Possible new classification opportunity for concretion spherules (blueberries) on Mars.

Oh.. it was Curiosity. I could not find the width of the MER's tyres in those articles.

Ok, so if they are not blueberries,
a) what are they?
b) where do they come from?
c) why are they arranged in such a spread-out and fairly even way. So, how did they get there?

I can explain that if they are vegetable kingdom items. If they are mineral kingdom items, then it becomes more difficult I think.

Originally posted by qmantoo
Oh.. it was Curiosity. I could not find the width of the MER's tyres in those articles.

Ok, so if they are not blueberries,
a) what are they?
b) where do they come from?
c) why are they arranged in such a spread-out and fairly even way. So, how did they get there?

I can explain that if they are vegetable kingdom items. If they are mineral kingdom items, then it becomes more difficult I think.

small pebbles? Was the crater ever filled with water at one time when liquid water could exist? Is the crater that old?

I mean yes, it looks spread evenly over the ground from those camera angles, but I could get the same effect depending on my camera's angle and what I'm looking at.

Are they truly spread evenly around that crater floor? Or are they thinner in some places than others but we can't see that due to the angle of the camera?

I don't have the answers to those questions myself (and I've had a large glass of chilled, homemade strawberry wine with a kitten that keeps climbing up my leg, so I'm kind of distracted right now.).

But those are good questions. I tried to find some info from NASA/JPL but the only thing I could find was news about them testing Opportunity's navigational system in that area, and nothing else (IE the crater floor). Possibly you'd have better luck.

For now I have to stop and get a kitten off my keyboard.

small pebbles? Was the crater ever filled with water at one time when liquid water could exist? Is the crater that old?

I mean yes, it looks spread evenly over the ground from those camera angles, but I could get the same effect depending on my camera's angle and what I'm looking at.

You just cannot conceive that this is NOT what you are told by NASA can you?

The pancam is a metre or so off the ground which should be high enough to show this (otherwise they would have made it higher. What good is a camera which gives a distorted view?) and no other areas are argued to be distorted due to camera angle. This is a very flaky argument from you in my opinion.

No-one doubts that you can create a scene like this on Earth, but this is what we see on Mars. You either accept what we are given or throw out all the data. Which is it?

The blueberries near to the rover are evenly distributed and not bunched as they would be if any water (ancient or modern) or wind had flowed across that area. Where are all the rocks all these millions of blueberry mineral/rock concretions come from? Come on... show me. Dont ignore it.

As a scientist-type, you should be constantly asking these questions and seeking answers, not accepting what you are told if something does not look right.

reply to post by qmantoo


I've never had a reason to doubt anyone from NASA or JPL.

I look at what they show, and it seems just as plausible to me as everything that I know in that area.

At no point can I find anywhere that they lied to me about something.

Most of the time distrust comes from being lied to. Exactly what did they lie to you about? It's quite obvious that you feel you can not accept anything they say.

If I point out the science to you, you tell me that I should not believe the science, especially if it comes from NASA.

:shrug:

There is no reason that I can think of to argue with you over anything then. If every explanation that I or others give you about things always ends up with "we can't trust those NASA people."

And then further expands to: "We can't trust scientist."

If that is always going to be the case, I can't see any reason to debate you anymore on, well, just about anything having to do with space, and especially Mars.

Good luck with your searching.

I can appreciate you feel NASA has done nothing wrong.

You obviously do not feel like asking more questions when the evidence in front of you in these images, does not fit the data presented by NASA. Thats fine, but you then shrug and throw up your arms and suggest that we just have to believe what they say when there are still questions to be answered.

How will any truth be discovered if people do not ask difficult questions and continue to push NASA for the answers. As I have said before, if we could get the data for ourselves from an independent source, then fine, but the sole source of data is through NASA and as such, they have a duty and obligation to continue to show us their integrity and honesty.

I asked,
"Where are all the rocks all these millions of blueberry mineral/rock concretions come from?" but you choose to ignore it and point to my distrust of NASA. My distrust of NASA has NOTHING to do with the answer to this question and you are avoiding and deflecting the issue. Of course, you dont have to even think about this and I cannot force you to answer the question, but it should probably be something you ask yourself if you want to remain objective.

Just found this thread by sevensheeps from 2011 and this is the linked photo in the first post in that thread entitled Mushrooms on Mars (not a joke). It needs to be checked out as I had not come across this thread before I posted mine here.

Wherein it is proposed that spherules were fleshy masses of archaeobacteria growing in the ground like nodules on a root. These fleshy spheres were later replaced by hematite to become the spherules.

Go here for further info on concretions and why NASA is correct.

===================
Although I am not an expert by any means, I do not agree that all these blueberries are concretions, and I believe some of them are STILL living as plant species in the present time on Mars.