Origin of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere is a peer reviewed journal Don.

The authors presented an abstract about this last March and followed up with a full 42 page highly detailed "peer reviewed paper" in the new issue of Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere. The authors are not saying absolutely that these spots are biological, but do point out in extreme detail the evidence for it and also for the phenomenon to have an abiotic origin. This is science.

Each of the theories about melting polar dunes is considered and it seems that a biological explanantion is at least equally plausible. Where is your scientific curiousity? Why rule this out when you don't know for sure? That isn't how science works. You believe Nick Hoffman's theory that liquid CO2 flows carved the valley networks on Mars right? Hoffman's paper is a theoretical paper too. There is a big difference between scienctific papers that pose theoretical concepts and those that show experimental evidence. Both are important though.

Gee Don you and many others on this bbs believed that Mars was a brick red world just two years ago only because NASA published most of its Mars images like this. Well, it sure looks like I was right on about the color issue. Mars is not red and never was. So what does that say about all the NASA Press releases and Viking and Pathfinder images that told everyone Mars was red? The truth is they could not continue the color lie any longer because of the ESA and other space faring nations who are sending their own Mars missions.

Face it Don, you will "believe" anything NASA (the agency) tells you. I'll bet you believed hook, line and sinker space shuttle manager Mark Dittmore's public excuse that the Columbia astronauts could not be saved, didn't you? Well, what do you think of how Dittmore handled the situation now? I'll bet you changed your tune, because you always want to be on what seems to be the politically correct side. This is only one example where the agency has failed. The Viking biology experiments may turn out to be NASA's biggest blunder in its history if Beagle 2 confirms life in a few months. I am sure you and I will be in touch about it.

Go ahead Don, keep "believing" what NASA says via TV and Press Releases, because belief has nothing to do with peer reviewed scientific papers nor NASA Press announcements. You choose to believe a federal agency rather than highly skilled researchers whose expertise is the study of microbiology. I suppose you are still waiting for the evidence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction too eh? I suppose if you wait long enough -- they might appear from "somewhere".

Since Don has not read the full scientific paper in, Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere, his comments along with those of R.L. about it are absolutely meaningless. For anyone interested in reading the full paper to see what is really being said, you can go to you local college library and make a copy. Then I would be interested to hear any comments about it.

Here is the reference again:
Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere 33: 515–557, 2003.