NASA Has Found Evidence Of Oceans On Mars

An unnamed correspondent points to this Sunday Times story, writing: "They have discovered ocean beds on Mars." The "they" refers to NASA scientists relying on information from the Mars Global Surveyor, which has transmitted "detailed pictures of rocks that could only have been created by sedimentation." A full announcement is expected next week from NASA -- wouldn't it be nice if they would simply release news as it happens rather than create News Happenings?

Comments

I hope you're no serious!

[2nd Post!]

NASA's budget, IIRC, is pretty small.
<a href="http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/facts/HTML /FS-003-HQ.html"> NASA's budget</a>

Something like 14 billion a year. Given that the US GNP is close to hundreds of trillions of dollars...

Regardless of whether I'm correct or you believe me about the money, sedimentation, as a process, does not work with volcanic activity or wind. It's defined by the existence of a liquid and solutes, things dissolved into the liquid.

IE, a sediment. Take sand, mud, clay, etc, in a jar of water, and let the stuff settle down and compact into rock, stone, whatever. This process just isn't defined by wind or volcanic activity, where volcanic activity melts and reforges pre-existing stone, and wind wears down and erodes pre-existing stone.

Geek dating!

News as it happens??? These are ancient oceans!

[LauraLolly]

wouldn't it be nice if they would simply release news as it happens rather than create News Happenings?

In this case, that would have meant releasing this information several million years ago!

Where did all the water go?

[Eloquence]

It is actually a pretty accepted theory that there have once been water oceans on Mars, the interesting question, however, is: Where did all the water go? It doesn't seem so unlikely that Mars may have seas or even oceans under the surface, just like Europe. If we don't go there, we will never know.

--

They seen to be buttering us up.

[Rhinobird]

This seems like they're leading us towards the inevitable conclusion that yes there is in fact life on Mars. They probaly did find conclusive evidence with the Viking lander, but they felt that the public wasn't ready yet. Now everybody's going goo-goo over evidence of water that "raises the probability of life on Mars". Then they find rocks in Antarctica that looks like a chunk of Mars with fossilized microbes. Now oceans.

Say it already! Say there is life beyond this little rotten planet! Spill the f!@$!@#ing beans. Let go of the religous zealotry that says that life only exists on this planet.

And in the end, the Greys will thank you.

A better place to search...

[DESADE]

Now that some sea beds have been located, it would seem like a very likely place to search for fossil evidence of life. Makes the chances much better. Rather than making a wild guess, we can now narrow down the search to where evidence may most likely exist. Interesting.

Press releases

[lonesome phreak]

NASA is, unfortunatly, competing with movies when it comes to gaining an audience. They have had to come up with marketing ideas, press releases, merchandise, and such to compete for public attention.

It's sad, because gone are the days when all their money could be poured directly into pure research. Now they have to justify all their advances to a public that wants the glitz of Star Trek but don't realize where our science actually is at technology wise.

It's sad, and it shouldn't be, but they have to have press releases to maintain their "market share", because the politicians force pure-research departments to compete with hollywood.

Oh, please

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, that's right. It's all a grand plot. They've known for some time that there was definitely life on Mars, and the Evil Geniuses of NASA have been keeping it from the poor, dumb masses.

Did it ever occur to you that maybe they're telling the truth, and that they're releasing the information as soon as they're reasonably confident they have their facts straight? Wouldn't that be far simpler than some bizarre conspiracy theory?

Honestly, I think some people here need to take a frickin' break from the online world and get some fresh air from time to time. There are indeed evil/twisted/whatever people in the world, but not nearly as many as some people think.

If Slashdot ran NASA

[DHartung]

If Slashdot ran NASA, all their press releases would look like this:

fIrSt p05t!!!!

Op3n w@t3r, n@t@l13 p0rTm@n (nVd3, p3tr1f13d) f0vNd oN m@rZ!!! t0t@LLy r3l1@bL3 l33t 1nf0!

Uh, put more soberly:
The official press release about the news conference was released 12/1, a week in advance, which is completely normal. This is the way this sort of thing has always been done, it's just that 99% of the time you don't hear about the news release that told you there'd be a press conference. (When you're on the internet, this happens -- geez, get used to it.)

Obviously if you're going to hold a major news conference you want to give the newsies plenty of time to show up, run up the antennas on their satellite trucks, and prepare good questions for the reporters. You also want the scientists around the world who are going to be eagerly watching this live the opportunity to set up conference rooms with cable feeds.

NASA's science news is of a different nature than its space program news. Technical news can be issued immediately, but science news does not, technically, belong to NASA: it belongs to the scientists who discovered it. All science results are "embargoed" based on the precedence of the science team in question, so that they can publish their results and get the career credit and institutional credit that they deserve for devoting, probably, years of their life to an obscure niche of science. They get this one chance to shine in the sun; NASA gets 'em every other week or so (though rarely as big as this one may prove). So NASA patiently waits for the release of the published science results until they can officially announce anything.

Another thing: Science news, when it's reported prematurely, is often distorted. (Prime example: early orbital results for NEO asteroids always seem to result in Tuesday's DOOM IS NIGH headline being replaced by MAYBE NOT the next day. This leads to public disrespect for science, among other deleterious effects.) By refusing to issue breathless incomplete press releases as soon as pimple-faced slashdot readers demand, NASA increases the chance that:

• science reporters will ask questions, not who ever isn't covering the election;
  
• fully qualified experts will be on hand to answer those questions;
  
• last-minute glitches in the publication process don't embarrass everyone;
  
• science releases proceed professionally through the peer review process before publication;
  
• the appropriate science community is aware and informed.
  

There's more, probably, but that's it in a nutshell. This leisurely approach works; peer review is better than press-release sniping.
----

Pictures of Mars

[Calle Ballz]

I found a link off of www.space.com of pictures of some of the evidence of oceans on mars. It also has many more interesting pictures.

News Happenings

[bcrowell]

A full announcement is expected next week from NASA -- wouldn't it be nice if they would simply release news as it happens rather than create News Happenings?
Sounds more like they're doing what reputable scientists normally do -- don't hold a press conference until the paper is published.