Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaculata" data-source="post: 8207526" data-attributes="member: 6801286">Not really. We know for a fact that life exists, and that our effort to look for it is there for not pointless. And even if we didn't find it on Mars, there are plenty of other things to study about Mars that will broaden our understanding of our galaxy. These missions are very directed and precise. It is not even in the same ballpark, or the same continent, as sending a satellite into space to find god.That kind of defeats the point of going there doesn't it? If we knew there was life already, we didn't need to go looking for it. And it's not like we don't have reasons to believe there 'could be' (or could have been) life on Mars, at some point in time. Mars has ice. Mars had water. Therefor the Rover is investigating a delta we spotted.No, we have observed Mars from very far away for a long while. But we have only started investigating the surface of Mars for a couple of years. Only now is the technology far enough to enable us to do that. Plus we've only investigated a very small area of Mars.Would you investigate one part of a desert on earth, and conclude there is no life on earth because you didn't find it there? Thats how silly that sounds.That quote just betrays an embarassing lack of understanding of NASA's work, and how science explores the galaxy. When you explore another planet, you don't know what you'll find ahead of time. But it takes years of planning, testing, preparations and research. Previous missions have given us tons of valuable data, and this one will yield much much more. Especially once the samples are returned to earth, and we can study them in our own labs. You think we are just tossing random rovers at random planets?I'm sorry if studying space rocks isn't as interesting as finding a giant crashed alien spaceship to you. But in science we study to learn. And if you care about learning new things, space rocks are plenty exciting.</blockquote>

Verification