What are the list of reasons NASA and JPL would choose to NOT disclose life on Mars?

a reply to: charlyv

It's only convincing when there are not alternative explanations. The visual evidence is actually not compelling at all. One of the minerals is not known to form on Earth by abiotic means, that's the only compelling evidence. This was later made less compelling when they actually found an abiotic method of creating it. This means there is literally nothing in the meteorite that is suggestive of life using Ockham's Razor.

Mankind is a deeply flawed creature and tends to leave a wake of distruction in it’s path, good intentions or not. a reply to: Phage

This is not necessarily my opinion BUT it is pertinent despite this guy having plenty of critics on ATS, well if he was or is correct he most certainly would have but are they correct or is he or is the truth somewhere in between OR are both camp's simply opinionated.


My opinion he is dis-information meant to muddy the waters, his avoidance of a certain subject is proof emphatic of this for my mind though in general I do believe he is mostly correct, wacked out star warsy but still mostly correct but delivered in such a way as to discredit it.
Here is that certain subject.
www.ufosightingsdaily.com...

a reply to: LABTECH767

I've seen some Hoagland videos.

He gets a diamond in the rough, once in a while, but the guy is too quick to endorse the most far field theories.

I can debunk about 50% of his "lunar" or "mars" anomalies as optical illusion.
(I think if he sat down and gave it some serious concentration he might be able to debunk his own stuff as well. I don't think Hoagland is self-critical enough. I don't think he's a wackjob or anything, he does some good work.)
He touches something compelling, once in a while.

My biggest issue with doubt and the Curiosity mission, is that they avoid/drive by, what appear to be very compelling structures.

If any layman can look at an image and go "We should go take a closer look at that thing!!"
Yet they don't...

Why? I'm not talking about rocks that look like crabs. I'm talking about stem like structures sticking 3-4 feet up vertically, with a visible shadow and coloration that doesn't match the normal Mars dust/oxidized metals.
They don't go near that stuff.

Consider it calling them out, if you will, but I bet if I had de facto control of Curiosity, I could prove that there is or at least WAS life on Mars, within about 3-4 weeks.
JPL, NASA, if you'll take that bet, I'm totally game for it.

a reply to: Archivalist

Hoagland is a hoaxer, he is in it for the money.

originally posted by: Archivalist


Consider it calling them out, if you will, but I bet if I had de facto control of Curiosity, I could prove that there is or at least WAS life on Mars, within about 3-4 weeks.
JPL, NASA, if you'll take that bet, I'm totally game for it.

What test would you be running that would prove it?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

"Hoax"er is too harsh a term for someone that truly believes what they're telling people.

Misguided from time to time, maybe. I think Hoagland's mentality is very scrutinous of the status quo.
I like that type of mindset. But yeah, he does have some amount of gain from it. To say he's hoaxing on purpose is a little harsh.

I think he believes the vast majority of what he sells.

Although he has definitely pointed out some pedantic stuff as "evidence".

All the same, he does get something actually interesting, from time to time.

Approach his work with scrutiny, it's tit for tat. He approaches the mainstream with scrutiny, and if he really believes what he endorses, then he wouldn't mind that same scrutiny. I think he's welcome to it.

a reply to: Archivalist

I do not for one second think he believes everything he peddles. That makes him a hoaxer. He is perfectly wiling to propagate a hoax to make money. That does not mean he does not have any belief.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Point taken, I like you.

Thanks for being a part of this thread discussion.

I personally believe it’s due to the coming of commercialisation of space.

Look at it like this, it’s a fresh untapped mineral mine source of god knows what but if big companies like musk, google and a few others partner up then then Whos really going to stop them????

Governments..... I highly doubt it. Everyone has a price in the business world.

Another would be that it’s possible that the reason for this stalemate at present is due to the possibility of working out politics and guidelines of what we can do there and then here. If we got greedy corps just willing to profiteer and no law making was prior done it could spark a on and also off world war between us and ET which could be catastrophic.

It’s obvious there is something going on and I think it’s a hold off due to making stellar law of some kind

a reply to: Archivalist

Thanks, you too.

The other part my statement above is you need to understand why this task would take such along time but has to be forefront and a priority before any of of us leaves and goes to mars.

We need to understand their Language barriers, trust issues etc and they need to understand ours too.

The mission to mars coming up is possibly a test of trust and faith and to see how us and them intergrate but us using small numbers is a test. If we kick off then it’s only a few of us they have to worrie about.

One would think that any "proof" of life on Mars would be immediately released by NASA. Just think....no more funding cuts. Huge swells in public support for missions. Global unity possibly.

a reply to: TXRabbit

Global unity?

Doubtful.

I'm not even sure if Reagan was right.

I'd be willing to wager that even in the face of an alien threat to this world, Palestine and Israel still wouldn't be best friends.

Even if they're forced to fight a common enemy, it would still take bloodshed for them to come to terms, after the fact.

a reply to: TXRabbit

Agreed but if there is no understanding and huge public hassle of the constant bombardment by the public of “we want answers” then it’s just a huge headache with huge money.

Steps need to be done prior as said above.

a reply to: Archivalist

Yeah, that's why I said "possibly". Given the current atmosphere around here, there would still be the politards crediting Trump or Hillary for any discovery.....

I've known Hoagland for almost forty years, he's a delightful story-teller and I-was-there self-aggrandizer. He gets carried away with the imaginary worlds he conjures up. If he were out to deliberately hoax people he'd be a lot richer, IMHO.

a reply to: Archivalist

There is little doubt in my mind that the Palestinians would look for a weakness and then attack Israel if they could.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Anything from 1960 would just be a historical side note. This is not even remotely the same world. I'd think that document is of little meaning now.

If movies and television have done nothing else for the topic, they have prepared everyone for the eventuality of Alien contact and finding say something bacteria-like or other small organisms would just be a special interest piece in the science section for the impact it would have. People would just say "cool, isn't that interesting" for the most part.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: charlyv

It's only convincing when there are not alternative explanations. The visual evidence is actually not compelling at all. One of the minerals is not known to form on Earth by abiotic means, that's the only compelling evidence. This was later made less compelling when they actually found an abiotic method of creating it. This means there is literally nothing in the meteorite that is suggestive of life using Ockham's Razor.

You have objects that appear physically like the segmented bacterium known on Earth, albeit smaller.

You have magnetite, in prizm form that is non-distinguishable from Earth based microbial remnants, even though the scientists found a very obscure way of simulating it's production in the meteorite that would not be caused by life.

The scrutiny turned ugly in that there was a pressure to make it NON biological, instead of the unbiased scientific method we like to think gets used in important subjects like this. Like an agenda... Let all the expensive stuff sent up to Mars get credit with the discovery....

In fact, it IS an Occam Razor issue... Looks like a Duck, Quacks like a Duck....