log in or register to remove this ad

 

Possible life on Mars


log in or register to remove this ad


No, it's bunk. It is written by a dubious 'scientist' who has been trying to push this idea for years now. Rawn Gabriel Joseph is the lead author; a neural scientist. The man tried to use the courts in 2014 to force Nasa to investigate what he believes is evidence of life on Mars. The man has had several articles about it rejected, and he then sued the websites for retracting his bogus articles. He also runs a consulting firm that charges a lot of money. 500$ for a 30 min phone call... yikes!

This is junk science everyone. Don't spread it.

No, NASA photos are not evidence of fungus growing on Mars, sorry
 
Last edited:

Ryujin

Hero
No, it's bunk. It is written by a dubious 'scientist' who has been trying to push this idea for years now. Rawn Gabriel Joseph is the lead author; a neural scientist. The man tried to use the courts in 2014 to force Nasa to investigate what he believes is evidence of life on Mars. The man has had several articles about it rejected, and he then sued the websites for retracting his bogus articles. He also runs a consulting firm that charges a lot of money. 500$ for a 30 min phone call... yikes!

This is junk science everyone. Don't spread it.

No, NASA photos are not evidence of fungus growing on Mars, sorry
Seeing those pictures my mind immediately went to "evidence of past water" and "wind erosion."
 

Seeing those pictures my mind immediately went to "evidence of past water" and "wind erosion."

Every now and then an old debunked story gets pushed back into the public eye by websites that don't do their work. Whenever an article claims "according to scientists...", that suggest some kind of authority. But there are lots of kinds of scientists, including FORMER scientists whose careers have gone down the toilet after spreading junk stories. We shouldn't accept someone's opinion just because they claim to be scientists, and we should be extra careful when an article does not name the scientists making the claim.

If there really was evidence of mushrooms on Mars, even the faintest evidence, Nasa would be all over that. After all, they are the ones trying to find evidence of life the hardest. If they don't publish anything about supposed mushrooms on the surface of Mars, your BS alarm should be ringing when someone claims otherwise.

In this case, we're most likely seeing rocks exposed by sand blowing in the wind. The weather conditions on Mars are a bit different than here on Earth, and a fair bit less friendly. It is to be expected that some rocks, sand blasted by the Martian winds, may look a bit different. Perhaps even perfectly smooth.
 
Last edited:


Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
If there really was evidence of mushrooms on Mars, even the faintest evidence, Nasa would be all over that.

This is the ultimate point. For this to be legitimate, it rather depends on NASA being incompetent. Sure, they can land on the surface of another planet, able to send back data the precision of which we've never seen before...

...but apparently, they don't know mushrooms when they see them.

And, btw, "scientists", the fruiting bodies of fungi (the body of the mushrooms we see) are specifically designed for Earth environments. That you see them sticking out of sere, dry regolith devoid of organic content (so, nothing that our fungi feed upon) is a pretty good sign is it not a mushroom in any recognizable sense.
 


An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top