Please join this FaceBook page (containing mosaics, panoramas, and up-to-date info).

1 | 2 Next
Author Message
impreprex







PostPosted: January 8, 2013 7:42 PM 

A Facebook page I started to keep images up to date with the public - specifically panoramas and mosaics and animated GIFS. And raw images as well. Smile
It's not a conspiracy page (although I am somewhat a conspiracy theorist), so please don't drag "fossils" or "bunny rabbits" in if you join and post.
Like I said, I sometimes wonder and think I am looking directly at fossils (I'm sure some of you do as well), but I/we (my moderator and I, and whoever else would like to be a mod) would like to keep the page clean of that. Smile

So here it is. I update it hourly, or as images come in. Please "like" it and be a part of it! This isn't about me or the page - it's about Mars and the rover and the fact that people need to see these images in a more timely fashion than what the official page is showing - no offense NASA.

https://www.facebook.com/marscuriosityimages

Also, as I said, I would like to have more mods - hopefully people who have degrees in Geology and the like. I am only the photo-stitcher, and that's not even my specialty. I create music, but that's another story. Wink

impreprex


Posts: xxx

Reply: 1



PostPosted: January 8, 2013 9:33 PM 

Thanks for deleting the other pages, mods. Smile
My apologies fort that.

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 2



PostPosted: January 9, 2013 12:10 AM 

I have a professional degree and I believe there is life on Mars. Common sense dictates that. NASA is government funded. Money doesn't grow on trees. NASA knows that.

They went to Mars in 1976. Dead planet, they said. We didnt go back. Well, in the interm, we found all kinds of hardy life right here on earth. We go back. Then all of a sudden, we're sending a fleet of satellites and landers about every other year. Now, we've sent a small billion dollar machine there loaded with an impressive array of instruments that would make some small colleges blush.

They've sent billions of dollars there for a reason. They know there is life there. Finding life is our main goal right? Holy grail, they say. Why haven't they sent a life detection experiment since Viking's "inconclusive" results? They don't need it anymore. They already know. Indeed, they have told us what it is -- cyanobacteria/microbial life. Life that lives in or under rocks, just below the soil. Follow the water, they say. Wow! Hematite! Wow! Springtime water melt in a gulley! Wow! Life could live in caves. Wow! A seventh grader found a cave! Wow! Water-ice polygons! Where there's water, there's life. Mars has water.

They are researching the extant life. They have to be able to prove extant Martian life beyond all doubt. Remember the meteroite in the mid-90s? Well, people get to looking at it and questions are raised. Crap. They will visit Glenelg twice for a reason. Hmm. Why? To check out the purty minerals and rocks again? No. Minerals don't change over a year, but life does, even if very slowly like lichens. You go back to compare and look for observable changes under different variables.

Geology ain't all of this by any stretch of the imagination. They used taxpayer money to pay certain scientists who have devoted their careers to studying extremophiles and life in analogue environments. The whole point of studying Mars is life, not to answer burning geological questions.

There will not be a manned Mars mission in our lifetimes. Why does it keep getting pushed back? We had the capability to do a Venus flyby in the early 70s. It's not that. We can do it. Mars was always our next big human spaceflight goal, yet it's always getting pushed back 20 years. Moon first, Bush said. No, asteroid first then an Apollo 8 throwback flyby, Obama said. It keeps getting pushed back because of the very real likelihood there is extant life there. Bioethics. Will our presence destroy the moss and algae? Will it destroy us when our would-be explorers triumphantly return home? We're not going.

Guess I cannot join due to this totally off the wall conspiracy theory not based in reality.

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 3



PostPosted: January 9, 2013 12:33 AM 

And if you don't think for a minute our smarty pants scientists aren't looking for "fossils," you're kidding yourself. They difference between them and others is that they're not finding furry little dust bunnies and skulls, they're finding direct visual evidence of what they're looking for: that wonderful ambiguous catch-all phrase that is "microbial life," which, by the way, encompasses stuff visible to the naked eye.

Funny how they tested out their cameras using a fossilized shell, a fossilized microbial mat remnant, and petrified wood from Antarctica.

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 4



PostPosted: January 9, 2013 1:23 AM 

One last rant:

You don't have to go to Cal Tech to identify readily observable features that you've had the occasion through life experience to observe, examine, and identify on earth.

For example:

This is biocrust. I didn't learn that in grade school, high school, college, or while getting my doctorate. I learned it from hiking in Arizona and reading all those little PSA signs imploring you to pretty please not step on the "dirt" because its not dirt at all, its actually life. What kind of life? Surprise, surprise . . . cyanobacteria.

Me and my tin foil hat will stay here on the back of the short bus of Mars. The public deserves to see the pictures but doesn't deserve to speculate? Only a scientist would be so obtuse and arrogant enough to say something so stupid. That's not directed at you as much as it is "Unmanned Spaceflight." The public is footing the bill. Funny how all that "let's inspire the next generation of explorers" bullshit goes down the drain the second the plebs, I mean public, begins infringing on the scientists' conception of "science" by making wild claims of life of Mars without proof, thereby making them "conspiracy theorists," instead of just looking at the purty pictures and marveling at that overly-processed butterscotch sky despite the fact that said scientists know they is an extremely high probability of life there but would never want be accused of having made that claim because they have to adhere to their high scientific standard of proof.

Its actually quite amusing.

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 5



PostPosted: January 9, 2013 1:25 AM 

One last rant:

You don't have to go to Cal Tech to identify readily observable features that you've had the occasion through life experience to observe, examine, and identify on earth.

For example:

This is biocrust. I didn't learn that in grade school, high school, college, or while getting my doctorate. I learned it from hiking in Arizona and reading all those little PSA signs imploring you to pretty please not step on the "dirt" because its not dirt at all, its actually life. What kind of life? Surprise, surprise . . . cyanobacteria.

Me and my tin foil hat will stay here on the back of the short bus of Mars. The public deserves to see the pictures but doesn't deserve to speculate? Only a scientist would be so obtuse and arrogant enough to say something so stupid. That's not directed at you as much as it is "Unmanned Spaceflight." The public is footing the bill. Funny how all that "let's inspire the next generation of explorers" bull goes down the drain the second the plebs, I mean public, begins infringing on the scientists' conception of "science" by making wild claims of life of Mars without proof, thereby making them "conspiracy theorists," instead of just looking at the purty pictures and marveling at that butterscotch sky overprocessed especially for them despite the fact that said scientists know they is an extremely high probability of life there but would never want be accused of having made that claim because they have to adhere to their high scientific standard of proof.

Its actually quite amusing

John


Posts: xxx

Reply: 6



PostPosted: January 9, 2013 1:34 AM 

UMSF......I think it is verboten to even MENTION "life" there. If I am mistaken, please correct me.

John


Posts: xxx

Reply: 7



PostPosted: January 9, 2013 1:49 AM 

Ahhhhh. Arizona, I trekked in the desert there a few years ago. Duricrust.... Interesting stuff. I was walking where I thought no person had ever walked and found foot prints, broken through the crust. Followed them and found an old campfire and 20 year old beer cans. Read up and found the sagebrush lives for 100 years. Damned lizards are quick too.

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 8



PostPosted: January 9, 2013 2:03 AM 

Excluding life as a plausible explanation for something you don't know in a place likely to harbor life is antithetical to scientific inquiry, yet it incessantly happens over there everyday.

The public ain't funding these missions to learn about the fascinating origins of these mysterious pink rocks. If that was the main goal, this mission would have never been funded. Never. No, they are selling these to Congress as life missions. That's the main goal. They are looking at the rocks as a means to an end. Find out about the rocks to find out about the life. Not find out about the rocks to find out about the rocks.

kevin


Posts: xxx

Reply: 9



PostPosted: January 9, 2013 6:22 AM 

After the Viking landings it was decided to look for the conditions to either support life today or in the past as Dr Leven's results were shot down so easily. It will always be the case and will be with Curiosity that whatever is found will be accused of having been contaminated here on Earth.
So NASA decided to follow the water and have successfully done so, then there would be the sample return mission. Manned flight to Mars is really a "we did it first" type project because the chances are we will find life or evidence of past life before any manned mission. Anyone who truly believes Mars is dead and always has been need to understand everything in our solar system was built at the same time and from the same stuff. There is no way of telling if microbes from Mars were blasted to Earth or vice versa either way whatever exists in our solar system are all related in one way or another we are all cousins.
What really made us want to go back to Mars was the discovery of Extremophiles here on Earth in very harsh environments especially Antartica this changed our whole way of thinking about what you need to support life. Creatures that became part of the rock, living in cold dry salty briny environments just like Mars, feeding off the most bizarre energy and food types. We had to go back and it had to be robots we cannot get Man to the Moon let alone Mars in fact the ISS is not within NASA's reach.
Curiosity is about to start drilling and bits of Carbon are going to fall of it when it is drilling so that will need to be put into the equation but it makes easy for those who want Mars to be dead to say nope skewed results guys. The drill is too small anyway, 2m to 3m would be more like it.
Budget is another issue as people starve in modern day USA how can the administration justify $ billions to fund missions? The USAF have lost enough F22's recently in non-combat situations to pay for another Curiosity not to mention the cost of Minuteman ICBM's that will never be used could fund a whole manned programme if they were scrapped.
To get Man on Mars is important in that we have always explored and advanced as a result for me another ISS project is required encompassing NASA/JPL/ESA/Roscosmos each focusing on specific parts of the mission i.e. funding and technology of a lander or living quarters. I am sad to say I too will be long gone when and if Man ever walks on Mars but I do expect to hear the answer to the big question which will be "no we are not alone" before I pop off.

http://www.astrobio.net/exclusive/233/antarctic-microbes-colonize-under-mars-like-conditions


Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 10



PostPosted: January 9, 2013 10:39 AM 

You can also bet your best buck that whatever "scientific objective" NASA has set for their latest mission has already been conclusively established by a prior mission.

With limited funding, the missions absolutely must succeed as a prerequisite to secure funding for subsequent missions.

In order to do that, you stack the deck. Was Mars once habitable? Of course it was. Are there organics? Of course there are. Was there once water? Of course.

Here's the presumptive goals for the next rover mission:

"The 2020 rover is intended to investigate an astrobiologically relevant ancient environment on Mars to decipher its geological processes and history, including the assessment of its past habitability and potential for preservation of biosignatures within accessible geologic materials."

Now you know what Curiosity is going to find. Preserved remains of life, also known as fossils.

What a conspiracy theory.

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 11



PostPosted: January 10, 2013 1:50 AM 

Thrombolites.

MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 12



PostPosted: January 10, 2013 4:33 AM 

John, Iam amused too every time the members/readers of UMSF are reminded or should I say disciplined not to talk about life on Mars. I guess the moderators just fears the massive noise generated by those folks seeing skulls, bunnies and other things in every other rock or pebble. Still I would advice them to accept the challenge and let the more serious members post and talk about the most relevant things comming from Mars! Smile

Of course we explore Mars to find et-life. And Wildcat you are probably right that everybody knows or at least believes that there is life on Mars since the Viking mission - at least I don't know a single scientist among my peers who doubt that.

by the way: imprepex, I have you in facebook - keep the pans comming and thanks for your work. Smile

impreprex


Posts: xxx

Reply: 13



PostPosted: January 10, 2013 6:23 PM 

You welcome. And damn - this thread got deep real quick, and it doesn't even sound crazy. Very Happy

But I still hope to keep my head down and just enjoy processing and viewing the images. Wink

Don Davis


Posts: 17

Reply: 14



PostPosted: January 12, 2013 3:14 AM 

I joined, a nice forum to get glimpses of and links to the great images coming in. I also support 'keeping it real', enjoying the geology and vistas being revealed.
MPJ, it is not all about looking for life. Even if the history of Mars turns out not to conform to many of our hopes and ends up lifeless then and now it is still an intrinsically interesting world on its own terms.

MPJ


Posts: 250

Reply: 15



PostPosted: January 12, 2013 5:45 PM 

Don Davis, of course you are right. Geology for instance is a very important topic too cause of the potential resources to find and exploit on Mars also the development of all the tech to conduct Mars missions will advance/benefit humankind on the long run. But still I say first things first - geology/resources on Mars can wait until we actually will be able to take advantage of such findings on Mars so we should rather concentrate looking for answers regarding our place in the universe (philosophical speaking) and the most hotly debated question of our times is their et-life somewhere out there...And where start if not on Mars?

Don Davis


Posts: 17

Reply: 16



PostPosted: January 14, 2013 8:04 PM 

Knowledge isn't just about seeking opportunities for exploitation. It is for its own sake. The ancient wetter (but probably still frigid) Mars turning into the frozen thin atmosphere world of the last few billion years ago is a story worth unravelling. The process of how a world ends up as it does is valuable to learn, we need to learn the story of Venus. It is not about looking for future real estate. Must of the Solar System is far too hostile for Man but places like Venus and Titan still beckon to have their secrets uncovered.
Life is not a 'prize' we are digging for. It is the knowledge of what we are digging through and how it illuminates the history of our neighbor world, that we explore to learn.

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 17



PostPosted: January 14, 2013 10:24 PM 

The fascinating story of Mars' demise alone is not worth the amount of money they are spending to find out. This is not romantic exploration for the sake of knowledge. This stuff costs real money.

We didn't go to the Moon just because it was there. We didn't just all of a sudden get the desire and ability to explore it for knowledge. We went to the Moon because we had to get there before the Russians just because we had to get there before the Russians. That's why those missions were funded. Once that goal was accomplished, we stopped going. We've never gone back.

Life is why we're at Mars. Not geology. Not what happened to kill this planet. Those are secondary and tertiary goals. The main goal is life. That's why we're at Mars and not Venus.

Life is the prize we are digging for. NASA is a governmental agency. When they seek funding for these missions, they have to explain what their goals are. They got funding for these missions because Goal No. 1 is finding life. Any other knowledge we pick up along the way, ala what happened to Mars and Venus, is the cherry on top. Those secondary and tertiary goals you described are not why we sent a 2.4 billion dollar machine to Mars.

Don Davis


Posts: 17

Reply: 18



PostPosted: January 14, 2013 11:20 PM 

Indeed it principally is why Curiosity is there, to learn the geology in the area with a better rover. To learn. That's why there are orbiters around Mercury, Venus, Mars, and Saturn as well as a probe on its way to Pluto and another to Ceres the largest asteroid. This is about taking inventory of our surroundings, and filling the blank places in our maps.

We don't know if Mars was ever 'killed', as we don't yet know if life was ever there. A sample Return Mission could well go a long way toward revealing the intimate secrets of our neighbor world.
And poor neglected Venus has not been explored on the surface since the Soviets did it in the 80's. We seem to be similarly exiled to Mars as they were then in their Venus surface exploration. Titan cries out for a better look as well.
It is not always the confirming or not of an advance question that makes space exploration worthwhile, it is the uncovering of the new unsuspected unknowns.

Don Davis


Posts: 17

Reply: 19



PostPosted: January 14, 2013 11:24 PM 

The political factors regarding Apollo were certainly there, and dominated at the time. The knowledge we have gained from those missions, however, has forever elevated our perspective regarding the Earth and the Solar Systems history long after the Cold War is over. Mars has its own side of this grand story to tell, and some day we may be in a position to get the samples we need.

Wildcat


Posts: xxx

Reply: 20



PostPosted: January 15, 2013 12:40 AM 

We most certainly are not exiled on Mars. We're at Mars and not Titan because that is where NASA knows life is. That is why we are there. To learn.

The other missions you alluded to are all significantly less expensive than 2.4 billion dollar rovers that dangle from sky cranes to join the small armada of spacecraft already there and the combined billion dollar cost those missions share.

They know its there. Now. That notwithstanding, they have to "take inventory" of all the evidence they find, both direct visual and scientifically detected, before calling a press conference to blow everybody's collective mind.

1 | 2 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