Mars Rover 'Curiosity' Team Reportedly Will Reveal Major Discovery In December

reply to post by thetiler


The only issue I had with the Basiago PDF is the level of speculation that went into the interpretation of the images from Mars. I so badly want them to be true..for example, i want that grainy pixelated image to be a statue of an insectoid. But I just didn't see it.

Our take on the whole issue of Mars is that there is a true possibility of an ancient ruins or ancient culture that once thrived on Mars. And the point of the podcast was to speculate on the possible Biblical revelations of that reality.

Originally posted by FaceLikeTheSun
reply to post by thetiler

 

The only issue I had with the Basiago PDF is the level of speculation that went into the interpretation of the images from Mars. I so badly want them to be true..for example, i want that grainy pixelated image to be a statue of an insectoid. But I just didn't see it.

Our take on the whole issue of Mars is that there is a true possibility of an ancient ruins or ancient culture that once thrived on Mars. And the point of the podcast was to speculate on the possible Biblical revelations of that reality.

I go by my interest in James Padgett and he states that Jesus told him that the bible is about 1/2 wrong. He even claims that. I even have more faith in what James Padgett states than I do the bible because the bible was written so long ago. I really think Jesus, is pi$$ed in regards to the bible and it's having false claims that Jesus never wanted to be written but also in the old testament. Such as Adam and Eve. Jesus mentioned to James Padgett that Adam and Eve as "supposed parents". That Jesus does not want to be called GOD.

But getting back to mars imagery, those artifact images are in the now and they are being side stepped. And deserve more importance than rocks and dirt. Why, because the malin approved bio - sprayer is an indication of a civilization now living on mars (under mars in all probability). Not sure how long it will be up on the site because the main photo was altered and became secondary but still it is up. For how long I do not know.

In my opinion, it's probably not going to be all that big. I'm hoping it is, but there are plenty of "earth-shattering" that have been discovered that they still haven't let anyone in on. The only reason they would reveal something relatively big to the population is because their backs are up against the wall and they may be running out of time to do something. So if they tell it before we find out on our own, then they can at least say they told us.

Maybe they found a Quran on Mars?

That would be huge and also help with their Muslim outreach directives.

Originally posted by robertinventor
reply to post by robertinventor

 

Also - you got me thinking - I tend to think that life on Mars can't have advanced to multi-cellular life because surely by now one of the rovers would have found a fossil.

But - what if the life was multi-cellular but soft bodied like the creatures that left their imprint in the Burgess shales? They would be much harder to spot and there might be just one or two places on Mars where conditions are favourable to preserve the remains of early multi-cellular soft bodied life forms - and they also might still survive to this day if they are that hard to spot maybe survive underground....

Interesting...

...However, even single-celled creatures can leave behind fossils that are visible to the naked eye.

I'm thinking of stromatolites, which are colonies of millions of bacteria and algae that built up on top of each other over the many, many years, crating a large and visible dome-shaped fossil.

serc.carleton.edu...
en.wikipedia.org...

I'm not saying they found a stromatolite, because I don't think they did, but it is interesting to think that if Mars once had life that persisted for a while -- even simply single-celled algae-like life -- that it may be possible for there to be visible signs left behind.

Again, I'm not "expecting" them to find a stromatolite, but if they did, I think it would be found in the strata in the walls around Mt. Sharp (which is in Gale Crater, and is one of the ultimate targets of Curiosity), and would not be found on the plains on the floor of Gale Crater.

Originally posted by shaolyn
In my opinion, it's probably not going to be all that big...

'Not that big" is a relative statement. Something that is HUGELY significant to a planetary scientist may seem mundane to the average person who fails to understand the science.

For example, some people on this thread have pointed out some inserting possibilities for what they found: maybe Limestone or possibly some certain kinds of organic compounds. But these things may or may not mean past life -- and the difference between these discoveries indicating past life or not can be very esoteric, and not meaningful to the average person.

As others have said, limestone OFTEN is the result of life processes, but is not ALWAYS the result of life processes. If the instruments on Curiosity are precise enough to be able to a precision analysis of the limestone, it could be found that the limestone is of a certain isotope that indicates it was the result of past life. However, other isotopes of limestone may indicate a NON-biological origin for the limestone.

The other possibility I mentioned -- organic compounds -- also do NOT always mean life. However, some organic compounds are preferred by life over other organic compounds. Some compounds are known to possibly be the result of life processes. While the discovery of these certain kinds of organic compounds may not 100% mean "life!", their discovery would be really really big news for the Science of Astrobiology -- even though it would leave most common people saying "Meh, so what?".

I have no idea what they found, and I'm not saying they found signs of past life. I'm just saying that something that SHOULD be big news to the average person may not be big news, because they don't understand the science, and thus the significance.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


Good points. If we learned anything from the past about NASA and public hype, it's that it's always mundane to the general population.

But they haven't delivered in the past. Like the rocket crashing into the Moon? That was a huge let down. I know there were scientific reasons for doing the experiment. But don't hype and give us expectations.

Until they really deliver, I see this as another one of those hypes.

Whether it's organic (carbon containing) compounds in general, or limestone (CaC03), the ratio of lighter to heavier carbon isotopes will be particularly telling. Curiosity's miniaturized chemistry lab is able to sort these out. Life processes preferentially use carbon 12 instead of carbon 13. The dominance of the former in a soil sample would furnish strong evidence of life. I agree that such evidence may initially seem uninteresting to some. I believe that if reputable scientists explain often enough that the best explanation for such a result is the presence of life on Mars, the significance; that we live in a universe where life arises readily, and the inference that the cosmos is teeming with a diversity of life, will eventually shine through.

To follow up Soylent Green's post: Something exciting to a planetary scientist, that they truly think is earth-shaking, is probably going to be a let down to the rest of us. It usually is. Oh how I want to be wrong though...

It might have nothing to do with life. It could be evidence of past geological activity that they hadn't confirmed yet. I'm guessing the announcement will go something like, "Hey guys, the place we landed that we thought could have been a giant lake long ago, we've confirmed it actually probably was an old lake. We're in an old dried up lake. Cool, huh? Guys?"

Perhaps you're right, but I have trouble seeing how even a scientist, preoccupied with his own field, could imagine that confirming something that we already have some very good evidence for on Mars could rise to the status of a history making discovery.

You did see the scientists crying when it landed? Hehe... I think they're overly attached to their fields, which isn't a bad thing. Just makes them a tad out of touch when it comes to what they think is cool.

Oh well, I really hope it's life though.

reply to post by Isee1111


I think perhaps it is the other way around. Im twenty seven years old, but I still remember the first time I saw the moon landing video. I had been stunned when I was taught that people had been there, and when I saw it happening in black and white, I wept.

Im no physicist. Im a locksmith. But I get just as excited by new discoveries as the people making them do. They fire my imagination. They have the potential to do this, because I get involved with the material that allows me to SEE the possible end result in my minds eye.

I dont think science is as cliquey and speciallised as some would believe. Its pretty inclusive, and you can get excited to, but you have to be prepared to interface with the background, before you can begin to understand the foreground, if you catch my drift. Without being prepared to interact with these discoveries, you wont get excited by them. Its a choice people make wether or not to enjoy the pearls that mankinds deepest endevours dig from the universe.

All the boffins can do is make the rocket go, and the lander fall to ground without breaking. The rest is up to us, in terms of how these things make us feel.

Everytime they call for these important announcements, it turns out to be incredibly boring for the average person. If it really is that important, why the hell wait till december. That is a marketing trick...... make people hold their breath, hype it up a bit. Show time.... blah.

Originally posted by flice
Everytime they call for these important announcements, it turns out to be incredibly boring for the average person. If it really is that important, why the hell wait till december. That is a marketing trick...... make people hold their breath, hype it up a bit. Show time.... blah.

They are verifying the results of the test, and they said that will be done in December.

If the earliest date given for the NASA press briefing is correct (Dec.3rd) we have only a week to wait, now. News of this discovery didn't become known to the public until Nov. 20th. The total delay would then amount to 13 days. I find that a remarkably short time to check and verify the results of scientific tests, with potentially momentous significance, under novel conditions, and being conducted by radio remote control from millions of miles away.

So does anyone know what this ended up being? There was another topic made saying that the announcement turned out to not be quite as major or significant as anticipated, and then the story seems to have just died more or less. Was there even ever a press conference at all? Was it cancelled due to the findings not panning out?

Please let me know. Thanks.

Peace.

reply to post by AceWombat04


The most recent results from the SAM are to be discussed at the upcoming AGU meeting. That's all it ever was.
fallmeeting.agu.org...

reply to post by Phage


Thanks, Phage! Well, knowledge is knowledge. No reason to be disappointed imo.

Peace.

Originally posted by Isee1111
You did see the scientists crying when it landed? Hehe... I think they're overly attached to their fields, which isn't a bad thing. Just makes them a tad out of touch when it comes to what they think is cool.

Oh well, I really hope it's life though.

If you spent 7-8 years of your life JUST on this one project, and has a 41% chance of failure, you'd be crying for joy too!! I was so happy for them all. Amazing work, and the sky crane worked flawlessly!

Hell, I cried when it landed. Seeing human accomplishment is very inspiring to me. We are desensitized to it now, because we are privileged to live in the so-called space age. But when you step back and really think about it, human beings collaborating for years to successfully deliver a fully functioning machine on another planet, is an amazing achievement. Whether they find anything or not.

Peace.