YellowKnife Bay - Page 21

Previous 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 Next
Author Message
Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 401



PostPosted: May 20, 2013 11:12 PM 

http://m.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/asd_10_19_2012_p06-02-508572.xml

They clearly identify the bright "specks" as Martian. Read between the lines. They gave the plastic bright object a pass and labelled it plastic without definitively identifying it (in laymans terms, they guessed) because it was the easy answer. Then they scoop for the first time and see other bright objects in the soil. Martian. Read at the end. The Cook guy gives it away. There is internal discord on it. If it were truly plastic, they would have stuck with that. It's not. They guessed. They found more bright objects. Those are from Mars, but the rover plastic is not? Please.

What an extraordinary happenstance! The plastic is from EDL! It fell from the sky right where we decided to park out and make our first scientific analysis! Wow! Or, it's rover plastic! Fell off right where we were making out first scientific analysis 62 days into the mission! LOL.

Or ... it's native Martian material just like the other bright objects nearby they deemed to be Martian material. What is Occam's Razor again? Exactly.

It's Martian. It fits where it is. It's supposed to be there. Also, they have the instruments (cough, ChemCam) to conclusively identify its composition as plastic, so... why wasn't it open and shut? Because its not plastic.

LWS


Posts: 3062

Reply: 402



PostPosted: May 20, 2013 11:46 PM 

Wildcat; Thanks for the link. I had seen that article earlier but I had interpreted it differently to you. I considered that it said that there were two types of bright material. 1) The earlier ones represented by the larger "plastic" material that they had deemed, with minimal investigation, to be plastic emanating from the Curi EDL or the Rover itself and 2) the small bright specks which they had initially thought to have been from the rover or the EDL but had now concluded was of Martian Origin.

They had not done any tests on the "plastic" ones but promised to do some detailed investigations to determine if they were from Mars or Earth. I haven't seen any follow up stories on those larger bright specks which were of sufficient size to merit detailed chemical examination. I suspect they are either keeping the results of those tests close to NASA's chest or did not do the tests at all. Take your pick. In any case it should have been reasonably easy to confirm if the larger bright specks were plastic or not and where they came from on the rover. So not providing this information in later reports is very suggestive that they were not plastic and did not come from Curi as you worked out.

So the plastic will remain grist for the "Mars Lifers" mill unless NASA can or does issue an official debunking statement. I suspect we have heard the last from NASA on this (nothing) and they hope the issue will go away.

Wildcat; Does it seem strange to you that none of the other posters seem to be in any way interested in this story or the newberry story? Five years ago lots of posters (pro and con) would have been putting in their two cents worth. Alas the spirit of this blog has gone. The rock guys, even in their now long absence seems to have won.

Winston

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 403



PostPosted: May 21, 2013 12:16 AM 

I'm still here.

The way I see it, in a century, everyone will probably know there is life on Mars. Additionally, I bet they will know it to be obvious life. Oh yeah, of course that's lichen there on the ground, a future student might say. Everything is always obvious when someone else points it out to you.

These missions interest me because nobody is here to point it out to me. I have do that for myself. And if my prediction about life hiding in plain sight is true, even an idiot like myself can examine the pictures, contemplate the attendant variables, make comparisons, look for analogues, and find life.

LWS


Posts: 3062

Reply: 404



PostPosted: May 21, 2013 6:46 AM 

Wildcat; Well said. My motivation for persisting is similar to yours. I think I saw life in the first images coming from Oppy and I still think so even though I have some very small doubts sometimes when Hort or someone else posts some info on another "harebrained" theory by Scientists that life was never possible there.

At least the two of us can talk. I suspect even the lurkers have gone.

Winston

MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 405



PostPosted: May 21, 2013 7:18 AM 

Yes, yes NASA really succeeded in making Mars exploration a "very professional" business strictly avoiding any risks of scientific blunders. Although they grow not tired in stating to "think outside the box" they actually do it at best in terms of engineering tasks regarding Mars missions. There are really very few signs of thinking outside the box in terms of science apparent. But thinking "outside the box" in a great community (remember the MSL science crew consists of about 400 individuals - all heading for personal gains and glory in their respective careers of course) is not an easy task I would guess...

With this kind of incremental - I would call it fearful - slow progress in Mars exploration since the Viking mission NASA will soon be overtaken by more ambitious and curious researcher from eg other agencies and/or even the private (space-)business.
Wink

I vote for a crowd funded BOLD mission to Mars to help answering the most interesting question about Mars which is not the far geologic past by any means.

[link]

hortonheardawho


Posts: 3465

Reply: 406



PostPosted: May 21, 2013 9:12 AM 

Sol 0279 MAHLI 3D of drill SOD ( Self Organizing Dust ) on Cumberland rock:

Ah SOD - the reason I started paying close attention to the Mars images - over 9 years ago.

IF there were life on Mars then it should be visible everywhere - just as the life on Earth is visible everywhere.

The rapid organization of disturbed Martian dust into a network of donuts and lines ( such as above ) is peculiar to Mars as far as I know. NOTHING like it - except life - exists on the Earth.

Until a scientific, non-living explanation is provided by the rock guys for SOD, I will continue to believe that Mars is alive - and it is everywhere visible.

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 407



PostPosted: May 21, 2013 10:29 AM 

Natural fit:

http://i.picasion.com/pic69/ca3ae194c6208ba9b43881deca4ef160.gif

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 408



PostPosted: May 21, 2013 11:29 AM 

This looks familiar:


Genus Aspicilia

LWS


Posts: 3062

Reply: 409



PostPosted: May 21, 2013 1:47 PM 

Wildcat; Re. your 408; Very nice comparison images.

Winston

hortonheardawho


Posts: 3465

Reply: 410



PostPosted: May 21, 2013 2:28 PM 

Sol 0277 animation of MAHLI and Chemcam view of Cumberland rock:

You must view the original size to see the animation.

The images are Affine registered.

Er, Wildcat, I don't understand your reply 407 animation. What are you comparing to what?

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 411



PostPosted: May 21, 2013 7:27 PM 

Maybe this will help:

The bottom image is the black and white Rocknest ChemCam overlain on the Cumberland picture.

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 412



PostPosted: May 21, 2013 8:22 PM 

This is the closest I can get (my Photoshop capabilities are quite limited):

http://i.picasion.com/pic69/1a3e4a7b1990063eca057725ef62af72.gif

LWS


Posts: 3062

Reply: 413



PostPosted: May 21, 2013 11:28 PM 

Wildcat; Here's a sol 231 3D image that I think shows clear microbial mats.

http://smu.gs/10kBgAz

Winston

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 414



PostPosted: May 22, 2013 1:27 AM 

Winston, I agree.

I know I sound like a broken record, but the Rover plastic seems to be visible in it, too:

Notice the oval object sticking out the top of both?

hortonheardawho


Posts: 3465

Reply: 415



PostPosted: May 22, 2013 5:52 PM 

Sol 0270 Bayer processed panorama of Esperance rock:

with 3D closeup notes of channels surrounding the rock.

Every time I process one of these Bayer images I am reminded that the Mastcam and MAHLI original images are STILL not included in the analyst notebook.

Will they ever be? Perhaps the excuse the next time will be that the reduced moneys for NASA makes it impossible to do the "PR" work?

I would dearly like to see personally what those odd green areas in the JPG versions of the original data look like.

Why the detailed interest in the channels?

Kevin


Posts: xxx

Reply: 416



PostPosted: May 23, 2013 9:11 AM 

Nice animation of the drill in action:

http://makeagif.com/i/qRlmLi

LWS


Posts: 3062

Reply: 417



PostPosted: May 25, 2013 9:09 PM 

Hort et al;

There was some discussion of the small mini spheres seen in the dust extruded from the recent grinding. You mentioned SODs.

Earlier I had commented on the brown layer underneath the predominantly greyish layer of the extruded "dust". I think I had suggested that the lower layer, the one extruded from the original surface, appeared to be brownish and composed primarily of small spheres which I now think are distinct from the usual SODs.

There were some releases today where the brown lower layer was clearer than in the earlier pictures. They really look like discrete spheres in these images. Below is an attempt at an X-eyed 3D of the area showing the brown surface layer with its numerous mini spheres (spores?)and the layer of sods covering most of that layer. Use Stereophotomaker to view the 2X image.

here

Winston

LWS


Posts: 3062

Reply: 418



PostPosted: May 25, 2013 9:15 PM 

Oops! Wrong image

It should be this one; Use Stereophotomaker at 1.5 x

Winston

LWS


Posts: 3062

Reply: 419



PostPosted: May 25, 2013 9:32 PM 

Just looked at Hort's sol 279 3D of the brown spheres. They seem much more discrete in the sol 283 images. Indeed, in the sol 279 images both the brown and the greyish areas appeared to be in some sort of matrix. The sol 279 spheres seem to have lost that matrix. Could the effect have been due to water loss over the past 4 days?

Hort; A GIF might be in order here.

Winston

LWS


Posts: 3062

Reply: 420



PostPosted: May 26, 2013 6:56 AM 

Hort; I tried a GIF and my suggestion of differences between the sol 279 and 283 images was wrong. I think it might have been differences in focus between the normal Curi images. The Curi Focus merge data products for those areas show no perceptible changes.

Winston

Previous 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 Next


Join the conversation:















Very Happy Smile Sad Surprised
Shocked Confused Cool Laughing
Mad Razz Embarassed Crying or Very Sad
Evil or Very Mad Twisted Evil Rolling Eyes Wink
Powered by MTSmileys