C'mon Don,

You are the master of doubt - king of skeptics. Anything you don't personally know about is wrong, right?

Explain something to me? Why do you enjoy getting down so bad on the Cydonia Mars Face folks and not do the same with the obvious junk science this Mars Habitat thing is about? Is one fantasy better than the other to you? The Mars Society takes membership funds of people who don't know much about Mars other than they want to go there to live and perpetuate this myth of living off the land on Mars. Example:

http://shockandawe.us/archives/Science/020323a.htm

"They go outside in white canvas space suits trimmed in duct tape. Their helmets are made from plastic light fixtures and white bullet-shaped trash-can lids. In their habitation module (the thing that looks like a silo), they sit with their laptops late into the cold desert night, typing up reports of simulated Mars disasters."

Can it be that the only reason you don't get down on the Mars Society "research" is that you don't want to get caught up with Eby and company's wrath? Are you affraid of being Mr. unpopular on their largely run bbs?

If you are genuine in your beliefs Don, then speak up and call a spade a spade. The Mars Society theatrics doesn't help anyone learn about the real Mars, this is Star Trek stuff.

Please read this entire article in the link below and tell me if you think this kind of antics is helping or hindering real Mars research?

http://shockandawe.us/archives/Science/020323a.htm

If you think this is real Mars "Research" then there is a bridge in Brooklin I know of that is for sale. Interested?

By the way Don, here is what Dr. David McKay and others said of Levin's LR experiment in his 2001 LPI abstract:

ORGANIC MATTER IN SNC METEORITES: IS IT TIME TO RE-EVALUATE THE VIKING BIOLOGY EXPERIMENTAL DATA? D. M. Warmflash1, S. J. Clemett2 and D. S. McKay1,

Given this perspective on organic material, a
biological interpretation to the Viking LR results
can no longer be ruled out. In the LR experiment,
a solution containing 14C labeled organic com-
pounds was injected into soil samples. The de-
tection of radioactivity in the overhead space
would indicate that one or more of the substrates
had been chemically converted into a carbon-
containing gas. To serve as a control, some sam-
ples were heated enough to destroy most known
terrestrial microbes so that an indication for life
would be a positive response from unheated sam-
ples and a negative response from heated samples
[13]. On Mars, the LR results had met minimum
criteria for a biological interpretation [2] but due
to the GC-MS results, the LR responses were
later attributed to putative soil inorganic oxidants
[3]. Since the time of Viking, studies have been
carried out with the objective of determining an
oxidant or combination of oxidants that might
exist on Mars and have produced the observed
kinetics of the LR response. To date, no such
agent has been found that produces all aspects of
the LR results on Mars [14, 15]. Therefore, in
light of the SNC meteorites data and their impli-
cations for the possibility of organic matter near
or on the Martian surface, it is concluded that
inorganic and biological explanations for the Vi-
king LR data should now be considered equally
plausible until more complete studies of the Mar-
tian surface are carried out.

Beagle 2 Don, Beagle 2 has the instruments necessary. NASA did not include an organic analysis or oxidant instrument on either Mars Rover. Why not if these questions need to be answered?