Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Find Life In 'Mars-Like' Chilean Desert (wsu.edu)

An anonymous reader writes: In 1938, CBS radio aired Orson Welles' dramatization of H.G. Wells' The War of the Worlds ; the broadcast was livened up by periodic "news bulletins" reporting strange activity on Mars and in New Jersey. There may or may have not been men on Mars at the time, and later opinions also differ on whether the broadcast caused widespread panic across the U.S. Eighty years later, scientists are again claiming to have found evidence on earth of Martian life. Well, not exactly Martian life... Washington State University reports: "For the first time, researchers have seen life rebounding in the world's driest desert, demonstrating that it could also be lurking in the soils of Mars. Led by Washington State University planetary scientist Dirk Schulze-Makuch, an international team studied the driest corner of South America's Atacama Desert, where decades pass without any rain. Scientists have long wondered whether microbes in the soil of this hyperarid environment, the most similar place on Earth to the Martian surface, are permanent residents or merely dying vestiges of life, blown in by the weather. Billions of years ago, Mars had small oceans and lakes where early lifeforms may have thrived. As the planet dried up and grew colder, these organisms could have evolved many of the adaptations lifeforms in the Atacama soil use to survive on Earth, Schulze-Makuch said. 'We know there is water frozen in the Martian soil and recent research strongly suggests nightly snowfalls and other increased moisture events near the surface,' he said. 'If life ever evolved on Mars, our research suggests it could have found a subsurface niche beneath today's severely hyper-arid surface.'" The study has been published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

54 comments

  1. Hmm Chili!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Love it!!

    1. Re: Hmm Chili!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is chilli a soup made with mexican pepper and beans?

    2. Re: Hmm Chili!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's a desert. Can't you reed?

    3. Re: Hmm Chili!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is beautiful. I can't tell if this is a whoosh moment or not.

  2. May have been? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There may or may have not been men on Mars at the time

    Nope, I'm fairly certain there weren't.

    Who wrote this garbage?

    1. Re: May have been? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same people who research alien invasion by virus in alient messages.

  3. probably but... who cares. by wolfheart111 · · Score: 0

    Ya we know there probably is this type of life on many of our planets. If we look hard enough ya Im sure find something. This was important in the 50's because we felt so alone... we didn't know any better. Now with the Hubble, ect. We know that life is abundant... rejoice... now where are the damn aliens. :)

    --
    [($)]
    1. Re:probably but... who cares. by ilguido · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ya we know there probably is this type of life on many of our planets.

      There probably isn't, you mean. In fact no place on Earth is Mars-like, atmosphere and gravity are totally different. Besides, the fact there is life in a desert today does not mean that life can arise in a desert: you can find humans in Greenland nowadays, but Greenland is not a place where the human race could have arisen.

    2. Re:probably but... who cares. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gravity isn't really that different.
      Yes, the mass of Mars is a lot smaller, but on the surface you are a lot closer to the center on Mars than you are on Earth.
      You get close to 38% of Earth gravity on Mars.
      The lack of atmosphere and water is the big problem.

      One would suspect that the lack of soil is a problem too but since Earth soil is the result of life rather than the prerequisite for it I suspect that there could be life forms that can handle it if there had been enough moisture in the soil and some atmosphere to work with.
      Well, if the water wouldn't freeze ever night that is.
      Perhaps a life form that thrives in some liquid that doesn't freeze at -100 F would work?

    3. Re:probably but... who cares. by TuringTest · · Score: 1

      the fact there is life in a desert today does not mean that life can arise in a desert

      The argument for life in Mars is that in the past, maybe, it had regions that were not a desert. If at some point in the past there was water, a denser atmosphere and a source of heat like volcanoes, some simple life might have formed that could have survived when conditions become harsh.

      --
      Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
    4. Re:probably but... who cares. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TFS considers the potential for life on Mars to have developed in lakes, and then evolved to cope with arid conditions.

    5. Re:probably but... who cares. by bobstreo · · Score: 1

      Ya we know there probably is this type of life on many of our planets.

      There probably isn't, you mean. In fact no place on Earth is Mars-like, atmosphere and gravity are totally different. Besides, the fact there is life in a desert today does not mean that life can arise in a desert: you can find humans in Greenland nowadays, but Greenland is not a place where the human race could have arisen.

      /s/Greenland/Cleveland/

    6. Re:probably but... who cares. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The atmosphere is the biggie. The intense UV radiation is going to be a problem for life on Mars.

      https://m.phys.org/news/2016-11-bad-mars.html

    7. Re:probably but... who cares. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's RACIST! #triggered

    8. Re: probably but... who cares. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm from Cleveland, you insensitive clod!

    9. Re:probably but... who cares. by syn3rg · · Score: 1

      /s/Greenland/Cleveland/

      You would have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at this.

      --
      The contents of this message have been doubly encrypted by ROT13
    10. Re:probably but... who cares. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Gravity not "that different"... well, I wouldn't phrase it that way. For a microbe, gravity has no significant effects (although they don't understand why microbes on the ISS are more aggressive than the same strains on Earth). I do agree that invoking gravity as if the difference between here and there is significant is just plain ignorant. As far as Mars life, over geological time Mars environment has changed. Atmosphere and temperature were both greater in the past and we've clearly established that liquid water did exist there. The OP states some rubbish about "increased" near-surface water "events" which I assume is referring to the "mud-slides" which have alternate and more plausible explanations. So, if there is life on Mars (and I'd guestimate the odds to be worse than 50:50 but we really don't know) then it has evolved as the environment deteriorated there and so it is really difficult to say for sure what it needs. In point of fact, we are just beginning to understand our own world's sub-surface microbiome so extrapolating to Mars is not going to be solidly based in scientific fact (rather it will be 99% speculation).. Water exists below Mars surface. It is possible that liquid water (as some sort of brine) exists there rather than it simply being ice. No one, as far as I know, seriously believes life (as we know it) can exist without liquid water. Below the ground on Mars, the conditions are NOT known - but reasonable guesses are that it is NEARLY favorable for liquid water brines. So, the questions surround the twin issues: did life ever exist there and if so, has it been able to hide (survive)? The "ever" question is in a way more important because it addresses the question of how common life is elsewhere in our Galaxy. But in a way, it's a trick question since IF fossils are found, distinguishing between microbes transported FROM Earth and native microbes would probably be impossible. IOW, it basically would not tell us much - for sure - about life evolving "elsewhere". Which brings us back to the question of whether it could be still there. Dr. Malcolm in the sci-fi movie Jurassic Park said "life will find a way" and establishing the limits of where this is possible is an important (if philosophical) study, I think. Of course, the problem with that is that there aren't any great ways to prove that life isn't holding on somewhere below the surface. How many cores would you have to drill to establish that life doesn't exist there? A million would be a great start. IOW, all we can hope for is that either life is ubiquitous there or one of the "Hail Mary" locations we'll pick for sub-surface drilling (if we ever do) will "luck out". Our best current info is the trace analysis of the atmosphere. We guess that life will exhale organics and those would be detectable. We're NOT seeing them. So, I'd say the best assumption is that Mars is a dead planet but that is subject to further information as it becomes available. The fact is Mars is our ONLY "elsewhere" we have the technology (and budget) to explore. Even though several of the moons of the Gas Giants seem more promising, we just don't have the technology to tackle them (yet).

    11. Re:probably but... who cares. by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the temperature on Mars averages around 55 C.

    12. Re:probably but... who cares. by tomhath · · Score: 1

      minus 55 C, stupid /.

    13. Re:probably but... who cares. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There probably is, if it can survive there. Asteroids have been knocking pieces of Earth into space for billions of years, some of those pieces big enough that microorganisms inside could have survived for hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions of years. One of those later splats onto a damp spot on Mars, or Europa, or Encaladus...and they'll colonize the place.

      Hell, there's at least one study that showed that the Chicxulub impact (the dinosaur killer) could have knocked pieces out of the solar system altogether, and potentially infect exoplanets out to dozens of lightyears. (Not likely, but not impossible.)

      Just like humans in Greenland, life on Mars doesn't mean it originated there.

    14. Re:probably but... who cares. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's amazing how much UV a fraction of a millimeter of soil will block.

    15. Re:probably but... who cares. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that makes everything so much better.

  4. Uh-huh ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... so this Chilean desert has an atmosphere of 3 mBars of mainly CO2, does it?

    1. Re:Uh-huh ... by Viol8 · · Score: 2

      Don't forget the high UV levels due to no ozone layer and the soil stuffed full of highly oxidising perchlorates that would quickly destroy any known cell. But apart from all that , yes, mars is identical to the atacama desert.

    2. Re:Uh-huh ... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      You're probably right, but I can't help but be reminded of this witty line in "The Martian Chronicles" where the Martians think Earth 'could never support life because ... there's far too much oxygen in their atmosphere', indicating they're based on radically different biochemistry from us.

      https://www.shmoop.com/martian...

      This alternation between comic and tragic is all over The Martian Chronicles. Like, in "Ylla," Yll says that Earth could never support life because "Our scientists have said there's far too much oxygen in their atmosphere" (43). That's comic because it's dead wrong--it's oxygen that makes life possible on Earth.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    3. Re:Uh-huh ... by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      Funnily enough, the oxygenation of earth was a big disaster for the predominant life forms of the time, it's a toxic waste product to them.

    4. Re:Uh-huh ... by ortholattice · · Score: 1

      I don't know about the UV levels, but "Naturally occurring perchlorate at its most abundant can be found comingled with deposits of sodium nitrate in the Atacama Desert..." (Wikipedia "perchlorate" page)

    5. Re:Uh-huh ... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      It's like in the Tripods trilogy where the aliens breathe a gas that sounds like chlorine and like room temperature and baths much hotter than humans can tolerate. The food they eat seems to be quite different from anything humans can eat too

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    6. Re:Uh-huh ... by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sci fi and mixing ecosystems is kind of difficult speculation. Unlike War of the Worlds, the Tripod trilogy doesn't deal with their flora interacting. In the former, though, instead of making the aliens ill, our microbes would probably either be unable to affect them at all, or conversely rapidly coat them in a biofilm and dissolve them (likewise us reacting to any microbes they brought with them).

    7. Re:Uh-huh ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that the soil in the Atacama desert is also high in perchlorates, right?

    8. Re:Uh-huh ... by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Science Fiction, emphasis on Fiction. As in fake, not real.

    9. Re:Uh-huh ... by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      The levels are trace compared to those on mars.

    10. Re:Uh-huh ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol i went there in 2010 and it snowed on me. Hard to live there? Yeah. Impossible? No.

  5. Skeptik optimist here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I always have a problem with moving from "we found life on Earth in pretty harsh environment" to "This means there could be life on Mars or Europa or somewhere else similar".
    Life ADAPTS, that's what it does, some offsprings will always wonder where their "parents" didn't, and they will adapt to places that were unhabitable before.
    But something tells me life needs a nurturing environment FIRST, to appear, solidify and survive past a point of no return, where it can't be wiped out that easily by the next storm or the next frost.
    But that doesn't mean life necessarly FORMS in harsh conditions. So the fact that you find life here on Earth, in various inhospitable conditions only proves life ADAPTS and not that life FORMS there.

    1. Re:Skeptik optimist here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But something tells me life needs a nurturing environment FIRST, to appear, solidify and survive past a point of no return, where it can't be wiped out that easily by the next storm or the next frost.

      Sure, but what is considered nurturing?
      No current animal would survive the conditions where life was first formed.

  6. Re:Your missing... by wolfheart111 · · Score: 1

    The "who cares" part of the function... really important... you get an undefined Var in return. :)

    --
    [($)]
  7. Yeah, very Mars like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With all that oxygen around, you can hardly call it "Mars.like"

    1. Re:Yeah, very Mars like by SandorZoo · · Score: 1

      Live came before free oxygen in Earth's atmosphere. It was life that put it there in the first place, in the great oxygenation event.

    2. Re:Yeah, very Mars like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Our best current understanding is that there were traces of O2 in the reducing primordial atmosphere. emphasis on "trace".

  8. Re:You're missing... by phayes · · Score: 1

    An apostrophe and an 'e' that would make your post meaningful. (See how I used "your" there?)

    --
    Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  9. You forgot to blame 'climate change', Beau by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on, you know the drill. Any time there is some atmosphere-related news story, especially when it was warm and now it's cold or it was cold and now it's warm, you ALWAYS need to mention Climate Change and how we need to be afraid for the consequences to our children.

  10. Pretty amazing by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    So they found a desert that isn't protected by an atmosphere or magnetosphere and is being blasted with radiation? Wow!

    1. Re:Pretty amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since I don't know of any serious proposals that life exists on the SURFACE of Mars, I don't understand your point (if you have one). Are you saying that if I were to, say, bury you under 1 meter of Martian soil, that you'd be concerned about radiation? It is a non-issue. The low pressure and temperatures are significant issues, but any microbes there (?!) are not directly exposed to the atmosphere (at least, not necessarily) and the surface temperature occasionally gets up above freezing, not that sub-surface water there is likely to have anything near pure water's freezing point. Anyway, like Earth, the subsurface temperature on Mars probably increases with depth.

    2. Re:Pretty amazing by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      " Are you saying that if I were to, say, bury you under 1 meter of Martian soil, that you'd be concerned about radiation?"

      I would be concerned, yes. Space nutters aren't concerned about anything.

  11. Oh Yeah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And scientist believe in the phony global warming, in evolution, in salt is bad for you, in the lie detector. Go ahead people, suck it up! You deserve to chase lies all you foolish life.

  12. Life, as we know it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    other increased moisture events near the surface.

    That doesn't mean liquid water or Martian humidity anywhere near Terran humidity. The water temperature needs to be in a rather narrow band for life to evolve, which also requires a healthy dose of sunlight. It is unlikely that life, as we know it, exists on arid frozen Mars.

    1. Re:Life, as we know it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heard of extremophiles, much?

  13. Why are scientists baffled? by imcdona · · Score: 1

    There's life thriving in the boiling temperatures of volcanic vents at the bottom of the sea of all places. One of the most inhatible places on the planet. Haven't we already established that life thrives in places we never thought possible?

  14. Not very Mars-like by mschaffer · · Score: 1

    Since when is Earth a good approximation for Mars? Sure, if you ignore everything else, dry is dry. If you want to study Mars, do that. Don't be such a planet bigot and say "they all look the same to me".

    1. Re:Not very Mars-like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when is Earth a good approximation for Mars?

      Do you know any better approximation in this solar system? Or any other for that matter?

  15. Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Life found on planet covered with life!

    This means that other planets might also have life on them perhaps some people believe.

    Get that man a research grant.

    1. Re:Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You joke, but consider that a repeat of the Viking Landers' biology experiments done in the Atacama desert didn't find any signs of life.

  16. Main point by ch0knuti · · Score: 1

    You're all missing the main point here. What would be more likely to generate funding?

    1. Study of microbiological life in the Atacama Desert.
    2. The possibility of life on Mars explored by studying Mars like conditions on Earth.

    Take your pick.

  17. I've been there. by hey! · · Score: 1

    You could well believe that the place is utterly sterile; if you pick up a handful of dirt it'll have no visible or olfactory signs of life in it. To the naked senses it's just like opening the pack of desiccant silica that came with your camera. In the Atatcama trash and even toilet paper from hikers blows around for years -- archaeologists have even found pre-Columbian textiles there still intact after half a millenium. The only life visible there is within a few hundred meters of the ocean, fed by morning sea mists. The ranger stations put up mist nets there to collect precious drinking water.

    But a few months after I was there, they had their first rain in over years. The friend I was visiting there told me that every square inch of the desert as far as the eye could see was carpeted in tiny flowers -- the floral scent was so intense it made her retch. If you want to see what it looks look at this Smithsonian article. Now imagine looking at a single square meter of that and finding thousands of tiny pollinating insects...

    Life in the northern Atacama is adapted to periods of dry quiescence lasting for years, punctuated by brief, intense bouts of rain-triggered reproduction lasting only for days. But there's a huge difference between getting rain every five or six years and having no rain for hundreds of millions of years.

    Even the driest desert on Earth is far from dry.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.