Source of methane detected in Meridiani.

exoscientist · Jul 19, 2004

This is a major big deal if confirmed by the other instruments that found methane on Mars: July 18, 2004 Distinct whiff of life on Mars Jonathan Leake, Science Editor "A SOURCE of methane gas has been identified by scientists probing the atmosphere of Mars, showing for the first time a possible location for life on the red planet. "The gas, thought to be produced by underground colonies of microbes, has been detected at high levels in Meridiani Planum, a low-lying region near the equator thought to have been covered once by an ocean. "Scientists say the only other possible source of the gas would be volcanoes but, while this has not been ruled out, most evidence suggests there has been no volcanic activity on Mars for millions of years. "Jim Garvin, head of Mars exploration at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa), said the results were “very impressive”. He added: “This has sharply raised the chances of finding life on Mars. It is too early to be sure but the most likely source of this gas is life." ... "The levels we are finding around Meridiani are powerful evidence that there is something emitting it at a steady rate. There is no evidence of vulcanism or tectonic plate movements, so it does favour the conclusion that this methane is of biological origin." http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1182551,00.html Bob Clark <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

the_id · Jul 19, 2004

WOAH! Would it be inappropriate to pray that this will finally be proof of indigenous life on Mars?

spacehappy · Jul 19, 2004

I told you so. Now non believer of life on Mars are finally coming around. First struggling through the water debate, is there or isn't there water on Mars? Just look at the Da%$ planet that should tell you something. Listening to all these people blowing a lot of smoke claiming they new something about science claiming the ones that don’t support their opinion was the idiots, what do you think now. As one scientist said during the Pathfinder mission way before these specialist water debaters, and was blasted for implying it. “If it looks like muck, it tracks like muck, and the traction feels like muck, then it is muck.” Can we now say the fossil word without all these experts yelling at us like they know something that we don’t? It is not a surprise to some of us who have been telling you all along. We were just tired of hearing these so called experts calling us idiots claiming we didn’t know anything. It turns out to be the opposite. Wait there is much more, fasten your seat belts. RLB2 you may have to repost those fossil images again. Maybe this time some of these so called experts will start to believe you. I would love to here there petty excuses when they make that announcement.

JonClarke · Jul 19, 2004

The problem is we are told nothing of significance. How was the methane detected, at what levels, what its diostribution was. As lots of people have pointed out, life is only one mechanism of several to explain the data. Volcanoes are not the only alternative. All these have to be excluded. Otherwise a whole bunch of people are going to get egg all over their faces. NASA became a laughing stock after Viking because of over enthusiastic jumping on the life bandwagon in response to the preliminary results of the labelled release experiment. It has been widely lampooned for the same thing after ALH84001 results. Unsupported statements like this have to be seen as blantant attempts to ramp funding. They are completely unscientific. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

alokmohan · Jul 19, 2004

NASA is under fear of budget cut .They have to sensationalise!!!!

tom_hobbes · Jul 19, 2004

While I agree completely with your take on the article, and the dangers of such optimism, on a positive side the more we learn about Mars, the less we find which could actively rule life out. Ammonia, Methane and formaldehyde are all present. If none of these had been found at all it would have been easier to say that life was unlikely. The evidence for life isn't in yet. But the evidence against life is on the way out. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I wish I could remember But my selective memory Won't let me - Mark Oliver Everett </div>

alokmohan · Jul 19, 2004

Thats a point.But nasa is repeating too much of the same thing.They may be wrong!Most ofthese points have been well discussed in past.

tom_hobbes · Jul 19, 2004

Of course they may be wrong. Let's hope not. It would be nice to inhabit the solar system with some other life forms, off earth, even if they are somewhat unevolved, and even if in the fullness of time it turns out we are distantly related! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I wish I could remember But my selective memory Won't let me - Mark Oliver Everett </div>

alokmohan · Jul 19, 2004

I full appreciate.But nasa told wrong thingsin past,so.....

exoscientist · Jul 19, 2004

Jim Garvin head of Mars exploration who is quoted in the article is a pretty good scientist who has written extensively on Mars. This gives the conclusion some weight. Also, the two other scientific teams who independently detected methane also said a source appeared localized to the equator. The importance of this new data is that it is further localized to Meridiani, a location where we have further evidence of liquid water in the past. However, I wouldn't rule out volcanic activity as the cause. It could still be due to some form of vent outgassing that isn't apparent as an active volcano. Bob Clark <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

JonClarke · Jul 19, 2004

The trouble is, without any facts to back it up, it doesn't say anything. In fact, I find it hard to imagine someone like Garvin saying this without facts, or not knwoing the consequences so one wonders how accurate the report is. It might be a bit like the "chlorophyll on Mars" beat up of a few years back. The journalist gets the wrong end of the stick and takes it out of all proportion Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

blairf · Jul 19, 2004

Garvin and Mumma were both at the Bioastronomy conference in Iceland. However Mumma's paper there was about comets not Mars. Reading between the lines I suspect that this report is based on an informal but on the record discussion the journalist had with both scientists in Iceland. My other, slightly more flippant, thought is that with the Formisano team about to potentially reveal some blockbuster findings Garvin & Mumma wanted to get their findings 'on record' at the same time. Never underestimate scientists' need for primacy!

silylene old · Jul 19, 2004

Jon, I agree, caution is indictaed in interpreting these results. I am reposting this from the "ammonia" discussion. perhaps some people haven't considered other abiotic sources of CH4. Here are a few interesting abstracts on the photoreduction of CO2 to make methane and formaldehyde vacuum-UV laser photolysis of CO2 systems. Nakashima, N.; Ojima, Y.; Kojima, M.; Izawa, Y.; Yamanaka, C.; Akano, T. Institute Laser Engineering, Osaka University, Suita, Japan. Energy Conversion and Management (1995), 36(6-9), 673-6. CODEN: ECMADL ISSN: 0196-8904. Journal written in English. CAN 123:270397 AN 1995:727451 CAPLUS Abstract Gaseous CO2 was photoreduced on irradn. with a vacuum-UV F2 laser (158 nm). The final products were formaldehyde, methane etc. for the case of a mixt. with hydrogen, and alc. for systems of hydrofluorocarbons. +++++++++ Photoreduction of carbon dioxide and water into formaldehyde and methanol on semiconductor materials. Aurian-Blajeni, B.; Halmann, M.; Manassen, J. Weizmann Inst. Sci., Rehovot, Israel. Solar Energy (1980), 25(2), 165-70. CODEN: SRENA4 ISSN: 0038-092X. Journal written in English. CAN 94:124490 AN 1981:124490 CAPLUS Abstract Heterogeneous photoassisted redn. of aq. CO2 to produce MeOH [67-56-1], HCHO [50-00-0], and CH4 [74-82-8] was achieved by using semiconductor powders with either high-pressure Hg lamps or sunlight. The reaction was carried out either as a gas-solid process, by passing CO2 and H2O vapor over illuminated semiconductor surfaces or as a liq.-solid reaction, by illuminating aq. suspensions of semiconductor powders through which CO2 was bubbled. Best results, under illumination by Hg lamps, were obtained with aq. suspensions of SrTiO3, WO3, and TiO2, resulting in absorbed energy conversion efficiencies of 6, 5.9, and 1.2%, resp. ++++++++ Reaction mechanism in the photoreduction of CO2 with CH4 over ZrO2. Kohno, <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function. </div> </div>

fangsheath · Jul 19, 2004

I more or less agree with you, there is a lot of yak yak there, not much substance, and plenty of indicators of sloppy journalism. The last sentence, for example, states that John Rummel "confirmed" that both rovers were carrying microbes. This is an absurdity without any foundation, I suspect the guy would be appalled to see himself misattributed this way. The article throws out unwarranted conclusions all over the place, such as "the gas, thought to be produced by underground colonies of microbes," and "Nasa’s Opportunity rover confirmed earlier evidence that oceans may have covered much of Mars," and." Most egregious, perhaps, is "The location of the discovery fits in with theories about Martian evolution, which suggest that the red planet may once have been lush and green and that its history has been marked by huge climatic swings." Huh? Having said that, the article is by no means information-free and I appreciate the link.

blairf · Jul 19, 2004

why is everyong slagging the article of. It is clearly sourced, and the quotes are plain as the nose on the end of my face. The padding that the journalist has used to string the quotes and real news together may be a bit flowery, but there are no factual errors in it.

spacehappy · Jul 19, 2004

Jim Garvin head of Mars exploration knows more than he is telling. I'm sure he would not have said that if they didn’t have much more information that they are releasing from there tests on the surface. They are just taking baby steps to release and back up the claim from their only rivals there, ESA. Have it ever occurred to anyone that the chemical signature of these findings could be suddenly melted decomposing "F;s" that were frozen for eons.

rogers_buck · Jul 19, 2004

>> Now non believer of life on Mars are finally coming around. What does belief have to do with science? Belief only guides your investigation. You plan the experiments to test your belief and then you modify the experiment or your belief paradigm accordingly. As Carl Sagan once said "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." Proof obviates the need for belief. We are the proverbial blind man with our fingers just touching the elephants trunk. Far, far, too early to assume we have laid hands upon an elephant. We need to get more instruments on the surface and even our chimpanzee feet. Maybe it will be years. Or, we could find the braille letters e-l-e-p-h-a-n-t where we first set hands upon the beast. Keep looking for the fossils, but keep and know that a belief is merely a belief until it is backed by proof.

exoscientist · Jul 19, 2004

Rummel is the head of planetary protection protocols at NASA. It's well known that NASA does not do a full sterilization of spacecraft unless these are meant to do a specific search for active biology. Since this was not the purpose of the MER rovers the limited amount of sterilization the rovers underwent was probably not enough to eliminate all bacteria present. However, such bacteria might only be in the deep interior of the spacecraft and not exposed to the Martian environment. Bob Clark <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

yurkin · Jul 19, 2004

I’ll take issue with this line The emissions were measured from Earth using telescopes equipped with an infrared spectrometer which can analyse light reflected from Mars and pick out the unique signature of methane molecules. Now Mars Express was barely able to detect the trace amounts of methane using its instrument. It is a lot more sensitive then any earth based telescope and spectroscopy. At least to my knowledge mars express has so far been unable to determine the distribution of methane on mars. So I highly doubt anyone on earth can do it. Also if it were possible to detect methane from Earth then someone would have done it by now. ESA would not be announcing the discovery of methane. ESA did not announce the discovery of formaldehyde since earth based telescopes have already made that discovery. They have only confirmed so far that it has been detected. Again I doubt if this can be done. This might be a case of Nasa skewing the data to make it look like methane came from Meridiani Planum. They might be hoping that in successive orbits Mars Express can confirm that this is the location of the methane source. In which case Nasa can say that they had made the discovery first. If they are wrong then it is only because Nasa’s data was wrong based on the inaccuracies of their collection method. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> But then again they might be right. In either case it is exciting. Usually solar system research progresses at a glacial pace as it takes a decade to build a new robot. This year there’s been a flood of new data.

peteb · Jul 19, 2004

fangsheath - As exoscientist says there was no requirement for either lander to be completely sterilized. The allowable load was 300,000 spores on exposed surfaces, but it is believed that somewhat less that that was achieved. Spores on surfaces exposed to light on the ground at Mars probably were cooked further by the UV. http://www.spacedaily.com/news/mars2003-03f.html

spacehappy · Jul 19, 2004

When will you guys let Carl Sagen rest in piece. The evidence has been there for a long time some of it wasn't released to the public. Why do you think there at Meridian, its not just the hematite. JPL is only releasing some of this information now because there is another kid on the block, ESA. They are so stuck on the Carl Sagan speech that they can't release anything. They didn't have extraordinary proof of the working of Venus when Carl Sagen made his hypotheses about it. No matter what happens here the so called experts will tute there own horn and try to take credit for the discoveries when they were so wrong and negative about it in the first place. I’ve seen this happen many times in corporate America, demented human responses can be a vile and pathetic game. Just don't take credit for these discoveries, give credit to the guys that deserve it not the negative a$%^hole who suddenly changes his colors and was always putting people down for not believing in his or her expert opinion about the universe.

exoscientist · Jul 19, 2004

Good info on abiotic formation of these simple organics Silylene. However, it is also interesting how complex organics such as amino acids and sugars can form from these simple organics: Prebiotic Amino Acid Synthesis from Carbon Dioxide/Nitrogen Primary Author: David Ross Presentation Type: Poster Session Poster Section 6: Laboratory and Theoretical Studies of Prebiotic Chemistry/Origin of Life David Ross, U.S. Geological Survey, dsross3@yahoo.com; Kono Lemke, U.S. Geological Survey, klemke@pangea.stanford.edu "It was recently noted that the earth's early atmosphere was probably carbon dioxide/nitrogen (ISSOL '99), a highly oxidized and therefore challenging starting mix for the terrestrial origin of amino acids. The results from two recent accounts, however, can be assembled into a thermodynamically favored scenario for early amino acid synthesis from this mixture. Projections suggest that the scheme should moreover operate with satisfactory chemical kinetics. The two accounts are the synthesis of amino acids from primitive materials (Marshall, 1994), and laboratory studies supporting the production of abiogenic methane from carbon dioxide and olivine (Berndt, et al., 1996). Marshall's investigation underscores how remarkably easily glycine and other common amino acids can arise in aqueous environments, showing that the acids develop from aqueous formaldehyde and ammonium ion at 110 - 210°C in periods of just 1-2 hr. An oxidizing environment is necessary for that mixture, and HCN is probably a transient intermediate rather than a required starting component as has been generally supposed. "Berndt, et al. describe Fischer Tropsch-like reductions of aqueous carbon dioxide/bicarbonate by olivine at 300°C/500 bar to aromatics and a <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

alexblackwell · Jul 19, 2004

When will you guys let Carl Sagen rest in piece. The evidence has been there for a long time some of it wasn't released to the public. Why do you think there at Meridian, its not just the hematite. JPL is only releasing some of this information now because there is another kid on the block, ESA. They are so stuck on the Carl Sagan speech that they can't release anything...I’ve seen this happen many times in corporate America, demented human responses can be a vile and pathetic game. Do you ever get tired standing on your soapbox?

alexblackwell · Jul 19, 2004

The trouble is, without any facts to back it up, it doesn't say anything. As infallible as the media are, Jon, I guess I'm with you. Call me old fashioned but I'll wait for the actual science data to be published before getting excited.

spacehappy · Jul 19, 2004

["Do you ever get tired standing on your soapbox?"] I will be still standing on it when they publish more about Mars and the surface temperatures about Titan. Do you see any Methane oceans on Titan lately Alex. It really is to bad they wiped the past post off the face of the earth it protects some of these so called experts from there own words. All this wasted research money spent on this planet from wrong speculative thinking here on Earth should go to the Space Program where we can go to the source and get the real data that removes all doubt. There are tens of billions of dollars wasted on these researches by people who toe the line and can't think for themselves. Spend it on Space research and getting to Mars, stop funding astronaut joy rides to ISS as Zubrin suggested.

Source of methane detected in Meridiani.

exoscientist

Guest

the_id

Guest

spacehappy

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

alokmohan

Guest

tom_hobbes

Guest

alokmohan

Guest

tom_hobbes

Guest

alokmohan

Guest

exoscientist

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

blairf

Guest

silylene old

Guest

fangsheath

Guest

blairf

Guest

spacehappy

Guest

rogers_buck

Guest

exoscientist

Guest

yurkin

Guest

peteb

Guest

spacehappy

Guest

exoscientist

Guest

alexblackwell

Guest

alexblackwell

Guest

spacehappy

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page