http://www.spacedaily.com/news/mars-life-02b.html

This article answers the questions I thought needed answering in the other "ALH Death Knelll" articles referenced earlier. I've got to say this does seem to significantly undermine what I thought was the strongest portion of the ALH evidence. While I have felt most past counter claims were exagerrated in significance or even downright bogus, I have to admit that I no longer think the ALH evidence warrants a rating above suggestive with regards to life on Mars.

I think most of the lines of evidence are still possible signs of life and their coincidence continues to suggest life, but there are enough other possible explanations that their linkage no longer seems unlikely in the absence of life. The whole linkage issue was the main flaw I found with most counter claims. Researchers would undermine one line of evidence then claim they had refuted the McKay team without showing how the other lines of evidence could coincide with their alternative for a specific line of evidence. Over 75% of these people seemed ignorant of basic probability rules and Occam's razor.

Regards,
Mark