See section 4.1 [page 909] of this report: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Beaty/publication...

The main driver is that the flows seem to be associated with seasonally higher temperatures, and therefore the flows ("RSL") may be caused by a melting brine. RSLs have been controversial and they have gotten a lot of attention from planetary scientists.

wishful thinking

also an isotope in the sand would have allowed water to stay flowing at the below freezing temperatures that mars has, so if you were grasping for straws at why there would be water, this would support it, but if you weren't wishing there was water there as the presupposition then this new answer would have been more immediately obvious

Did they simply went with the visual look of it? Probably did some simulations on a computer and compared and decided its water. I would be shocked by such low quality of Science behind it if that was the case. Extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence.

Please don't post obvious dismissals of other people's work unless you have some specific knowledge about it.

There's nothing more lowering of discussion quality otherwise; it's like a snake in snakes and ladders.

Problem is if they actually suspect it's water they aren't allowed to bring their rovers or probes anywhere near as they don't want to risk contaminating it with Earth microorganisms.

And yet Elon Musk is going to build a colony?

I don't believe he is bound by this, or maybe wouldn't care if he was. https://planetaryprotection.nasa.gov/about

https://planetaryprotection.nasa.gov/intpolicy/

Yeah, I've been intrigued by this cognitive dissonance for a while. Are we going to visit, or would contaminating the planet be a disaster for science and our understanding of the nature of life?

god bless anyone dumb enough to believe him