NASA Fossil Found on Mars?

You are right about the RAT,

"I am surprised I do not hear any more commotion about the good old 'rotini' shape from Meridiani in the early part of the mission," Gorevan said. "We have not yet been able to duplicate that shape with the RAT or any Mössbauer Spectrometer or Alpha Particle X-ray Spectrometer contact mechanisms."

The shape is also embedded in the rock so I dont think it is a product of the RAT.

Gorevan also said "That's infinitely far from saying it is of biologic origin, but it is proving resistant to duplication."

Source

Of course if you are a career scientist at NASA you would not put yourself in the firing line with speculation based on instinct.

Here is a comparison with some lifeforms here on earth.

Earth



Mars




Archimedes, a member of Ectoprocta. You see a similar twisting structure.

I am not saying its a fossilised life form but I am looking for a satisfactory explanation.

reply to post by bharata


I do not consider those two structures similar, the only similarity is that both are twisted, but there are many twisted life forms and lifeless objects in nature.

I understand how someone can think that the "fossil" was the result of the use of the RAT, a rotating blade and the resultant winds could make strange shapes, I have seen it happen with saw dust several times (my uncle was a carpenter), and I also understand how someone can see it as a fossil, but, as I have said, its general shape (a bent spiral) and the lack of consistency in the shape is not common in nature.

reply to post by ArMaP


I agree with you. The twisting shape, spirals etc are quite common in nature, be it of a biological nature or not. And this was the point of showing the two images, not to say it is a biological form but rather there is always the possibility.

ArMaP can you give any input? What do you think it might be? How do you think it was formed?

An interesting article about fossil hunting on Mars can be found at astrobio.net (assosiated with NASA). Professor Jack Farmer at Arizona State University says that with today's exploration technology we can most easily look for evidence for past life, preserved as fossil "biosignatures" in old rocks.

"Finding the signatures of an ancient Martian biosphere means exploring old rocks that might preserve traces of life for millions or billions of years," Farmer notes. Among the best places to look on Mars, he says, are deposits left by springs and former lakes in the heavily cratered highlands. "The rocks there date from a period in Martian history when liquid water was common at the surface." In fact, says Farmer, conditions on Mars then were likely similar to those on the early Earth at the time when life began.

"Besides water, life also requires energy sources and organic chemical building blocks," Farmer explains. "The Mars Exploration Rover Opportunity found ample evidence for water in ancient rocks at Meridiani Planum, but the rovers' instruments can't detect organic materials." However, NASA's next rover, the Mars Science Laboratory, will carry instruments to analyze traces of organic substances. It is due for launch in 2009.

Recognizing a Martian fossil may be difficult. "We're not talking about stumbling over dinosaur bones," Farmer says.

Instead, the discovery may involve finding biologically formed structures in old sedimentary deposits, perhaps like stromatolites found here on Earth. Stromatolites are distinctive structures that form in shallow oceans, lakes, or streams where microbial colonies trap sediments to form thin repeating layers.

www.astrobio.net...

(Edit to add that the Mars Science Laboratory has been reschedueled to 2011. THANKS to ArMaP for reminding me, I should have included it in my post the first time!)

Read more about stromatolites here:
en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 21/12/08 by ziggystar60]

reply to post by bharata


I don't really know what that could be, it could be a real fossil or just something created by the rotating blades of the RAT, but what it looks to me is something like a fibre that was twisted while it was covered in mud; it does not look like a shape for a living creature, it looks like it was mechanically twisted, not that it was born that way.

I hope you understand, when I try to explain what I think I face some problems to put things in words, even in Portuguese.

reply to post by ziggystar60


Yes, there are several ways of detecting past life, not just by looking for fossils.

It's true that, if it's not possible to find a living creature, the next best thing would be to find a fossil (specially if it was a mummified fossil, like those that are found on amber), that would show how the life forms have looked like.

Too bad Mars Science Lab was rescheduled to 2011.