1. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    06 Jan '15 15:08
    http://phys.org/news/2015-01-potential-ancient-life-mars-rover.html

    Unverified but VERY interesting discovery.
  2. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    06 Jan '15 15:581 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://phys.org/news/2015-01-potential-ancient-life-mars-rover.html

    Unverified but VERY interesting discovery.
    The clincher just might be if they discover those mat-like structures are made of calcium carbonate or similar mineral that is difficult to explain without involving biology. I don't know if that rover can do such a chemical analysis to determine that.
    If those structures are made from just sand and/or clay, they are probability made by just boring erosion.
  3. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    12 Jan '15 12:13
    Originally posted by humy
    The clincher just might be if they discover those mat-like structures are made of calcium carbonate or similar mineral that is difficult to explain without involving biology. I don't know if that rover can do such a chemical analysis to determine that.
    If those structures are made from just sand and/or clay, they are probability made by just boring erosion.
    At least here on Earth, that kind of pattern doesn't occur from just erosion.
  4. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    12 Jan '15 16:241 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    At least here on Earth, that kind of pattern doesn't occur from just erosion.
    I have only just noticed there I actually said

    "they are probability made by just boring erosion."

    not

    "they are probably made by just boring erosion."

    I didn't know probability is made by just boring erosion. Did you?
  5. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    13 Jan '15 10:28
    Originally posted by humy
    I have only just noticed there I actually said

    "they are probability made by just boring erosion."

    not

    "they are probably made by just boring erosion."

    I didn't know probability is made by just boring erosion. Did you?
    You could still use the same word, but 'in all probability made by just boring erosion'.
Back to Top