
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".
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?"
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 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
@ChrisEdwards same here, I think it's the marsians messing with our heads
I think the price is decent, if anyone's more confident than me I'm selling my position at 88%
@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.
@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
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