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.

 

Curiosity finds gravel on Mars!

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
vulcanism ? gravel can be ejected by volcanoes , mars has volcanoes not QED , but a logical premise




posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   
What made the gravel? I don't think I'd be reaching to guess...asteroid impact ejecta....



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   
I'm not worried about the gravel.



^ ACTUAL raw pic. Others are doctored.
edit on 6-8-2012 by Qemyst because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jeremiah65
What made the gravel? I don't think I'd be reaching to guess...asteroid impact ejecta....


Originally posted by ignorant_ape
vulcanism ? gravel can be ejected by volcanoes , mars has volcanoes not QED , but a logical premise


Gravel-sized material can come from both impacts and volcanoes, and can also come from the chemical or mechanical weathering of pre-existing rock. What becomes interesting is how gravel moves and becomes sorted by size. Most gravel beds are composed of similar sized pebbles, which (except for primary volcanic ashfall) means that they were transported to that location by a specific mechanism (probably water to move pebbles) with a specific energy appropriate to transporting that particular bit of mass.

The gravel is probably most interesting because of where it came from and how it got there, rather than what it's actually made of ...



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by schuyler
 
But schuyler...it's gravel. GRAVEL.

Ain't nobody got time for that.



Pretty sure that gravel could mean water. Water could mean life. Isn't that why we went to Mars in the first place?



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnarchysAngel
reply to post by Sulie
 


The same road that the last 20 or so threads on the same subject have gone down. The debate of natural or possibly manufactured gravel on the Martian surface. Care to contribute and offer your speculation on the subject?


My husband used to be in the gravel business along the Mississippi in Louisiana. It was just there, after years and years of having been on planet earth.

They dug it up, and put it in driveways.

So, your point?

Gravel is along river beds, and nothing new with speculation that there was once water on Mars.

New day, differnt yawn.........

Why don't you just spill the beans about what you think you know?



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnarchysAngel
reply to post by eriktheawful
 


Can you back up the idea that gravel doesn't erode on Mars' surface in a few billion years with a source?

I heard about the space program getting canned a long time ago. I'm pretty sad, but things like that change with administrations.

edit on 6-8-2012 by AnarchysAngel because: (no reason given)


I gave you a source on Gravel.

Do I need to explain how geological processes here on Earth work, and how weathering works? How different types of rocks weather at different rates depending upon many different things such as: water, air, temps, chemicals, etc?

Do I then need to link you to a source that is the study of geology on Mars? The different types of rocks that they have there? Which, BTW are a lot like the rocks here on Earth. The atmosphere on Mars and it's weather?

Okay:

Geology
Earth
Minerals
Ores
Erosion
Mars
Weathering On Mars
Erosion (Lunar and Planitary Institute)

ETA: btw - I did not say that the gravel on Mars won't erode. It will. But all the gravel on Mars will not erode to nothing. There are still geological processes going on at Mars even today.
edit on 6-8-2012 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Yes. A few pages back we said water was the likely culprit. Phage threw the number out of water being more common 1-3.5 billion years ago on Mars. I'm finding it hard to believe that the gravel eroded by glaciers 1 billion years ago is still sitting there.

Which leads me to the request for an estimate on how long gravel created by a glacier 1 billion years ago would last.

Any geologists care to take a stab at it? I don't think rock dredgers from lousiana qualify as a geology expert.
edit on 6-8-2012 by AnarchysAngel because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by AnarchysAngel
 

What makes you think, with all that wind erosion, it's been sitting on the surface for 1 billion years? What makes you think it wasn't exposed in the past 50,000 years after being buried?
What makes you think it couldn't be the result of wind erosion?

edit on 8/6/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
Have you ever seen a tornado throw a block wall several hundred yards?
What are the maximum sustained winds on the red planet?
Doesn't Mars have storms, unlike the Moon which has no atmosphere?

What's the big deal over gravel?

The larger stones are probably under the smaller ones due to gravity and settling of the heavier densities...Or, perhaps a large scale cyclonic effect could have accumulated the similar-sized evenly-weighted rocks throughout it's lifespan and deposited them in a cluster as it fizzled out...?



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by schuyler
 
But schuyler...it's gravel. GRAVEL.

Ain't nobody got time for that.


24hours...
Have they even raised the high res camera mast yet? or are you complaining about the fixed hazard camera images spooled out just before the Mars observer dropped below the horizon.

I think y'all are being terribly shortsighted at an amazing engineering feat.

I think one of the flight engineers said: "it's not what we expect to find that's exciting it's the stuff we don't expect to find and have no explanation for that will amaze us".
jeez its only been24 hours....
[

I Suppose when we finally get to Europa with the "ice penetrating submarine probe"; you guys will be posting:
"hmmm dark and cold who'd figured?

editby]edit on 7-8-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-8-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-8-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by AnarchysAngel
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Yes. A few pages back we said water was the likely culprit. Phage threw the number out of water being more common 1-3.5 billion years ago on Mars. I'm finding it hard to believe that the gravel eroded by glaciers 1 billion years ago is still sitting there.

Which leads me to the request for an estimate on how long gravel created by a glacier 1 billion years ago would last.

Any geologists care to take a stab at it? I don't think rock dredgers from lousiana qualify as a geology expert.
edit on 6-8-2012 by AnarchysAngel because: (no reason given)


Not a geologist but that would depend on the density of the atmosphere(wind)or force and quantity of thewater. Apollo mission footprints on the moon should remain crisp indefinitely.
edit on 7-8-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by schuyler
Fer God's sakes, they just got there less than 24 hours ago. It's a two year mission. They haven't even unpacked yet and y'all are griping about the pics. Do you seriously think that's all there is? That they landed in one piece and are operational is a minor miracle in itself. Nearly half the Mars missions failed "on impact." How about exert some patience and give them a chance?


i agree. seen a number of posts elsewherer complaining about the black and white photos or theyre alreadyi seeing "man made" items and a structure. really, let them unpack, remove the lens covers and test the equipment.

hopefully they programed the thing to shake hands or tentacles(whatever the marsies have) and pass out chocolates to the younglings.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:14 AM
link   
reply to post by AnarchysAngel
 


Hey Lou,
Fogetta bout it.
www.ogind.com...

And Thats That



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:39 AM
link   
reply to post by AnarchysAngel
[more

Gravel can surely caused by win erosion as well folks. Mars seems by all the pictures to be an arid barren rock strewn desert. In the news lately across the mid west of America there has been massive dust storms (haboobs or shaboobs or something like that). Perhaps these could cause gravel to be formed or deposited in various ways. The best hope we could have is that these deposits of gravel are glacial till dropped from retreating glaciers in eons past, which would hint at the possibility of water!!



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:55 AM
link   
its bloody gravel for christs sake...you can pontificate all day and all night...Curiosity has only just landed....could even be strwn from the landing...i'm waiting for the expert geological explanations...i'm sure there will be much more to see in the coming future

close the door on your way out..............




posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:20 AM
link   
Oh, that must have been left behind by the construction firm building the studio.

NASA hasn't gone to mars and the "curiosity rover" is just a ruse to perpetuate the myth that NASA is a space agency and not playing second fiddle to those researching how to take war to space. The useless eaters like seeing this sort of thing.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:30 AM
link   


where does this gravel come from?


Someone bring it there, after mass excavations inside the crater...



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Domo1
While I certainly see value in exploring the universe, perhaps that billion dollars could have gone to better use. Like maybe feeding people, helping out the poor, paying off some national debt...



Yeh like lining the pockets of corrupt officials and bankers. You actually got something for your money here instead of more debt. Wake up bud, there is enough money to go around ten fold. Money isnt the issue, we are.

MSL was paid for years ago, probably budgetted before the gfc hit. The costs partially landed before blast off and the remain funds are paying for the scientists on the ground for the next two years.

That billion would have been redirected to the US military if released, and we all know what war is good for.

Go NASA. Ten points for doing something other than killing humans and hoarding wealth.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by bringback
 


See, that would be a good film, but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny..

The signals being broadcast from Mars are there for all to detect. If there were none to detect, I think the Chinese, Russians or some amateur hack would expose them. That would be something that would be nigh on impossible to fake. The same goes for the moon landings, the Russians would have been all over the US had they faked it.



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join