Standing water on Mars in PIA16550

page: 7
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordDrakula

Originally posted by GezinhoKiko
reply to post by Thorneblood
 


yeah that is a crazy looking rock
seashell, pasta quill shaped



im not seeing the starfish tho!

and OP i dont see any water!
edit on 18-12-2012 by GezinhoKiko because: (no reason given)


Reflection of rocks in the water !!!





im sorry im just seeing shadows and fine dust

theres no water in this picture
edit on 19-12-2012 by GezinhoKiko because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:18 AM
link   
Definitely looks like water. The shadows where there is no water looks completely different than the ones where there is water.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Somehow the shadows really looked different from others. Could be however due to the sands "thickness". Well one can not truly see wether they changed colors in purpose. If I can make water out of sand can they make sand out of water?






posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by qmantoo
 
I see the water and the reflecetion of the rock above the water. I dont know about others.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by IMSAM
i would say pareidolia but this is not even the case

you really want to believe dont you?

wate water everywhere,and not a drop to drink....


reply to post by IMSAM
 





I wasn't looking for murky translucence indicative of an object submerged in a liquid, but it's there nevertheless.
edit on 12/19/2012 by this_is_who_we_are because: resize photo



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Removed...
edit on 19-12-2012 by Blarneystoner because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blarneystoner

The distance difference between the Sun and Earth and Venus is only 26 million miles. Buy hey these two planets are so different. Basically Earth is not toast like venus is.


Only 26 million miles closer and look at the difference.

What I mean is that if earth can be thriving why cannot mars. There is no greenhouse effect there. The distance is not so great.



Look at Jupiter. It is about 389 million miles further away from the sun than the earth is. And yet some of its moons may have water under a sheet of ice.


Right... UNDER A SHEET OF ICE

No one is disputing that there may be liquid water under the surface of Mars.

Yes. And you should also know that underground water can seep to the surface. We call it high tide here on earth. Only that Mars has a permanent low tide where water is always under the ground and only rarely comes over the surface.

And then as you say because of the lack of atmospheric pressure, it evaporates faster than say here on earth.




So using this common sense logic, is Mars so far out that it is impossible to think there would be water on its surface? I do not think so.


What you think doesn't matter. Liquid water on the surface is not possible due to the temps on the surface of Mars. It's just physics man.

Do you know that the temperature on Mars can go upto 40°C. Even at 5-6°C water does not freeze in most places here on earth.


I have serious doubts about the information being provided by NASA on Mars. Its weather, its surface temperature, etc. It could still have a hotter region inside the crust that melts the iced water once in a while and leads to the formation of rivers or pools or increase in surface temperature at certain places.


You have serious doubts but you believe the photo to be authentic.

I think you should recollect what Obama said to the NASA team when curiosity landed. Maybe some people in NASA do not want to do the hiding stuff anymore and are releasing or not erasing things as before.

Also this around, RAW images are being directly posted on the NASA web server and many are downloading it (like me ) before these get replaced by tampered ones.

There is a FB and Twitter account curiosity. So the directive from Obama has been to not to hide stuff this time around or there will be no more NASA missions to the moon or mars or anywhere.



edit on 19-12-2012 by Blarneystoner because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by 0pass
 


Only 26 million miles closer and look at the difference.

Only? Only 26 million miles? That is more than 25% of the distance from the Earth to the Sun. Are you familiar with the inverse square law and what it means in regard to the radiation of energy? What does that 25% difference in difference do to the amount of radiation received from the Sun?


What I mean is that if earth can be thriving why cannot mars. There is no greenhouse effect there. The distance is not so great.
The distance is great. But if there were a thicker atmosphere on Mars there would be a greenhouse effect.


And then as you say because of the lack of atmospheric pressure, it evaporates faster than say here on earth.
It wouldn't exactly evaporate. It would boil away immediately.



So the directive from Obama has been to not to hide stuff this time around or there will be no more NASA missions to the moon or mars or anywhere.
Can you provide a link to that directive where the President said "not to hide stuff this time"?
edit on 12/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by 0pass
 


Only 26 million miles closer and look at the difference.

Only? Only 26 million miles? That is more than 25% of the distance from the Earth to the Sun. Are you familiar with the inverse square law and what it means in regard to the radiation of energy? What does that 25% difference in difference do to the amount of radiation received from the Sun?

If all the laws worked, then we all would be living a perfect life. Science is not a constant, it keeps changing with new laws and effects being discovered.

I am making a comparion in difference between the distance between the different planets. And I do not think the it is too cold out on Mars to sustain underground water and some of it to seep up once in a while. Period.





What I mean is that if earth can be thriving why cannot mars. There is no greenhouse effect there. The distance is not so great.
The distance is great. But if there were a thicker atmosphere on Mars there would be a greenhouse effect.


On one hand you say the distance of Mars is too big for any kind of significant temperature to prevent water from boiling away and on another hand you say there could be greenhouse effect on mars.



And then as you say because of the lack of atmospheric pressure, it evaporates faster than say here on earth.
It wouldn't exactly evaporate. It would boil away immediately.



So the directive from Obama has been to not to hide stuff this time around or there will be no more NASA missions to the moon or mars or anywhere.
Can you provide a link to that directive where the President said "not to hide stuff this time"?

Let me know ASAP if you see any Martians

edit on 12/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful
reply to post by qmantoo
 


I think one of the many things that makes me raise my eyebrows at people, is their insistence that NASA and the universities and the scientist world wide that work with them, have their instruments and science packages on board Curiosity, are hiding and/or ignoring things.

Consider the following if you will: Using the OP picture as an example, many on here jumped up and said that they were seeing standing water. Just as many (including me) came back and said "No, that's not standing water.".

Those of us that said "No." did so for many reasons: The martian atmosphere is too low in pressure to support standing water, or water in liquid form on the surface. The angle at which those areas in the photo are suppose to be standing water is impossible for water to just sit there as it's on a slope.

Those that insist that it is standing water, say it is so for mainly two reasons that I can see: because they say it looks like water to them and......NASA must be lying or hiding something.

So, the one side says No, based on scientific evidence, and critically looking at the picture (the wrong angle, lack of reflections or sun light highlights, etc).

The other side says Yes, based on: opinion that those spots look like water, and pure conjecture and speculation about NASA and the scientific community (hiding, lying, conspiring, etc).

That makes me ask this question, which I asked before in this thread, and absolutely no one responded to it:

"Why would NASA and the entire scientific community either lie or ignore finding something like standing water, some other liquid, plant fossils, etc on Mars?"

They would have EVERYTHING to gain by finding something like this on Mars. The interest it would generate on a GLOBAL scale would help more funding to send even more probes and eventually people there.

I can understand the mind set of: Well their are alien bases there! The world isn't ready for that so NASA lies!
That is something I would expect from a conspiracy theorist.

But lying or ignoring a fossilized sea shell? Lying or ignoring standing water/some liquid? Lying about a fossilize leaf?
And then posting pictures that people swear show these things?

That would be stupid beyond even the stupidest ideas any government has ever had, as it would do nothing but create even more mistrust with the public.

On the other hand, there may be a very good reason that your puddles of standing water, your "sea shell" fossil and other "strange artifacts" located in pictures are not being investigated more by NASA and the scientific team that works with Curiosity:

Because they are not the things you think they are.

If people on here truly have an open mind, then they should consider that possibility, instead of assuming that they are being lied to all the time. That they know better than those who are trained to look at these images and the data that comes with it.

That's not having an open mind. That's assuming something based on foregone conclusion that you're always being lied to.
It's the same thing as having an Xray taken of your chest and instead of believing what the doctor says about it, deciding that you know better than the doctor or radiologist that have the education and training to understand that xray.

That is how many of these threads read: ignoring the fact that NASA, the ESA and other space agencies, the entire international science community would be screaming at the top of their lungs if they spotted an actual fossil, plant life or yes........even an actual guinea pig on Mars. It would give them all the funding they ever dreamed of to do even more. Ignore that fact.
And instead, play Arm Chair expert of photography and declare that literally tens of thousands of scientific minds are lying to us.....because they are hiding..........

what exactly again?


bumped



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Druscilla

It's a nice thought, but, If you look closely, it's just fine sand and higher contrast shadowing.

Mars weather for Curiosity ranges from a high of 45 degrees above zero, to minus 94 degrees Fahrenheit.
Any standing water would be ice, or develop as frost crystals.

Source: Weather on Mars surprisingly warm

... and 45 above zero to minus 94 is supposed to be "warm".

Well people live in -70c (-94F) on Earth in towns in Russia, it's +6c (45F) in London just now and it's bucketing rain. I'm not agreeing with the interpretation of the picture, but water could exist in liquid form. The only downside to Mars appears to be the very thin atmosphere, otherwise we're good to go.


.




posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by 0pass
 


If all the laws worked, then we all would be living a perfect life. Science is not a constant, it keeps changing with new laws and effects being discovered.
Ah. I see. So the inverse square law is not in effect in the case of Mars. If the laws of physics which we understand did not work you would not be sitting at a computer using the internet.
 



On one hand you say the distance of Mars is too big for any kind of significant temperature to prevent water from boiling away and on another hand you say there could be greenhouse effect on mars.
Yes. If Mars had a much more substantial atmosphere it could be warmed by the greenhouse effect. If you don't understand why that is the case it isn't surprising that you don't understand why liquid water cannot exist on the surface.


 


‘If in fact you do make contact with Martians, please tell me know right away.

‘I got a lot other things on my plate, but I can say that... that would go to the top of the list... even if they are just microbes, it will be pretty exciting,’ the president said, drawing laughter from the assembled Curiosity operators.
source
That's a directive? It looks more like a joke to me. But I don't see anything about "not to hide stuff this time".

edit on 12/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)
edit on 12/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by nomadros
 




I'm not agreeing with the interpretation of the picture, but water could exist in liquid form. The only downside to Mars appears to be the very thin atmosphere, otherwise we're good to go.

That very thin atmosphere precludes the existence of liquid water.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by GezinhoKiko
 


You're actually right about this picture showing ''water'' but the water is no longer there. What you are seeing is actually sedimentary structures, and in the backgroung it looks like conglomerates which are definitely evidence of water at one time being present on Mars (and actually flowing like rivers here on Earth). The laminations in the ''shaley'' rock is clear evidence that it's a sedimentary structure and that there was several successive deposition events and probably many velocity changes in the river.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by 0pass
 


Basically Earth is not toast like venus is.
Put enough CO2 in its atmosphere and it would be close to it. It is not the proximity to the Sun which makes Venus so hot. It is the fact that the atmosphere traps heat. If it weren't for all that CO2 Venus would be a much nicer place.


I have serious doubts about the information being provided by NASA on Mars.

But you believe that Venus is "toast". Why?


It could still have a hotter region inside the crust that melts the iced water once in a while and leads to the formation of rivers or pools or increase in surface temperature at certain places.
Temperature has little to do with it. Temperatures would allow liquid water in the "summer". The problem is atmospheric pressure. There isn't enough of it.
edit on 12/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

I agree with most of your posts... But Co2 is only a tiny part of why venus is so warm. The main reason is the atmospheric thickness and not the co2 itself. If it had a different composition with less co2 it would still be a hothouse with the atmospheric pressure it has today.
Co2 has way less effect than what politicians wants you to believe. Go back a few million years and we had co2 levels in the tens of thousands of ppm and yet we even had full blown ice ages hitting with co2 lagging behind the temperatures.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by juleol
 


If it had a different composition with less co2 it would still be a hothouse with the atmospheric pressure it has today.
Sort of, but I was really speaking in terms of greenhouse gases in general. And I had no intention of turning this into a discussion of climate change on Earth.

If the atmosphere of Venus were composed mostly of nitrogen and oxygen (like Earth) it would not be nearly as hot. Nitrogen and oxygen do not absorb much infrared radiation. They are not greenhouse gases. But it isn't, it is composed almost entirely of CO2. You are right though it's atmosphere is very dense, which means that CO2 can capture a lot of heat. So, If Earth's atmosphere were 95% CO2 like that of Venus it would be much hotter than it is now but not as hot as Venus. Both because the atmosphere is not as dense and because it is farther from the Sun.
edit on 12/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   

"Why would NASA and the entire scientific community either lie or ignore finding something like standing water, some other liquid, plant fossils, etc on Mars?"

It is fine to ask questions like these. You expect them to be answered, but as I said, there are many other questions as well which are left un-answered. You believe the scientists, but you do not see why they should do what scientists should do - which is to investigate what they are there for. Your money, my money, everyone's money is being wasted by us not getting answers to these questions and you are quite content to sit back and lap up all they tell you.

As I have said, there are so many things in the Curiosity photos and in MER photos which are not explained, so what do you and they expect. If you keep us in the dark, we will eventually want to seek the light.

You assume they would have everything to gain - but apparently not. Otherwise they would release proper photos, so there MUST be another agenda running which you or I do not understand.

Common sense would say that we would investigate the Moon before we go further afield, but for some reason (who really knows why) we have leapfrogged the Moon. Of course there are going to be CT abound when it defies all logic to go further. When we send men to Mars in the next few years, then they will be far, far further away and less likely to survive if anything happens there. On the Moon, we are 4 days away and may even be able to help them before they die should they need helping.

So, before you ask why, there are thoughts of conspiracy, then ask yourself why many of the other questions have not been satisfactorily answered.


That would be stupid beyond even the stupidest ideas any government has ever had, as it would do nothing but create even more mistrust with the public.
NO, it is not stupid. It totally depends on the driving force and the agenda being run. There may be some very intelligent beings running the show. Perhaps, far more intelligent than our Earthly minds can fathom.


Because they are not the things you think they are
I could understand the logic of this BUT can you understand the logic of seeing straight stick-like shapes, curly and intelligent designs on rocks, mechanical cog-like structures lying around the place, fungus-like fruiting bodies, lichen-like coverings on rocks, even concrete re-bars regularly placed sticking out of solid rock. All these things have been found in images of a planet which is not supposed to have life on it and they are not all figments of the imagination.


It's the same thing as having an Xray taken of your chest and instead of believing what the doctor says about it, deciding that you know better than the doctor or radiologist that have the education and training to understand that xray.
Poor example because we can get other opinions and get our hands on the real data. But anyway, No, but there is a need to exercise some modicum of common sense and if the doctor tells you you are fine and the evidence is contrary, then maybe just possibly they you know your body better than the doctor does.


Because they are not the things you think they are.
SO PROVE IT THEN by releasing the proper photographic data. There is absolutely no way that the data we get to see is the real best-quality data the scientists at NASA see.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by qmantoo
 


I see it.
If someone had shown me this picture and asked, "is there or is there not water in this photo," I would have said there is (regardless if I knew it was from mars or not.)

I really don't see how others don't see it.
Possible that it is a trick of the eye with really fine dust,
but I definitely see what you're talking about OP.

Don't listen to those who say you're crazy just because you noticed it and they don't.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by qmantoo
 




SO PROVE IT THEN by releasing the proper photographic data. There is absolutely no way that the data we get to see is the real best-quality data the scientists at NASA see.

And you know this how?
But why are you ignoring the images I posted?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 12/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by qmantoo

"Why would NASA and the entire scientific community either lie or ignore finding something like standing water, some other liquid, plant fossils, etc on Mars?"

It is fine to ask questions like these. You expect them to be answered, but as I said, there are many other questions as well which are left un-answered. You believe the scientists, but you do not see why they should do what scientists should do - which is to investigate what they are there for. Your money, my money, everyone's money is being wasted by us not getting answers to these questions and you are quite content to sit back and lap up all they tell you.


I don't "lap up" all that they tell me. I have a degree in engineering and in the course of getting that degree, plus several decades of "hands on" I've not only reproduced different physical experiments, but have confirmed many as part of the learning tree to get where I am.

I could say the same for you: you "lap up" what CT's put out their instead of actually investigating on your own to see at least what "some" of what they tell you is true or not.

How many times have you verified Ohm's Law? How many times have your verified Newton's Laws Of Motion? How many times have you verified the Laws of Thermodynamics?

I've done it many, many times, both in school and because of my work. So maybe it is easier for me to "Lap It Up" as you so crudely put it, because I've actually seen the results in many cases for myself.

Can you say the same?



You assume they would have everything to gain - but apparently not. Otherwise they would release proper photos, so there MUST be another agenda running which you or I do not understand.


Define "Proper Photos". The majority of the pictures taken are for navigation and look overs, most of it is to make the public go "Ooooo" and "Awwwwwww"
How much time have you spent behind a camera? I mean a REAL, SLR, variable lens type of camera? How much time have you personally worked with optical equipment? (not just cameras but telescopes too). How much time have you spent working with light to achieve the type of affect you wanted? Shadows?
How much time have you worked with software that can manipulate photos? How much time have you spent working with software that is used to simulate light for virtual 3D worlds in order to make it look realistic?

I have a very heavy amount of hours and hours on all the above, including using 3D game engine SDKs for making virtual worlds..........

What have you done? What makes you an authority of what is or is not a Proper Photo.


NO, it is not stupid. It totally depends on the driving force and the agenda being run. There may be some very intelligent beings running the show. Perhaps, far more intelligent than our Earthly minds can fathom.


There you go assuming again: that they have some other agenda other than what we see. Care to back it up, with solid, absolutely no way to debunk facts?



It's the same thing as having an Xray taken of your chest and instead of believing what the doctor says about it, deciding that you know better than the doctor or radiologist that have the education and training to understand that xray.

Poor example because we can get other opinions and get our hands on the real data. But anyway, No, but there is a need to exercise some modicum of common sense and if the doctor tells you you are fine and the evidence is contrary, then maybe just possibly they you know your body better than the doctor does.


No, it's a great example. There is NOTHING stopping you from getting a 2nd opinion on Curiosity's photos either. You'd done just that by bringing it here. You just are not happy that not every one is jumping up and agreeing with you.
Send the photo's to other people that have degrees in this area and see what they say. Again, no one is stopping you and you CAN get a 2nd opinion.



Because they are not the things you think they are.

SO PROVE IT THEN by releasing the proper photographic data. There is absolutely no way that the data we get to see is the real best-quality data the scientists at NASA see.


I do not have to prove anything. It is YOU that is making a very wild claim.

The burden of proof is on you. And pictures in this case are not giving you enough proof.

Instead, you're going to have to prove that Mars has more than 0.636 kPa of pressure so standing water can exist. You are going to have to prove physics wrong. You are going to have to prove that what you see in a picture is what you say it is, and by more than just saying that it is that.

The burden is on you. Not me.

Good luck.
edit on 19-12-2012 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join