I immediately took the side of freezing, while my friend took the side of boiling. What follows is a compacted version of the debate that took place. Although it was not a formal debate, it was still great fun. Note: The discussion has been edited for content and length.
I immediately opened with: (My arguments will be in regular font.)
There's water on the poles of Mars, which is a commonly known fact!
My friend stated: (My friends arguments will be in Italic font.)
But water cannot exist under a vacuum, which Mars almost has because of the lack of an atmosphere. I remember back in chemistry, we did an experiment where we stuck water in a vacuum, at room temperature, where it then proceeded to boil.
Look, I even have proof! Look at the NASA web site about water on Mars: http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msp98/why.html. (Note: You may want to visit this site in another window, just for reference.) "Although liquid water may still exist deep below the surface of Mars, currently the temperature is too low..."
Yes, but did you read the rest of it? "...And the atmosphere too thin for liquid water to exist at the surface. " Because the atmosphere is too thin an entire body of water (lake) cannot exist on Mars, it will begin to evaporate due to the extremely low atmosphere.
But water does exist on the poles! If we were to dump a lake on the pole, wouldn't it freeze?
The water on the poles of Mars contains so many impurities that of course it wouldn't boil away! However, the water, because it has no severe amounts of impurities, would immediately boil due to the air pressure. Besides, the question was "on Mars" not "on the pole(s) of Mars"
I guess NASA would have to take some water up there on their next mission to see what happens!
*sigh*
To the readers: Please give me your standings/information/point of view. If you would like to start a debate of your own, go ahead! If I'm just being ignorant, then please state so below.