I'm not sure why you're focusing on Charles Elachi or his job title (properly, "Director of JPL") here.
Charles Elachi (http://www.nasa.gov/about/highlights/elachi_biography.html) is an eminent scientist in his own right (follow the link to see) and you can bet he's very well-informed about MSL, which is JPL's biggest mission right now. This is because Charles has been running JPL ever since MSL was in the planning stage. His job would include briefing all interested parties about the progress of the mission and its instruments for about 8 years now.
In no sense is Charles Elachi "just like every other armchair scientist".
Besides this side show (I work at JPL so it's bothersome to read mischaracterizations of Charles), I agree with you that this story has been shifted beyond what it actually means. If I read you right, that's what caused you to comment. "Organic" has been changed from its chemistry meaning ("containing carbon") to its lay meaning ("coming from something living"). And "perhaps" has been left out completely.
Charles is a careful speaker and a veteran at communicating results to the public. This is why his statement contains a specific disclaimer ("not biological"). You have to give the article credit for getting this right.
The question is whether or not he's speaking from having some insight into Curiosity's findings or if he's merely engaging in speculation, which I think is ambiguous given his statements so far. Until he's made a more clear-cut statement I don't think it's helpful to read too deeply into what he's said and assume that he has some special knowledge of the mission findings.
Charles Elachi (http://www.nasa.gov/about/highlights/elachi_biography.html) is an eminent scientist in his own right (follow the link to see) and you can bet he's very well-informed about MSL, which is JPL's biggest mission right now. This is because Charles has been running JPL ever since MSL was in the planning stage. His job would include briefing all interested parties about the progress of the mission and its instruments for about 8 years now.
In no sense is Charles Elachi "just like every other armchair scientist".
Besides this side show (I work at JPL so it's bothersome to read mischaracterizations of Charles), I agree with you that this story has been shifted beyond what it actually means. If I read you right, that's what caused you to comment. "Organic" has been changed from its chemistry meaning ("containing carbon") to its lay meaning ("coming from something living"). And "perhaps" has been left out completely.
Charles is a careful speaker and a veteran at communicating results to the public. This is why his statement contains a specific disclaimer ("not biological"). You have to give the article credit for getting this right.