I used to like to think that the number crunchers logical approach to the likelihood of life elsewhere in the galaxy and universe were incredibly plausible.

Or as Carl Sagan said... "There are some hundred billion (1011) galaxies, each with, on the average, a hundred billion stars. In all the galaxies, there are perhaps as many planets as stars, 1011 x 1011 = 1022, ten billion trillion. In the face of such overpowering numbers, what is the likelihood that only one ordinary star, the Sun, is accompanied by an inhabited planet? Why should we, tucked away in some forgotten corner of the Cosmos, be so fortunate? To me, it seems far more likely that the universe is brimming over with life. But we humans do not yet know. We are just beginning our explorations. The only planet we are sure is inhabited is a tiny speck of rock and metal, shining feebly by reflected sunlight, and at this distance utterly lost."

Eventually, that logic was no longer enough to continue fostering in me thoughts that life must surely exist or existed elsewhere. With our super close neighbor, Mars, being an exception.

1. We humans have an awfully limited definition of what 'life' is and what makes 'life' happen. Until the origiins of life on earth are determined, do those that search for life in the cosmos even know what they're looking for?

2. For all those billions upon billions of stars...conditions have to be just so for any form of life to take hold. The presence of H2O and O2 may indeed help...but if there is no adequate barrier from radiation, as is here on Earth, would any signs of life ever even take place in a place that is simply too hot for animal and plant life as we know it to exist?

3. For fact that no one knows how life was begun in the cosmos...for fact that no one knows how life made its way from it's origin to finding a rock to squat on and flourish, coupled with that the right sort of bacterium has to land on the right sort of planetoid with an environment suitable to it's means to adapt into more complex forms...makes the odds of us recognizing developed life elsewhere go through the roof.

4. Signs of life are being sought in, what to science, are obvious places. ie...look for water, find life. But being as here on Earth exist bodies of water that not even our sturdiest forms of bacteria can sustain itself, pretty much means that the presence of water does not indicate that life be present as well.

5. The calculations for determining the probability of life elsewhere are overly optimistic and chock full of an assumption. I believe a better formula would be to determine the unlikeliness of life occurring, and working from there.

Put in other terms...You're hovering at 150,000 feet above the Pacific Ocean, you're given a 5ml vial and an awfully long string...your task is to drop it into the water...and try to fish out one tiny speck of life that is still recognizable as such when observed more closely.

I save Mars as the exception to all this for sake of it being a stone's throw away from our home here on Earth. Visualizing life dispersing throughout the cosmos as a shotgun blast, with some hitting Mars and Earth both opens my door of probability.

I'm intrigued by the theory of life on Earth may have begun on Mar's, and through impact of with bodies that may harbor signs of life, spread here to Earth. Or, vice versa. The latter being more plausible considering how much debris was set forth when the Earth's moon was just beginning to gather itself after one whopper of an impact separated it from Earth.

That life found it's way to mars, but simply could not sustain itself on the surface is where my thoughts on life on Mars arrive.

None of it really matters though. With arrogance and egotism being such influential staples of humanity...finding life elsewhere would simply be another thing for humankind to exploit.
slowthestone Reviewed by slowthestone on . Mars....There was life. Look at these pics, and tell me what you think. Rating: 5