Polar Storms

Sol 114 still has low level moisture deck. Winds light

Stu

I think that Fred/Darwin's posts above referring to you were totally uncalled for and the last one was in extremely bad taste. But, in my view, your "There are some good people here, and some great discussions" sounds somewhat hollow, as, despite your infrequent postings here and your obvious regular lurking and sometimes taking ideas and information from here for the edification of the gentry over there, you have never defended this blog in the face of gratuitous, uncalled for and unwarranted attacks by a few posters on UMSF.

I'll continue to lurk and enjoy your excellent images and poems on UMSF. They are a refreshing aspect of that dry as dust forum which nevertheless provides important technical information that is essential for a proper understanding of the Mars we all love.

Au revoir, and all the best!

Winston

I'm not sure you really appreciate what a moisture content of near zero to a max around 100 precipitable microns means. There was a Cornell comment that put it in perspective. If all the water vapour in the atmosphere could instantaneously deposit on the ground as water, we would have a layer about one third the width of a human hair.

Actually the width of human hair is variously given as 50 microns to 100 microns (different people have different thicknesses.) So the maximal amount of water vapor on Mars would be the width of a human hair to twice the width of a human hair, depending on what you consider to be the width of a human hair.
The question is if this low amount of water vapor on Mars can result in snow. The key fact to keep in mind that the amount of precipitation that can fall from a single storm event of Earth can be MANY times what appears in the air as precipitable water.
For instance this map gives the amount of precipitable water over the Earth:

NASA Water Vapor Project (NVAP)
Total Column Water Vapor
1992

From:

WATER VAPOR in the CLIMATE SYSTEM
Special Report. December 1995
[link]

So on Earth the maximum amount of precipitable water vapor is around 5 to 6 precipitable centimeters, 2 to 3 inches, even over the oceans. Yet during storms you can have very many inches of rain or snow fall during a single storm event:

The Maharashtra floods of 2005.
"The highest 24-hour period in India was 1,168 mm (46.0 inches) in Aminidivi in the Union Territory of Lakshadweep on 6 May 2004 although some reports suggest that it was a new Indian record. The previous record high rainfall in a 24-hour period for Mumbai was 575 mm (22.6 inches) in 1974"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Maharashtra_floods

I asked some weather experts how it is that so much more water can fall as precipitation than appears in the air as precipitable water vapor, but the answers I received weren't very satisfying. The explanation that still seems reasonable is one that occurred to me:

you could have all the water in a column in a cloud fall to the ground, then the cloud move so all the water in another column falls on the same space on the ground. If the cloud is large in horizontal extent and moving slowly quite a bit could fall at the same location on the ground.

Bob Clark

That is correct Bob. The atmosphere is always mixing. The snow has begun. Now lets see when and how much will fall. The H2O snow will be first. I know they are taking night time observations can not wait to see them.

Oh freedoom

Fred

Winston,
I have never seen gratuitous, uncalled for or unwarranted attacks against this blog on UMSF. In fact Stu showed typical British understatement by describing the bile that has been spewed in this forum over Doug in particular and UMSF in general as obnoxious and pathetic. In any event, I fail to see how any negative comment with regard to this blog on UMSF could be regarded as unwarranted. Doug’s restraint in this respect has been admirable But then again he is a gentleman and his even handed moderation is one of the reasons why UMSF has such a good reputation. The thought of Stu lurking here on the Darwin (aka Fred)forum with intent to steal ideas is a bit of a giggle.

More clouds.

Fred

Hi Brian

I know you consider that anything that the UMSF few say about marsroverblog is warranted but they usually refer negatively to this blog in general, not to individuals who post here who might have stepped across the line of decency or the acceptable reality of what can or cannot exist on mars.

"Attacks" may be a bit strong but snide, gratuititous and unwarranted statements have certainly been made.

re. stu lurking and possibly repeating images or other info from this forum on UMSF, you can do some research on times certain images, etc. were published here and then appeared over there. I must add however that such is a two-way street and is perhaps somewhat even, with possibly a slight edge on official info from UMSF being seen first there and then being referred to over here.

You say above "In any event, I fail to see how any negative comment with regard to this blog on UMSF could be regarded as unwarranted." It is really strange that you would continue to post on a blog of which you personally have such low opinions as you obviously think that the BLOG itself warrants any negative comment from anyone on UMSF.

Is there a superiority complex peeping through there somewhere?

Winston

No winston. It is when I see the the pseudo moderator of this blog accepting statements such as 'Doug is a big (expletive deleted' and you yourself effectively encouraging such comments that I believe that a response from UMSF would be well justified. However Doug would never allow such. I repeat. I have never seen a comment against this Blog despite the fact that Darwin has now taken it down to a new low.

But you are right Winston. Apparently this blog considers that the ability to wear a wig askew is more important than the retention of minimum standards of politeness and respect. So I will indeed cease any interaction with this forum. This is not a superiority complex as you imply. Rather it is a reluctance to wallow in the sewer with people such as Darwin.

Brian

Well for someone who does not want to wallow you sure are doing a lot of wallowing.
You seem up-set Brian. I agree with Winston that you have a superiority complex secondary to blindness.

Fred

I think Fred is doing quite well with many posts that shows that . Come on guys, Fred IS doing very well indeed. Just ignore his bad posts, when he's down.

--Mizar

The comical part of this is Doug and Stu read everything that is posted here. The reason is they long to hear alternative thought, thought that is snubbed at and not allowed on that forum. It makes his forum more of a museum of standard thought. We in turn read all we can over there to try and remain grounded.. The fact is we are a binary system. It is a very polarized system with views and ideologies creating electrical disturbances that manifest as arguments. It would seem the principles of physics are there on every level.

Now it is no secret that I have a problem with pretentious people. It is no secret Brian that you have a problem with people that see Mars different than you. It is an exciting time in Mars research with Hort’s images this week showing complex structure to the soil matrix and active weather at the Phoenix site.

Forecast: Expect more storms on all levels as more data becomes available. Now back on the bus.

Fred

Thanks Mizar.

Brian

Seems like I touched a raw nerve there. Sorry.

But you are wrong, I have never encouraged Darwin/Fred's occasional bouts of non-standard behaviour as his "attacks" on me will attest. I feel, like you, that this forum needs significant moderation where totally off -topic and ungracious comments should be removed quickly, and that Fred has many of those but I think that his comments are balanced by a number of interesting, insightful ones that add to the vibrancy and, yes, ultimate scientific worth of this blog.

One should be able to ignore any comments or posts that are repugnant until the moderator removes them. But the moderator has been absent for months, perhaps years. I have been among the few to have asked for off-colour, off-topic comments to be removed but they are still there. I can't therefore accept your statement to the effect that I effectively encouraged such comments.

I agree with Mizar.

I think that this forum will be significantly poorer without your inputs but we still have some good posters who tend to mainstream views although they can appreciate non-mainstream ones and who are not distracted by the intermittent and infrequent noise generated by Fred and a very few others. I had numbered you as marginally among such posters but I see I was wrong

MIzar. Thanks for those views. Its simple. We should just ignore the few posts that vexes us and enjoy the multiple times more posts that are informative and engages our questioning thought processes.

I think we all should recognize that NOT one of us knows for sure exactly what obtains on Mars at the microclimatic and possibly microbiology levels and that the NASA and Team scientists are NOT infallible and that because some process is true on Mars it necessarily has to operate the same way on Mars. I don't know. My offerings are just speculations but believe it or not, the "theories" that are offered in many peer reviewed journals are also only speculations.

Winston

Ooops! that sentence in the last paragraph above should be "because some process is true on EARTH it necessarily has to operate the same way on Mars."

Winston

Sol 116 seems quiet with light winds. Sky conditions feature high thin dust or ice cloud viel with unrestricted visibility.

Fred

Sol 116 dust devil???

This is on the very edge of detection using JPG source images. Maybe. Maybe not.

Only the 12 bits a drumming know for sure if there is a dust devil in a pear tree.

The dust devils are weak on 116

117 Sky conditions show low level moisture has gone convective at 14:00. Wind backing to pre frontal direction. Could be a front is on the way. Will conteniue to monitor.

Fred

If people read this Blogg they keep hearing over and over us thanking Hort for his hard work. His contributions to science will go on long past mine. I feel it an honor to have know him. Just credit were credit is due folks.

Now I claimed snow fell on Mars and Hort has presented the visible evidence. My earlier reference could be attributed to over exposure so lets say it is. The first Hort image shows Frost patterns. Note the uniform nature of the condensation. Frost uses the surface to attach and the wind will not blow them just hasten the sublimation or melting. It is also patchy with micro-environment evident in formation.

The second image is of Snowfall. Notice at the bottom of the early image. See the wind blown nature of the white material. If you take a small amount of flower and put it in your hand, blow it out onto a surface. You will see this pattern.

Image one Frost. Image two snow. Thanks Hort.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3254/2887168275_b08ef82fea_o.gif

Glad to be of service.

I have to admit a growing depression from realizing that the Phoenix mission is very close to ended - and that my primary question about micro-Mars ( what the heck is that stuff in the soil? ) remains unanswered.

The bus is just about out of gas and the tour guide has a look of boredom in his eyes, wanting it to be over so he can get back to his life.

I fully expect the Phoenix press conference next monday to be the last - filled with pat's on the back all around for completing a "successful" mission. But nothing new.

I had a faint hope that the weirdness that I see in virtually every image would get the attention of the scientist. But you can't publish science papers and advance your careers on weirdness. So it was not meant to be that this mission would answer my simple question.

Ah well.

I hope some of you have been amused by my amateur efforts to use the sows ears provided by NASA to manufacture silk purses.

Time to book a cruise to some more exotic place.

The tour guy may be tired but we have enough Hort images to keep us busy.

Thinks my friend.

Fred

That should be thanks. Who was it that said this Meteorologist can not spell.

Fred