Docker2.0
Watchin' you!
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2002
- Messages
- 25,312
- Reaction score
- 2,448
- Points
- 103
Intriguing on a purely academic level, but worthless in terms of practicality. It's nice that scientists have found evidence that there was once a lake on Mars at some point in the past, but who gives a flying flock?
worthless in terms of practicality
Touche.Answered your own question
Well I certainly can't conceive how this information could be useful to Earth or the human race in the future.One shouldn't off-handedly presume something's potential for practicality rests at 0.
Why are we still looking for anything on Mars? With the exception of Total Recall has there been any movie based on Mars that didn't suck?
Why are we still looking for anything on Mars?
With the exception of Total Recall has there been any movie based on Mars that didn't suck?
1.) Mars has evidence of once having liquid water on the surface
2.) Where there is liquid water there is the capacity for life to arise.
3.) Mars has liquid ice on and below its surface
4.) Mars is only slightly outside the "habitable" region of space around our sun (at least for the kind of life we understand)
If we can find evidence of life on Mars, then the likelihood of life existing elsewhere increases astronomically.
For these very reason scientists are also interested in eventually searching Titan and Europa more thoroughly.
Other than Mars, what does that have to do with this?
:facepalm
Liquid ice? The hell you say!3.) Mars has liquid ice on and below its surface
Single-celled organisms no longer count as life? Damn. Somebody should tell microbiologists that they're fake biologists. I'm looking at you, Colossal Spoons.until they find fossils of dead martians, I refuse to believe there was ever once life on the planet.
In hindsight, we need to get our asses on that planet and start digging
Single-celled organisms no longer count as life? Damn. Somebody should tell microbiologists that they're fake biologists. I'm looking at you, Colossal Spoons.
What if they find the skeleton of a bipedal Martian that was only 3 feet tall?hell no they don't
doesn't count unless they're AT LEAST 4 ft. tall with arms, legs, torso and head
What if they find the skeleton of a bipedal Martian that was only 3 feet tall?