The problem with Norman Pace's view is that he is an "old school" microbiologist. Many of these people refused to believe that life could exist on Earth's most extreme environments. Of course, many of them were proven wrong. Pace's view is surprising since he studies some of Earths most extreme environments and the bacteria that live there. It is fair to be skeptical, but to come out and use the word "bogus". He is in a position of great respect. It is his duty to convey his views, but to use harsh words is reminiscent to comments made from earlier times about life in extreme environments here on Earth. While it is true that hydrogen perioxide is dangerous to terrestrial organisms, the oxidation potential of the molecule would be reduced in the lower temperatures found on Mars. Furthermore, there is nothing to say that the bacteria would have mechanisms in place to mitigate oxidative oxygen similar to Earth organisms. I am not saying that Houtkooper is right. however, he is just offering an alternative explanation to the Viking life experiments results. While science is based on facts, theories and hypotheses are important to its advancement.

In fact, there probably wouldn't be as much interest in the topic if it weren't for David McKay's ALH84001 announcement of microbial life found in a Martian meteorite. That too, was dismissed as a geological/chemical process. The fact is, that data supports both avenues of thought. Bacteria have been found recently to have genomes much smaller then what was believed possible only a few years ago. That would support McKay's finding of very small bacteria like objects.

More definitive information should be upcoming with the NASA probe. Right now, these people are just giving opinions based on current data. Acting like a seventh grader is bogus and doesn't look good for science.