Hi horton
Lost of stuff for comment in this discussion. Re post 52:
6)Precipitation is a form of sedimentation. We also know from cross bedding and corss lamination that sand-grade particulate as well as precipitated matter was present in the depositional environment and was subject to reworking. Whether these grains were another silicate or simply reworked eavporites I don't think we yet know.
We know from the fact they displace earlier textures that the spherules formed relatively late during diagenesis. Certianly later than the sedimentary structures and the evaporite pseudomorphs. We don't know at this stage, or at least I don't, whether the basin still contained surface water at the time.
The sphericity of the concretions does not bother me at all. Why should it? First, they are not that spherical, many are irregular, have lumps, bumps, and dimples, some are grooved, others consist of two or three amalgamated together. I know of a great many geological processes that can produce concretions of equal or greater sphericity. Like you I have examples, bauxite pisolites, calcrete pisoliths, ironstone pisoliths that gave grown during acid groundwater diagenesis.
5) I don't see the image as evidence of drage, simply of flat slabs that have fallen down the slope. There is no real consitency in bedding orientation between the slads suggest any genetic continunity in their geometry. Any weathering and eroding slabby rock (slate for example) will cover a slope with randomly orientated slabs in which the bedding will, because of the slabby nature of the rock, be subparallel to the slope.
Re post 53:
4) Your prediction is a valid one for your hypothesis, but is is not a unique solution to the observation. As for my predictions, here are some. a) The cross-bedded unit will be aeolian. b) The darker bands will contain be mineralogically different to the lighter bands, perhaps through containing more haematite, either as concretions of disseminated. c) Evporites will be present throughout the host rock. d) Some of the upper units will display low angle and ripple cross-lamination.
3) OK, I get what you are driving at now. Geometrically it is similar to what gray said in the X-bedding thread. I don't see it myself, but closer inspections should clarify it.
2) I don't see any different between Fram and the other craters except in scale and degree of degradation.
1) Still not quite clear here at what you are saying. But I would not say that this is the last evidence of surface water on mars simply because we have no absolute chornology for mars water yet. These deposits are Hesperian, so they are the middle Epoch in the history of mars, there is evidence for Amazonian water flows, even very recently, so the story of liquid water is still ongoing.
I don't think there is an accepted theory, yet, just multiple working hyptheses which we sift insead of watching TV 
Cheers
Jon
