Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Mars - soaked through with water?

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

We know there is water on mars, that has already been proven but looking at the RAW images coming through from Curiosity - the track marks it is leaving suggest that the dirt is damp doesnt it -its not just one or 2 photos, its pretty much every single photo - not just one or two areas but everywhere Curiosity has traveled so far.

For track marks to exist the dirt must be damp in the first place for it to be able to clump up and even hold its shape - if it was a barren desert world like they say then you wouldnt be getting these deep track marks showing every detail of the tracks - you would get tracks but not as detailed as we are seeing.

Would this be classed as "surface" water, something that supposedly does not exist on Mars because of its lack of a thick atmosphere - or is surface water only flowing water?

Some one please correct me if Im wrong - sorry if this doesnt make sense.




posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Here you go, there's already a 19 page long thread on this:

ATS - Curiosity Just Went Through Mud?



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I would have to agree with you. I have a feeling there is more water then we are aware of.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 04:53 PM
link   
static from the tyres maybe....this force of attraction would build up as the rover moves over time!?


if there is water there...wouldnt it be some sort of liquid sulphur based chemical...and not H20


peace

BTW - the right side of my brain says...yea there is water in nevada...lol
edit on 21-11-2012 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-11-2012 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Not if it is like the moon dust, that formed perfect, deep, highly defined impressions- but they claim it was just "super fine", LOL.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Perhaps the dirt on the ground is of a finer nature than we would see here. More like moon soil.
Or maybe Mars has high humidity? idk.

Great observation though.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by youwillneverknow
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

We know there is water on mars, that has already been proven but looking at the RAW images coming through from Curiosity - the track marks it is leaving suggest that the dirt is damp doesnt it -its not just one or 2 photos, its pretty much every single photo - not just one or two areas but everywhere Curiosity has traveled so far.

For track marks to exist the dirt must be damp in the first place for it to be able to clump up and even hold its shape - if it was a barren desert world like they say then you wouldnt be getting these deep track marks showing every detail of the tracks - you would get tracks but not as detailed as we are seeing.

Would this be classed as "surface" water, something that supposedly does not exist on Mars because of its lack of a thick atmosphere - or is surface water only flowing water?

Some one please correct me if Im wrong - sorry if this doesnt make sense.


Martian Soil in many places has the same consistency of flour. If you take a shallow box, fill it with flour and then roll a toy wheel around in it, you find that it leaves deep, very detailed tracks, and it's not wet at all.

Here's a story about Spirit getting stuck in the stuff:

NASA Rover Stuck In Flour Like Martian Soil

The pictures of deep, sharp tracks are not proof of surface water, or wet soil.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful

Originally posted by youwillneverknow
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

We know there is water on mars, that has already been proven but looking at the RAW images coming through from Curiosity - the track marks it is leaving suggest that the dirt is damp doesnt it -its not just one or 2 photos, its pretty much every single photo - not just one or two areas but everywhere Curiosity has traveled so far.

For track marks to exist the dirt must be damp in the first place for it to be able to clump up and even hold its shape - if it was a barren desert world like they say then you wouldnt be getting these deep track marks showing every detail of the tracks - you would get tracks but not as detailed as we are seeing.

Would this be classed as "surface" water, something that supposedly does not exist on Mars because of its lack of a thick atmosphere - or is surface water only flowing water?

Some one please correct me if Im wrong - sorry if this doesnt make sense.


Martian Soil in many places has the same consistency of flour. If you take a shallow box, fill it with flour and then roll a toy wheel around in it, you find that it leaves deep, very detailed tracks, and it's not wet at all.

Here's a story about Spirit getting stuck in the stuff:

NASA Rover Stuck In Flour Like Martian Soil

The pictures of deep, sharp tracks are not proof of surface water, or wet soil.


Interesting post and read. Thanks



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful
Here you go, there's already a 19 page long thread on this:

ATS - Curiosity Just Went Through Mud?


I posted this in that other thread.

Originally posted by VoidHawk
Its wet.
Look at center of this pic, its even reflecting like water.


As for Electrostatics being involved, I realy dont think so.
NASA would NOT send a craft all that way just to have the electronics zapped by static when they can so easily make the wheels - whether made of rubber or metal - discharge any potential before it has time to reach dangerous levels.

Sorry but the static theory is far more silly than the water theory.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by youwillneverknow
...For track marks to exist the dirt must be damp in the first place for it to be able to clump up and even hold its shape - if it was a barren desert world like they say then you wouldnt be getting these deep track marks showing every detail of the tracks - you would get tracks but not as detailed as we are seeing...


Very fine powder would also hold the track mars.

I'm not saying this is definitely the case here, I'm just saying it isn't ONLY damp soil in which the track marks could remain so crisp.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowLink
Perhaps the dirt on the ground is of a finer nature than we would see here. More like moon soil.
Or maybe Mars has high humidity? idk.

Great observation though.



What is humidity?
edit on 11/21/2012 by VeniVidi because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful
Here you go, there's already a 19 page long thread on this:

Curiosity Just Went Through Mud?


Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion in the above linked thread.
Thanks




**Thread Closed**


for future reference:

We Have A New Search Engine--Please Use It!





new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join