It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Life on Mars Likely, Scientist Claims

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 03:35 PM
link   
www.space.com...

Likely, I got no dubt at all. What about you people? ( microbial life.)




posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 04:25 PM
link   
It has deffinite potential to have life. The problem is that unless we could do detailed genetic testing on a sample, we can't tell if any life on Mars came from Earth. So even if the next lander shows us nice microscopic images of microbes...people can still calim its not really alien.

The only landers to date that were sterile were the viking landers, since then we've been infecting the planet.



posted on Aug, 3 2004 @ 04:29 PM
link   
I believe that micro-life on Mars would force some close-minded people to accept that Earth and Earthlings are not as special as they would like to believe, but I really don't think it will change that much in the long run. A couple of single celled aliens will not change our world dramaticly.



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 01:29 AM
link   
I don't see why everyone believes that because you find a bacterium on some far off world...our world would "mentally" change.

Guess what, we've landed on the *snip* moon, and is there any change in our mentality? No.

We're still just as stupid, near-sighted and self-interested as we have always been and always will be.

I mean my God, we landed on the *snip* moon, THE MOON!!!!

You'd think Humanity would have "changed" completely from then on.

In fact, if anything, we're more like the decadent Romans than ever.

Finding bacteria on Mars, would probably make a bunch of people go "oh....wow..." then flip over to "Friends".

The only revelation humanity shall ever share as a whole, will be as a meteorite shatters our Moon into a million pieces which then rain down on the Earth bringing certain death, and we know it is certain death because after this hell storm, the "real meteorite" is going to hit the Earth as what hit the Moon was just a prelude.

Spice things up by making the meteorites be sent by Aliens...and that would be the only true time humanity would change.

I do think "Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy" capture it best, though it wasn't really stating this fact...

In that, just as soon as Humans discovered the meaning of life, Earth was destroyed to make way for an intergalactic highway.

What I think can really be drawn from that, other than life is a biatch...is that the only time humanity will truely discover the ultimate "meaning" to everything, that final revelation that makes everyone perfect instead of evil and self-centered, is just before Humanity is obliterated.

[edit on 2/28/2008 by Djarums]



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 05:35 AM
link   
all I can say Its about TIME! back in 76 with viking everthing the on board exparment said Pointed to LIFE and befor you start yelling earth Viking was the very First lander we put on mars . So even if viking its self had a few germs its most likly what viking found was mars life .
But to go farther I say it realy matters not if life from earth got to mars through viking or metors For one thing the oppsit Is much more likly as mars being smaller and farther from the sun cooled faster so life would have started there then moved to earth through metors.Of corse it dident have to be this way but it is looking more and more likly .
Now back to mars there will be lots of simalarites between mars life and earths life im sure but reguardless of that its still alian life because the definican of alian life is life the dident come from earth and right at this moment a microb is reproducing and the new microb was born on mars making it a (DARE I say it Making it a marchian. Akk little green slimmly things . Lolol



posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Just thought you all would like to read the following that was just posted on Wired.com:
A couple of years ago, when the Mars Global Surveyor was circling the Red Planet and beaming snapshots back to Earth, science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke lectured remotely to an audience gathered at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum. Speaking from his home in Sri Lanka, Clarke informed the crowd that the images he'd downloaded from NASA's Web site showed something growing on the planet's surface. "I'm quite serious when I say I have a really good look at these new Mars images," Clarke said. "Something is actually moving and changing with the seasons that suggests, at least, vegetation."
For more info on this article, here is the link: www.wired.com...
For the guy who concieved of the notion of satellites to say that he believes that the picyures were showing not only life but "moving and experiencing saesonal changes" holds a lot of weight to it



posted on Aug, 5 2004 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Simcity I don't know what crap you have read, but the Viking Landers showed conclusively that there was no organic reactions occurring at those landing sites.



posted on Aug, 8 2004 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Freemason,

I'll have to agree about finding bacterium, on Mars.
Scientists, and others interested, will say WHOOPIE!!!.

But, as my wife said one day..."I thought they already found life on Mars."
She's a very smart lady, but is pretty blase about space related things.

It will be in the papers, but "LIFE GOES ON" so to speak..



posted on Aug, 8 2004 @ 06:31 PM
link   
We've been saturated with so many science fiction movies and television shows that we automatically assume that extra terrestrial life is going to be in some intelligent form. This is not necessairly the case, but it wouldn't make the discovery any less extra-ordinary.

Even the simplest life form is an incredibly complex assortment of molecules - DNA. Finding other life, even the simplest in nature would give an amazing insight into the orgin and evolution of life itself. ET life could be based on an entirely different set of genetic rules for instance, or even chemical elements. Certainly nothing to be blase about


[edit on 8-8-2004 by sunspot]



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Seriously, the only time Humanity will care about anything, is when we are being scrapped of the boot of something more powerful. It doesn't matter what it is...can be an earthquake or tsunami or hurricane, or Alien invasion.

Unless we're dying by the millions and have to deal with it immediately, Friends is a more preferable alternative to caring. Other-wise we'd already be living on Mars and in a sense proving there is life on Mars by simply being there.

No, we preferred instead to make a show about 6 or so idiots having sex with eachother and marrying eachother about a dozen times, that lasted longer than the entire Apollo missions.

Doesn't that tell you anything about Humanity?



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 12:23 PM
link   
An "update" on space.com www.space.com...



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Yeah im sure they have and will find small microrganisms or traces of them. I believe way way way before humans were inhabited on earth, that there was once water, plants, maybe some kind of animals? Fish? I believe that Mars probably had a climate much like the saharra desert during its day and climate like Antarctica at night. My therory is that extreme between hot and cold shocked the planet over time and made "life" diminish. Maybe NASA will find fossils of bones. That would surely intrest me for about a week.
I agree that the news about space isnt that exciting compared to what the people of the sixties and seventies experienced!



posted on Feb, 28 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Simcity4Rushour
 

Sim,even though I'm 4 years too late for you,you left the other naysayers in the dust because you so nailed the actual reality of the situation about life on Mars.Life visits the landers and rovers long after they become useless to us,because Mars has animals of all sizes like Earth and the very tiny ones like the metalic monsters we send because they maintain heat and become a cozy micro-environment. Those tiny beings are getting radiation in the process. I designed the Mars rovers 1987.There are people on Mars like us who wear clothes and tons of animals wherever a USA craft has landed successfully to record them .Nasa masks the images you paid to see.That's where i come in.



posted on Feb, 28 2008 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by vze2xjjk
 


You say NASA masks the images, but you haven't proved it.

If they do mask the images you can not unmask them, an image, once altered, there is no way of putting it has it was before unless you have the original.

And if you designed the rovers you should be in a position to know that what you say is not possible.



posted on Feb, 28 2008 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by vze2xjjk
reply to post by Simcity4Rushour
 

Sim,even though I'm 4 years too late for you,you left the other naysayers in the dust because you so nailed the actual reality of the situation about life on Mars.Life visits the landers and rovers long after they become useless to us,because Mars has animals of all sizes like Earth and the very tiny ones like the metalic monsters we send because they maintain heat and become a cozy micro-environment. Those tiny beings are getting radiation in the process. I designed the Mars rovers 1987.There are people on Mars like us who wear clothes and tons of animals wherever a USA craft has landed successfully to record them .Nasa masks the images you paid to see.That's where i come in.



vze, did you design the rovers for NASA and JPL or for another company or on your own? Were you told about life on Mars when designing the rovers? Do you know about the underground and above ground bases on Mars? Rik Riley



posted on Feb, 29 2008 @ 03:18 AM
link   
< >

Beg pardon. On second thoughts...

[edit on 29-2-2008 by Astyanax]



posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Hi ArMap,I have proved very clearly that Nasa masks the images by pointing at the most famous example this year of an item called a statue,that was blacked out from detail.I went over this weeks ago.Then I presented an example of the same object in a different photo from same vantage point,the 3D images which had been less or not at all tampered with(the answer I found out is "less" tampered with). I showed the 3D image showed clear detail of facial features and body features,and vigorously posted it thru several threads to the point of spamming it.So you couldn't have missed it by now,the comparison shots. If you choose to ignore my proof then that's your choice. I could present it again ad nauseum,but I'm sure others would complain and rightly so that I was being a PEST. No, I'm just making a case against masking the images.It's a censorship issue for me.I gave Nasa good designs that worked consistently and held up better than expected.The payoff is seeing the fruits of my labor and not some troll masking things out for me.That's my personal beef that goes beyond the way you can all experience mere annoyance at some missing info.



posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 03:58 PM
link   
I don't agree with a person who doesn't feel there would be no significant change in the way people think were life to be discovered on another planet.

There are people who would experience enormous shifts in the way they think. The people, the common man, the senior citizen who goes to McDonald's to hang out with his other senior citizen friends who order senior discounted coffees, it is this person who will not be able to make the adjustment.

The seniors of the world might form secret societies and meet on Sundays rather than play golf and discover new ways to menace society.

Please Nasa, please continue to hide the truth if you already do know about other lifeforms. I'm having enough trouble paying my rent because I spend so much time researching any form of life other than what is given and staring off into space when I should be working.

The point is, people don't need to be moved from their comfortable manufacturing conveyor belt better known as life.



posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by vze2xjjk
Hi ArMap,I have proved very clearly that Nasa masks the images by pointing at the most famous example this year of an item called a statue,that was blacked out from detail.
To me, there is a difference between your presentation of what you think is evidence of masking by NASA and proving it.


Then I presented an example of the same object in a different photo from same vantage point,the 3D images which had been less or not at all tampered with(the answer I found out is "less" tampered with). I showed the 3D image showed clear detail of facial features and body features,and vigorously posted it thru several threads to the point of spamming it.So you couldn't have missed it by now,the comparison shots.
I didn't missed it, I even answered to some of your posts, but apparently you were the one that missed them.

In one of those I said that you should not use the 3D composite image because there is some transparency in both the left and the right images to make the 3D effect, what you say is "less tampering" is this transparency making the shadows less dark because we can see the lighter areas of the other image.

Also, if the images were masked, you (or anyone else) have no way of knowing and even less of proving it, because to do it you would need the unmasked version, and you do not have and can not have that version, it is impossible to recover what is removed from an image.


If you choose to ignore my proof then that's your choice. I could present it again ad nauseum,but I'm sure others would complain and rightly so that I was being a PEST.
As I said, I did not ignored your presentation, but I think that it doesn't prove anything.

And there is no need of presenting it once more.


No, I'm just making a case against masking the images.It's a censorship issue for me.I gave Nasa good designs that worked consistently and held up better than expected.The payoff is seeing the fruits of my labor and not some troll masking things out for me.That's my personal beef that goes beyond the way you can all experience mere annoyance at some missing info.
Well, you are trying to make a case against masking the images, in my view you are not being successful.

Another thing, and I hope you don't take this as a provocation, is that I do not believe that you designed the Mars rovers, at least until you show me some proof of that, just saying that you designed them means nothing, as you certainly know.



posted on Mar, 2 2008 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Here's that proof you requested.This may be the 5th time I posted it on various threads,but I can't just assume you saw it.That could be a mistake on my part.
Now look for those facial features in the the BLACKFACE DESTROY THE DATA pic(that would be #2 above). That's called masking.Nasa wants nondisclosure about life on Mars and THREATENS their employees with JAIL and /or FINES for disclosing secret Nasa info about what they discover .Draconian? Freindly? Are we hididng something perhaps? Legal penalties for discussing life,revealing life with news media. Is that Nazi tactics or just corporate protection?Does the public really need to know about life on Mars? Should we allow other space agencies in other countries to start a space race with this knowledge so that they gain any technology advantage or first contact advantage with various Mars peoples? Why aren't we sending manned missions to Mars in the next decade? What would Von Braun say? ****** in case you missed it the sandmarie's head moved between frames as you can see plainly by looking at all these pics.That means she is alive and that's why Nasa covered it up.BLASTOFF !!!!!!



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join