are very susceptible to fake political and religious ads.

If the images are real then why do the supporters of the images on Mars always use fake names? Uncover your real name like you have uncovered the truth on Mars.