Originally posted by Tuning Spork
I was just thinking. (uh-oh.) If there was an ancient civilization on Mars when there were presumed oceans and rivers, there would neccessarily have to have been a much thicker atmosphere.
Hey Sporky long time no see... 'much thicker atmosphere'
LOL umm yeah like one that NASA's MARS1 Humvee currently being tested in the Arctic can operate in ...
Like the one that has clouds...
Their are very few recognizable craters on Earth because the weather quickly ("quickly" in geological terms, anyway) gets rid of them.
Ummm no there are hundreds of craters recognizable on Earth... all the best ones are naturally in drier desert climates...
Wolfe Creek Australia
Gosses Bluff Crater
Amguid Crater Algeria
Tenoumer Crater Mauritania
Aouelloul Crater Mauritania
That atmosphere and water would result in weather patterns that continuously erode and reshape the terrain.
As I have just shown, the atmosphere and water on EARTH do not erode craters especially in desert regions... why would I expect it to erode EVEN MORE on Mars if as you say the atmosphere on Mars is less and there is no rain?
The crater in Arizona exists because it was created relatively recently and in a desert.
Well from what I have seen from the rover pictures, I do not see lush vegetation, I see what lloks like dry desert terrain... perfect for preserving those monuments in Egypt... so why would not the same thing happen on Mars?
And iammonkey has shown that erosion is evident
it was carved in the side of a crater that was formed recently to that civilization (since it existed in their time), but shortly before Mars lost it's significant atmosphere (since it hasn't been eroded away since the carving).
A lot of assumptions here...
How do you know this area has not always been Desert, even when oceans existed on Mars and the atmosphere was thicker?
How do you know WHEN this Martian civilization existed and met its demise? We have only been looking a few hundred years, and the recent digs in Turkey show that we are even wrong here on Earth...
the impact that created it would have been very destructive and perhaps left the surrounding area uninhabitable for a very long time.
Why? Was it radioactive? The Tunguska Event in 1908 did not leave it "uninhabitable for a very long time" A little messy maybe with all the blown down trees, but look at Mt St Helen... was that area "uninhabitable for a very long time"
being skeptical is fine, but you need to get your facts straight or be just as ridiculed as us 'loonies' are