I wonder if their evidence points at H2O, or...?
H2O is not supposed to be able to exist out there without sublimating away (much akin to old comet theory), and the one theory that they propose on how it's "buried" but "makes it's way to the surface when the asteroid is bombarded" by stuff... wouldn't they have detected 'jets of sublimating water' like they presumed would be seen on comets?
Why do I have the sneaking suspicion that there's no more water on that asteroid than they have detected from any comet?
"I have no fear to shout out my ignorance and let the Wise correct me, for every instance of such narrows the gulf between them and me." -- Michael A. Harrington