Slashdot Mirror


NASA Orbiter Reveals Details of a Moister Mars

Matt_dk writes "NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter has observed a new category of minerals spread across large regions of Mars. This discovery suggests that liquid water remained on the planet's surface a billion years later than scientists believed, and it played an important role in shaping the planet's surface and possibly hosting life."

10 of 94 comments (clear)

  1. Moister Mars by tpheiska · · Score: 5, Funny

    Moister Mars.... mmm.... sweet...

    --
    "wahts woring iwth my tyoping?"
    1. Re:Moister Mars by Pikiwedia.net · · Score: 4, Funny

      This means that there is water on Mars, which means that you can grow grain, which .. When can we expect the first bottle of martian whisky?

  2. Moist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Due to probing?

  3. Mars: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Mars: What The Earth Will Look Like If We Fuck Up Too Much

    1. Re:Mars: by Verteiron · · Score: 5, Funny

      Venus: What The Earth Will Look Like If We Fuck Up Too Much In The Other Direction

      --
      End of lesson. You may press the button.
    2. Re:Mars: by confused+one · · Score: 4, Funny

      Mercury: What the Earth is eventually going to look like, no matter what we do.

  4. Stop it. by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Every time someone claims ANYTHING about water on mars, it always trails with "There could have been/should/would been life!". Find me a fossil and then we'll talk.

    --

    "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  5. Re:Mmmmm... by CraftyJack · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have seen lakes that were so saline or full of some organism that they could not support life.

    They were so full of some organism that they could not support life? Yogi Berra, is that you?

  6. Re:wonderful by Lord+Ender · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If life developed completely independently on Mars, it would be drastically different (on the cellular level) than anything we have here. If life is found on Mars which is cellularly similar to ours, we must conclude that one planet was the source and the other was "contaminated" via rocks or spacecraft or somesuch.

    In short, sending a biosphere to Mars would not do anything to hamper our ability to prove or disprove that life developed independently on Earth and Mars.

    And I doubt "environmentalists" (whatever that means) have the collective will and political power to interfere in NASA missions which don't directly harm particularly-cute animals. Outside of a few parts of California, fanatical environmentalist culture is pretty rare.

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  7. Re:Re TFA by E++99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now regarding the actual article, what they seem to be saying is that there might have been a longer window for life to develop on Mars. Frankly this was always an unlikely event...Mars is and probably always has been dead.

    Based on what? We have no idea. For all we know it may be virtually impossible for a planet to go 1,000 years with liquid water on its surface without acquiring life.