Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Space Exploration & the Cosmos
The Viking Mars Missions May Have Discovered Life in 1976
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Peregrini" data-source="post: 51626" data-attributes="member: 2670"><p>This is very interesting info Numenorean7 but, two paragraphs bother me a little bit.</p><p>I didn't recall Cluster Analysis from college. I did tons of statistical work and if this was covered it must have been only in passing or perhaps I had a hangover that day so I looked it up and I did recognize parts of it. I got this from wiki;</p><p>Cluster analysis as such is not an automatic task, but an iterative process of knowledge discovery or interactive multi-objective optimization that involves trial and failure. <span style="color: #ffcc00">It will often be necessary to modify preprocessing and parameters <span style="color: #ff0000">until the result achieves the desired properties</span></span>.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_analysis" target="_blank">Cluster analysis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</a></p><p>I've highlighted the pertinent parts.</p><p> </p><p>That statement bothers me in that it alludes to biasing your data toward a desired result. IMHO a big NO NO in statistical analysis. The phrase often attributed to Samuel Clemens aka Mark Twain...There are three types of lies. There's lies, damned lies, and statistics. The above lends credence to that statement.</p><p> </p><p>The second from the article itself;</p><p>Further, when they compared Viking’s data to confirmed biological sources on Earth, like temperature readings from a lab rat, the analysis <span style="color: #ffcc00">correctly</span> clustered the biological readings with the active Viking experiment data, separate from the non-biological data in the control experiments. All that essentially means that the cluster analysis, when fed a good deal of data from both biological and non-biological sources, <span style="color: #ffcc00">correctly</span> separates the two types of data. And when it does so, it lumps the Viking data into the “biological” category.</p><p><a href="http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2012-04/new-analysis-viking-i-and-ii-data-shows-mars-missions-may-have-discovered-life-1976" target="_blank">The Viking Mars Missions May Have Discovered Life in 1976 | Popular Science</a></p><p> </p><p>The word "correctly" again indicates a bias toward a specific outcome. That is not the case in true statistical analysis. I'm not saying there is no bias in statistical analysis but that it should be minimalized. Only the result should be debated. The data should not be adjusted for a desired result. Again IMHO.</p><p> </p><p>But, as far as life on Mars, why not? I believe life can exist in many less than optimal conditions. The term "life as we know it" should be scraped from the language. The extreemophiles already discovered lend proof to my belief. There could very well be some form of life living underground. Human, human like, or our ancestors? Maybe someday we will know for sure. There are several other places that life is now believed to possibly exist.</p><p><a href="http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2011/12/jupiters-io-could-extreme-life-thrive-there.html" target="_blank">Jupiter's Moon, Io --Could Extreme Life Thrive There?</a></p><p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/8895487/Ice-cavern-could-support-life-on-Jupiters-moon-Europa.html" target="_blank">Ice cavern 'could support life' on Jupiter's moon Europa - Telegraph</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Peregrini, post: 51626, member: 2670"] This is very interesting info Numenorean7 but, two paragraphs bother me a little bit. I didn't recall Cluster Analysis from college. I did tons of statistical work and if this was covered it must have been only in passing or perhaps I had a hangover that day so I looked it up and I did recognize parts of it. I got this from wiki; Cluster analysis as such is not an automatic task, but an iterative process of knowledge discovery or interactive multi-objective optimization that involves trial and failure. [COLOR=#ffcc00]It will often be necessary to modify preprocessing and parameters [COLOR=#ff0000]until the result achieves the desired properties[/COLOR][/COLOR]. [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_analysis"]Cluster analysis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url] I've highlighted the pertinent parts. That statement bothers me in that it alludes to biasing your data toward a desired result. IMHO a big NO NO in statistical analysis. The phrase often attributed to Samuel Clemens aka Mark Twain...There are three types of lies. There's lies, damned lies, and statistics. The above lends credence to that statement. The second from the article itself; Further, when they compared Viking’s data to confirmed biological sources on Earth, like temperature readings from a lab rat, the analysis [COLOR=#ffcc00]correctly[/COLOR] clustered the biological readings with the active Viking experiment data, separate from the non-biological data in the control experiments. All that essentially means that the cluster analysis, when fed a good deal of data from both biological and non-biological sources, [COLOR=#ffcc00]correctly[/COLOR] separates the two types of data. And when it does so, it lumps the Viking data into the “biological” category. [url="http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2012-04/new-analysis-viking-i-and-ii-data-shows-mars-missions-may-have-discovered-life-1976"]The Viking Mars Missions May Have Discovered Life in 1976 | Popular Science[/url] The word "correctly" again indicates a bias toward a specific outcome. That is not the case in true statistical analysis. I'm not saying there is no bias in statistical analysis but that it should be minimalized. Only the result should be debated. The data should not be adjusted for a desired result. Again IMHO. But, as far as life on Mars, why not? I believe life can exist in many less than optimal conditions. The term "life as we know it" should be scraped from the language. The extreemophiles already discovered lend proof to my belief. There could very well be some form of life living underground. Human, human like, or our ancestors? Maybe someday we will know for sure. There are several other places that life is now believed to possibly exist. [url="http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2011/12/jupiters-io-could-extreme-life-thrive-there.html"]Jupiter's Moon, Io --Could Extreme Life Thrive There?[/url] [url="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/8895487/Ice-cavern-could-support-life-on-Jupiters-moon-Europa.html"]Ice cavern 'could support life' on Jupiter's moon Europa - Telegraph[/url] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Space Exploration & the Cosmos
The Viking Mars Missions May Have Discovered Life in 1976
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top