(January 14, 2016 at 1:10 pm)AAA Wrote:(January 14, 2016 at 12:02 pm)Stimbo Wrote: I agree, which is why I said the jury's still out. If Krasnopolsky and his colleagues are correct, the absence of areological activity doesn't really leave many alternative options other than microbial. This is what following the evidence means in this instance:We have methane coming from vents underwater here on earth, and we know that mars has water, and used to have a lot more. Again it is just a carbon atom bonded to four hydrogen atoms. molecules more complex than that arise abiotically. I think that saying life is the only cause is premature. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Step 1. Observation: methane on Mars
Step 2. Hypothesis: possible presence of microbial life
Step 3. Test hypothesis against observation to eliminate possibilities
Step 4. Revise or abandon hypothesis in the event of falsification
I agree and I have already said that. Nobody is saying that life is the only explanation for the observation; that's why they're looking.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'