And that's one of things that makes Mars fascinating. There aren't any other good examples of a solar system body where:
1) Conditions in the past plausibly would have allowed, even if only marginally, Earth-like life to exist
2) Geologic deposits from that era have been preserved and are accessible
Note the "plausible" and "marginal" in #1. I don't consider it certain at all that Mars was a nice place to live. But at this point the upper bound on the habitability of periods during the Noachian is not conclusively below than the lower bound of what Earth-like microorganisms could plausibly tolerate.
Unless we find 4 billion year old, unmetamorphised ocean sediments up in the Venusian tesserae -- WAY harder to identify remotely than Noachian clay -- Mars is it.
Space/Science » in reply to Wouldn't fossiles last a lot longer on a "dead" world, though?
Probably
The whole thread (13 posts)
- Phylosillicates on mars
- OK, so can we agree that Mars has been dead for 3.8 Ga?
