It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by wildespace
Great reply. I'd also add that what may look featureless and boring to you might provide valuable clues to scientists about martian environment and its geological past. Curiosity is up there to do science, not to enterntain the public with pictures of weird rocks.
This thread smacks of ignorance.
6. Was Curiosity's visit to Glenelg really just an 'intermission'? A deviation from the official plan as stated by NASA/JPL? Curiosity landed just about 400m away and went straight into that area encountering a whole variety of strange formations!? Didn't MRO data already indicate from orbit that this area consisted of mineral rich layers & deposits as well as other interesting - probably unique - signatures? After almost one year into the mission, I do have to speculate and ask: why exactly was it declared an intermission after all? Didn't it rather look like a major part of the overall-mission?
Last week, the mission finished investigating science targets in the Glenelg area, about 500 yards (half a kilometer) east of where Curiosity landed. The mission's next major destination is at the lower layers of Mount Sharp, about 5 miles (8 kilometers) southwest of Glenelg. The July 9 drive brought Curiosity's odometry to about 325 feet (99 meters) since completing the Glenelg investigations and about 0.51 mile (0.95 kilometer) since landing on Mars in August 2012.
At targets in the Glenelg area, where Curiosity worked for the first half of 2013, the rover found evidence for an ancient wet environment that had conditions favorable for microbial life. This means the mission already has accomplished its main science objective.
Originally posted by alienreality
The oddness of the "rocks" on mars are unlike anything that you would expect from a barren planet that has never had life..
Originally posted by optimus primal
reply to post by alienreality
Mars wasn't always barren. It had a thicker atmosphere, volcanic action, and water. The land on mars has had almost the same geologic forces working on it for billions of years as earth. I could link you to thousands of pictures of strangely shaped rocks on earth that don't look natural to the casual layman, but they are in fact completely natural.
That isn't to say there aren't some interesting anomalies in a few mars pictures, there are. However, the good ones get lost in amongst the dozens of threads that start with titles like "OMG LIZARD ON MARS, ULTIMATE PROOF OF LIFE ON MARS!!!!111ONE!" , and the authors of such threads who make them do more damage to their cause than any supposed government shill could.
Long ago Mars had an atmosphere, we know it most likely had large seas, there was geologic activity (volcanoes). The odds that Mars had, at the least, microbial life are getting better by the year with all we learn from the rovers.
The problem is there are a lot of threads by a lot of people in this forum who muddy the field for the really good anomalies, simply because they don't know a damn thing about Mars to begin with. They're on the internet, the biggest repository of knowledge known to man, and they can't even look up simple information on it.
This is why there are so many "it's a rock" posts and people. They've given up on looking because some people post a thread every time there's a rock with a curve on it.
Originally posted by Argyll
reply to post by jeep3r
You've put together a decent thread.....however....I don't think Curiosity or NASA do "requests"......especially not from random conspiracy websites.
Originally posted by jeep3r
reply to post by wildespace
But how could it be a waste of time? We're not talking about drilling, SAM analysis or other time-consuming activities. It's more about taking better images/close-ups of formations that were in the vicinity of Curiosity anyway.
It would have perhaps been a short drive, an adjustment of the instrument arm and some snapshots incl. a slightly increased file transfer between Earth & Mars - all that wouldn't be a matter of days or weeks, so the delay would have been essentially 'irrelevant'.
I'd even go further: what about all the other thousands & thousands of feature-less rocks that have been imaged 'close-up'? According to your argument, that would have also been a waste of time, right? Yet it was done, so I think there's more to the obvious omission of these particular 'anomalies' ...
Originally posted by crankyoldman
The Never A Straight Answer topics are quite poplar, but I have to wonder where people get the idea that NASA is obliged to share anything with anyone at all?
Maybe it would help for someone to point to some real, verifiable, written policy that states NASA is obliged to provide all, or even any, of their findings to anyone other then whom they wish to provide it to.
It might be helpful for someone to point to the edict or policy that states that NASA must provide undoctored information for everyone to examine.
It seems to me that NASA is under to obligation to do anything at all. If they want to provide low grade, grainy photos to the public, they are well within their right. If they want to withhold information, doctor information or even destroy information they are well within their right. Unless we see some policy foundation which they are not living up to, it would seem we must accept the scraps the toss out to the masses and all we are entitled to.
It seems a great amount of frustration comes on both sides of this argument, folks who feel NASA is perfect, telling all and an open source of information and those who feel NASA is more a private corporation vetting information through some secret system before they release anything at all. It might help stop the madness to actual determine, with GREAT detail, what NASA's obligations are to any of us regular folks. If they have none, they the argument changes.