It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by AlBeMet
This is Big!
Nasa is trying to sell it as "The "trees" are really trails of debris caused by landslides as ice melts in Mars's spring"
What do you think?
[edit on 13-1-2010 by AlBeMet]
Originally posted by MysterE
Great Pic! I remember seeing something similar, but I don't think it was this close or clear. Certianly looks like foliage to me, and the source seems reilable! Good find
Originally posted by Solofront
Well its a good thing we send all our robots and probes to the driest and most remote parts of that planet...otherwise we may discover something interesting...
Source -- ".doc" file
To mitigate the risk of disappointment and ensure the greatest chance for science success, we want the greatest number of possible science objectives at a chosen landing site. We need multiple science targets, and these targets should be as strongly differentiated as possible. Thus, a landing site with both morphologic and mineralogic evidence for past water is better than a site with just one of these criteria. Furthermore, a site with spectra indicating multiple hydrated minerals is better than a site indicating just one. A site with multiple styles of stratigraphic expression and inferred depositional mechanisms is better than a site with a single mode of stratigraphic expression. For example, a site with stratigraphically differentiated spectroscopic evidence for both clay minerals and sulfate salts would constitute a rich site.
In the Martian winter, carbon dioxide freezes out of the air (and you thought it was cold where you are). In the summer, that CO2 sublimates; that is, turns directly from a solid to a gas. When that happens the sand gets disturbed, and falls down the slopes in little channels, which spreads out when it hits the bottom. But this disturbs the red dust, too, which flows with the sand. When it’s all done, you get those feathery tendrils. Note that at the tendril tips, you see blotches of red; that’s probably from the lighter dust billowing a bit before settling down.
Now, you might think I’m making this all up. How do we know this stuff is flowing downhill like that? Ah, because in this picture we’ve caught it in the act! In this image, a closeup of a region just to the left of center of the big image, you can actually see the cloud of dust from an avalanche as it occurs.
Originally posted by wylekat
Bottom line: we need to send people there- and quit taking the words of someone sitting here looking at a pic (no matter HOW smart they may seem- and I am ONLY talking about these NASA nerds), and then telling the world 'it's nothing', when clearly, it's a lot more than 'nothing'. I remember when they were SURE the mud at the rover sites was some complex, mumbo jumbo-ed explanation of 'weird chemical processes, that simply was unique to Mars'. GUESS WHAT. Turns out the mud, was M U D. Water mixed with dirt.
After that, and a few other 'expert' opinions that weren't worth wiping my butt with, I laugh in their face every time they spin a tale like this.
It's plant life on a frozen sand dune. It's what it looks like, and that's most likely what it *is*. Their explanations are a joke.
I'd LOVE to have the original image, and not the one they have on the news page.
[edit on 13-1-2010 by wylekat]