By 2100, will there be scientific consensus of past or present life on Mars?
Basic
65
13k
2100
29%
chance

Life must originate before 1971 (can't have arrived via a human prope, though panspermia by other means still qualifies).

Resolves with whatever manifold considers scientific consensus in 2100 - the equivalent of today’s "resolves with wikipedia".

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:

The wording of the question is pretty confusing. I propose changing it to, "In 2100, what will be the scientific consensus on whether life ever originated on Mars?"

bought Ṁ200 YES

Currently manifold thinks there is a 78% chance of AGI by 2048.

If argue that AGI would massively increase our ability to answer the question posed by this market so this market should be well above 2048.

I also think probably Manifold over predicts the likelihood of AGI

@ChrisEdwards crap I massively misread the wording

bought Ṁ100 NO

@ChrisEdwards note that this question is about whether there is life on mars; so if there is no life on mars no agi will help us conclude that there is

opened a Ṁ10,000 NO at 50% order

@ChrisEdwards same here, I think it's the marsians messing with our heads

opened a Ṁ200 NO at 88% order

I think the price is decent, if anyone's more confident than me I'm selling my position at 88%

bought Ṁ100 NO

@Bayesian I mixed up the title, thought the price was the equivalent of 12%. So uh. should have sold ig.

A consensus that there was life, or a consensus either way?

@RemiRampin That there was life

opened a Ṁ230 NO at 70% order

@Bayesian wanna take?

opened a Ṁ10,000 YES at 50% order

@spider yeah sure

opened a Ṁ250 NO at 70% order

@Bayesian I've opened another with most of my remaining account balance

spiderboughtṀ20NO

@spider wait reallyyy?

bought Ṁ20 NO

@Bayesian I'd honestly give this one slightly-greater-than-coin-flip odds.

opened a Ṁ15 NO at 90% order

@spider that's wild. would it be the same life as on earth in that case? or some independent marsian life

@Bayesian honestly I'm really uncertain how to divide probability mass between the two. Most of my current world view comes from the strengths and weaknesses of existing evidence (mainly seasonal atmospheric composition changes), instead of trying to reason it out as a black box.

opened a Ṁ1 YES at 67% order

@spider i'd put like 7% on the first and 3% on the second, that would be absolutely bizarre. unless "life" is tiny self replicating molecules and there are tons of them all throughout the universe but we don't know about them or care about them bc they never got or never could have gotten past that stage? ig in that case second option could be 50% for all I know

@Bayesian oh yeah, the idea that abiogenesis could be one of the easier steps would make for such a cool universe.

Full of future scientists investigating briny pockets full of weird patterns for the next few dozen millennia.

they could probably get them to form spontaneously in a big lab / simulations? at that stage. yeah that would be cool

wait did I misread the market all along???? I thought YES was that there wouldn't be any life found on mars. I am so confused. why did I buy YES again? huh

More related questions