[otto_ortega]

This kind of articles seems specifically made to say "please don't cut our funds" and not to communicate a newsworthy discovery.

"Ancient organic material", "Mysterious methane" feels like click-bait after you read the content behind it

I hope the NASA keeps getting all the funds it needs, it is just sad that they have to fall in this kind of strategies to do so.

[fixermark]

Isn't the methane actually a bit mysterious though?

IIUC, methane should be broken down by interaction with sunlight. So if there is trace methane in the Martian atmosphere, it's either coming from not-depleted sub-surface reserves (in which case: how did it get there?) or chemical processes are actively generating it in the Martian ecosystem somewhere.

[caymanjim]

I don't think this is egregiously hyperbolic. "Ancient organic material" is exactly what they found. They go out of their way in the article to emphasize that organic molecules exist in many naturally occurring forms that are not indicative of life processes, but that life processes can not be ruled out either. The same applies to the methane finding.

I don't think it's fair to criticize the article itself. It's well-written, level-headed, and self-critical. I think it's fair to criticize their calling a press conference to announce it, rather than just releasing a notice or allowing the articles to be published in due course.

I'm inclined to cut them slack on the marketing style. NASA lives and dies by the whims of a fickle Congress, and they have few opportunities to make headlines. There's a bit of sensationalism or grandstanding at play here. The actual announcement is good science, and plays into their desire for funding to follow up.

[bhnmmhmd]

Well, I believe NASA is one of those few organizations in the world that's actually doing the humanity a favor. Despite that, it has been criticized for decades. Remember how people complained about millions of dollars that NASA used for Apollo missions? Some even argue(d) that space missions are pointless, and that there are more important issues on the Earth that we should cut NASA's funds. In my view, this view is just outrageous and disgraceful. Astronomy and space exploration is a very humbling science that not only will help us survive our disastrous extinction on this planet, but also makes us realize how unimportant we are in this vast universe, and what issues really matter in the world.

I'd rather see my money go to NASA and be spent on space discovery than see it spent to make useless products, or worse yet, to shed blood.

[otto_ortega]

It was not my intention to criticize NASA, I like it and as I mentioned on my original post I hope they keep getting the funds they need.

My point was that the title seems a bit exaggerated given the content of the article.

[bhnmmhmd]

I know, I didn't mean that you criticized NASA, I was talking about other people.

[friesen]

Somehow, the article managed to miss what should have be a big part of the announcement. They found evidence of kerogens. That has a bit more impact.

[havemylife]

So... I didn't know what kerogens were so I looked it up. Classified as solid organic matter in sedimentary rock. It is formed by the degredation of living matter.

So wouldn't this discovery relating to Mars further hint that it may have supported life in its past?

[ianai]

I’m curious about that as well. The wiki showed that kerogen looks very similar to chlorophyll. So how is it not safe to conclude it was made by life? Are there any non living sources of it?

[elorant]

Why only in the past and not in the present? Methane could be produced from living organisms.

[teaspoons]

If NASA went on Patreon I'd gladly help fund them if it meant they could just do great science without needing to worry about 'impact'

[lopmotr]

But to get Patreons to fund them, they'd have to make exciting press releases. That's sort of what they're already doing - make Americans excited about it so they vote for politicians who continue to fund them. I'll bet there are already endeavors on Patreon that you're not funding because they haven't been promoted enough to sound very exciting.

[teaspoons]

it's true. What can be done about this ? Lottery grants ? Universal Basic science funding ?