|
|
Topic started on 14-1-2009 @ 11:54 PM by GreyFoxSolid
|
Mars Mystery Solved!-says Fox News
www.foxnews.com
 Rocks on Mars are in some areas scattered in a strangely uniform fashion, puzzling scientists for years. Now they've figured it out.
Researchers had thought the rocks were picked up and carried downwind by extreme high-speed winds thought to occur on Mars in the past.
Although Mars is a windy planet, its atmosphere is very thin, so it would be difficult for the wind to carry the small rocks, which range in size from
a quarter to a softball, said Jon Pelletier, a geoscientist at the University of Arizona in Tucson.
Pelletier and his colleagues now think the rocks are constantly on the move, rolling into the wind, not away from it, and creating a natural feedback
system that results in their tidy arrangement. (visit the link for the full news article)
|
copyright & usage
|
Click here for more Breaking Alternative News topics
Hot Topics
|
Top Topics
|
This Week
|
Subscribe
|
Home
|
reply posted on 14-1-2009 @ 11:54 PM by GreyFoxSolid
|
This actually struck me as somewhat funny. On the foxnews.com main page there is a picture of mars with the headline in front of it saying "Mars
Mystery Solved!" and it turns out to be some odd story about rocks rolling against the wind constantly on the move.
The odd thing is that they are trying to explain why the rocks appear to be laid out uniformly with a terrible, terrible story of rocks that are
"constantly on the move".
www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 12:04 AM by zazzafrazz
|
reply to post by GreyFoxSolid
yeh, they're also got the rock formation that looks like a person, Sounds like the rover is picking up stuff that they need to debunk before anyone
asks questions. Fact that its come from Ruberts mob means that its some form of propaganda and this in itself should inspire us to look into the rover
images to dig up whatever they are covering up with thick layers of red Martian dust.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 12:06 AM by GreyFoxSolid
|
I am definitely more inclined to think that this is a lie. A blatant one. One that says that rocks are continuously mysteriously rolling against the
wind, being pushed into a uniform pattern.
Come on!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 12:07 AM by RFBurns
|
This is part of the disinfo drip that goes along with the real info drip.
"Would you like sugar in that coffee and a touch of salt too?"
Cheers!!!!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 12:12 AM by NovusOrdoMundi
|
FOX News should stick to the frothing vomit they typically spew instead of trying to sound like an intelligent and respectable news source. Surely
there's a celebrity that left the house without underwear that they could talk about.
The article is written in a very condescending way like every person who reads their poor excuse for a media outlet web site is a complete
moron.
The wind creates mounds and the rocks roll down. Great. We get it. Any one who attended elementary school and maintained at least a D- average in
science class understands the physics.
[edit on 1/15/09 by NovusOrdoMundi]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 12:41 AM by MessOnTheFED!
|
Come on now you have all seen rocks get up and move on their own. sheesh o thought everyone knew that rocks had legs!
MessOnTheFED!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 01:06 AM by InfaRedMan
|
Rocks rolling against the wind, when the wind itself isn't strong enough to blow rocks in the correct direction? Hmmmm, let me get my head around
that...
Oh, I see! It's like saying "The more I eat, the thinner I get" 
It appears the swamp gas crew just got themselves new jobs!
IRM 
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 01:48 AM by Phage
|
reply to post by InfaRedMan
It actually is a very reasonable, simple (and cool) theory. The wind itself doesn't cause the motion.
Sand is blown away from the windward side of the rocks, causing them to roll upwind into the hole created. The same process happens on Earth. The
patterns are caused by the wind being redirected by groupings of rocks.
[edit on 1/15/2009 by Phage]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 01:58 AM by InfaRedMan
|
reply to post by Phage
I see where you're coming from Phage - fair call my man!
I stand corrected!
IRM 
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 02:01 AM by RFBurns
|
Does that also explain the rock movement along the flat desert basins in Death Valley and other locations where there is nothing but solid dry
ground?
Cheers!!!!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 02:13 AM by InfaRedMan
|
reply to post by InfaRedMan
Just wondering after a quick think....
If the wind blows a hole in front of the rock that is deeper, thus allowing the rock to roll back into it, would the wind have to keep blowing an
increasingly deeper hold for the process to continue?
As I see it in my head, when the rock rolls back, it is now at a lower elevation relative to the surface than before, therefore the next hole has to
be an even deeper hole, relative to the surface and/or the bottom of the rock, for the process to continue.
Maybe I'm wrong but wouldn't that put a limitation on how long the process can continue, or would it eventually cover the rock?
LOL!
IRM 
[edit on 15/1/09 by InfaRedMan]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 02:17 AM by RFBurns
|
reply to post by InfaRedMan
It would also have to depend on the depth of the "sand" too. Eventually that rock, as it gets deeper and deeper, is going to "hit bottom"..a solid
bottom.
Cheers!!!!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 02:36 AM by Phage
|
reply to post by InfaRedMan
I don't think the theory requires that it be a continual process. The rocks could move a certain distance then stop. It still accounts for the
formation of the "patterns".
It would be nice to have access to the original paper but here's an article with a little more depth than fox.
www.astronomynow.com...
[edit on 1/15/2009 by Phage]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 15-1-2009 @ 11:33 PM by GreyFoxSolid
|
Interesting and stupefying nonetheless in their presentation.
Ah well.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
