Theories on why Venus and Mars aren't inhabited by similar life forms?

You must be idiots.

 

The OP is incorrect. I just read a book that said both Venus and Mars were inhabited by similar life forms. I suggest you all read the book, it's called:

Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus
-by John Grey

 

Mars is actually in the habitable zone. Which means it can sustain liquid water. Mars probably had a good chance at life at one point. The earth is unique because it has a spinning iron core which produces a magnetic field. This magnetic field is called the ionosphere. It protects us from a lot of the high intensity radiation, not the atmosphere itself. This high intensity radiation would like kill what life did try to live on a planet without an ionosphere. Basically this spinning iron core helps us from all dying of cancer before we can evolve.

 

God put the iron there! He didn't want us to be green, big headed monsters.

 

i bet god buried some dinosaur bones on mars to weed out the non believers

 

Actually Mars does have iron in it's core, it's just not spinning and circulating like it does for us.

Here's a picture of Mars.


Oh and there's also this thing about Mars' Magnetic field:
http://phys.org/news141573374.html

 

Why hasn't "life" arisen on these other planets? Evolution would seem to state that species will be evolved based on the conditions of the surroundings, and the strongest of these genetic changes will survive as long as possible. There are fish on Earth that live in what are basically oxygen-free environments, and with literally thousands of pounds of water pressure. Why can that evolve on earth, yet nothing on our neighboring planets? That's another thing I've always wondered. The stock answer is that the other planets don't have the same conditions as Earth, yet that doesn't make sense, in terms of true universal life. If inorganic matter can evolve into organic matter, shouldn't that happen on all planets? Or, are we just all lucky we live on the one planet we know of that has conditions perfect to sustain life as we know it.

 

So, it's just chance that we inhabit the one planet that we know of that can sustain organic life? Think of those odds!

 

You mean, the odds that a planet that can sustain life, has life? WHOA! mind blowing. That's like, what are the odds a swimming pool collects water?

 

I'd be happy to explain further. We need* certain organic molecules to survive or for life to arise, as far as we know. Those organic molecules break down under high radiation. That high radiation occurs on the other two planets at the surface, but not at our surface. There are also other molecules that form which are not as stable on our surface. It's like a natural selection for non living things. Pretty amazing, and it improves the odds of life happening here!

 

Mars at one time, probably would have sustained life. It might look like Hoth from star wars, but it should have been habitable.

 

a million years is less than a percent compared to the age of the planet though!

 

Comparing Hundreds of millions to millions is like saying, the Blazers have wins, hundreds of wins. Very poorly written. Also I got tired of going off your hearsay, and I looked it up.
http://www.space.com/22013-mars-atmosphere-curiosity-rover-meteorites.html this says 4 billion years ago.

 

Yes, "we." Isn't it possible that on other planets, evolution could have yielded lifeforms that could live in environments completely different than earth?

 

It seems rather presumptuous to feel that our lifeforms, as evolved on this planet, should be the baseline for life on other planets, and for the universe in general.

 

It'd be fascinating to see what martian fossils look like and if DNA could be extracted.