Here is a problem I have with scientists–THEY AREN’T VERY LOGICAL

Two possible explanations have been developed for the red methane gas produced by Mars, one is geological and one is biological. So of course at least one NASA scientist believes it is more likely biological.  Hmmm. When faced with two possible explanations, life on Mars caused it or chemical reaction caused it, which one do you think is more likely? This is not a tough question. Unless you work for NASA and want to get national headlines… The Sun reports:

…”Scientist Michael Mumma of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center said: “This raises the probability substantially that life was there or still survives at the present. We think the probability is much higher now based on this evidence.”


“The bugs that made it may have vanished millions of years ago, leaving the methane frozen under the planet’s surface.”


“But another possibility is that some hardy organisms still survive on the Red Planet, living underground without sunlight and using hydrogen from water for energy. Similar microbes exist on Earth.”


“Methane produced by the action of water on hot carbon bearing rocks, as occurs in volcanic regions on Earth, is the alternative explanation.”


“Whatever the source is, scientists agree that something is replenishing the methane.


“The find is seen as exciting new evidence that Martian microbes are still alive today.”

Seems like a case for the application of Occam’s razor to me:  “All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best.”  And the simplest explanation in my view is that this was produced by a rocks. I’m not saying life on Mars is impossible, just not very likely…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s