ebnelson wrote:
I only asked where the water is?

Alex writes:
A fair question, and one that is still in the process of being addressed by the Mars community, as well as NASA, with future missions. Remember the unifying theme of the Mars exploration program is "Follow the Water." Bear in mind, though, that the ultimate answer may be (and probably is) more complicated than we can envision. Clearly there are problems with accounting for the liquid water, but to say, based on our limited exploration of Mars to date, that we KNOW for sure that liquid water WAS or WAS NOT active on the martian surface is not supportable. However, one cannot deny that the overwhelming bulk of the science tends to support liquid H2O models.

ebnelson wrote:
I only posited that CO2 could have done it.

Alex writes:
True, but I only asked you to defend it.

ebnelson wrote:
I WANT there to be water tucked away on mars someplace.

Alex writes:
I WANT to win the lottery, but that is irrelevant to whether I actually do. At any rate, to avoid the zealotry label one has to be careful to separate out personal preferences from the actual science and go where the data indicate, lest one be accused of supporting a particular model out of passion rather than logic.

ebnelson wrote:
Do I sense a major battle of PhD wit brewing?
Will it be safe on the bbs for mere interested civilians?

Alex writes:
Please do not be intimidated with titles such as PhD or phrases like "I have a masters degree in such and such a field." Just jump into the debate and participate; that's what science is all about. However, I caution those with thin skins that one should carry a shield in addition to their spears ;-)

Alex R. Blackwell
University of Hawaii