Talk:NASA: Signs of liquid water found on surface of Mars

What about other possible explanations?

The article seems one-sided, in that it fails to report on opinions within the scientific community that stress possible alternative explanations for what has been seen, as reported in the world press, e.g. from the BBC news website:

But some scientists think these fresh gullies could also have been cut by liquid carbon dioxide (CO2).

And again:

Other scientists think it possible that gullies like this were caused not by water but by liquid carbon dioxide.

One of the reasons for favouring CO2 was that computer models of the Martian crust indicated water could exist only at depths of several kilometres. Liquid carbon dioxide, on the other hand, could persist much nearer the surface where temperatures can drop as low as -107C.

And further:

Oded Aharonson, an assistant professor of planetary science at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) said that while the interpretation of recent water activity on Mars was "compelling," it was just one possible explanation.

Aharonson said further study was needed to determine whether the deposits could have been left there by the flow of dust rather than water.

The above quotes are from Water 'flowed recently' on Mars, a report on [1] dated December 6.

It seems to me that an article such as this should be backed by a wider range of sources than the two cited. Also, isn't it time to take off the "Breaking News" template?

I am brand new to Wikinews, so I will not make changes in the article myself this time, as I may do something wrong. I prefer to leave that to the original author or other editors, if they see fit. --A R King 07:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

i think u've raised valid concerns about the article. do feel free to make changes to the article to address these issues. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikinews is a wiki, so anyone can edit any article by simply following the "Edit this page" link at the top. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. if u need any assistance, leave a message here or on my talk page and i'll be happy to help out any way i can.  — Doldrums(talk) 07:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Doldrums. However, I'll pass this time round. Perhaps you could do me the favour of making the changes (if you see fit, of course)? I have a busy morning... Cheers, --A R King 07:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I found the time and decided to go for it! It's my first time, and I still haven't read the instructions, so if I've done something wrong I hope you or someone will come in after me and sort it out. --A R King 12:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

looks good!  — Doldrums(talk) 13:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Why is NASA just reporting this now? Wasn't the "new" picture taken in 2005?—02:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)Xgeorge