Paper detail

Martian Methyl Chloride. A lesson in uncertainty

The MSL Lander Curiosity has recently detected methyl halides coming from heated samples of Martian soil. This is reminiscent of similar findings in the Viking Lander spacecraft. In the 1970s a consensus developed quickly explaining the methyl halides as contamination originating from the spacecraft, and ignoring lines of evidence that the two compounds originated from Mars, and that they could not have originated from the proposed spacecraft chemistry. I discuss why this consensus developed from the understanding of biochemistry and geochemistry of 1976, despite its implausibility. Subsequent explanations for the Viking methyl halides are more plausible but still not proven. The Curiosity rover results are also being explained as a result of on-spacecraft chemistry. I urge caution in this interpretation, in light of the historical Viking example: it is better to leave unexplained data unexplained than to lock in an explanation that precludes future developments.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.