Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Former NASA Astrobiologist claims: evidence of alien life on Mars was destroyed!

page: 2
66
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 04:41 AM
link   
reply to post by wildespace
 


I didn't even know the small round things were in the picture. The object in his incident which was always the main object - at least that's what I've thought since it happened - is the segmented thing, the object that looks like a fossil and not the fossilized blueberries. That's the one which isn't addressed in your sources, and the one that Richard Hoagland at EnterpriseMission based his "look at this" excitement on.

And NASA's explanation seems fine to me. The Rover was going to leave the area and not just sit there and look at the object, and it wasn't going to cut the rock apart, collect the potential fossil, and send it back to earth. So why not grind it down to see if there was more structure or evidence in there. Thinking more about it, that's what I would have recommended too.
edit on 21-2-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 04:51 AM
link   

AleisterAnd NASA's explanation seems fine to me. The Rover was going to leave the area and not just sit there and look at the object, and it wasn't going to cut the rock apart, collect the potential fossil, and send it back to earth. So why not grind it down to see if there was more structure or evidence in there. Thinking more about it, that's what I would have recommended too.
edit on 21-2-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

I already posted this. The guy criticised them for not collecting it. How does collecting it make sense, how is it getting to Earth?

I then posted a possible motive for him to say these things.



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 04:58 AM
link   

OccamsRazor04

soul44
I was watching a documentary on the discovery channel about the red rain in India and how it may have been caused by a meteor blast in the upper atmosphere and how the cells found inside the red rain did not contain DNA but the cells could still replicate. The lead astrobioligist from India sent his research to NASA to ask for help and NASA swiftly replied that they were no longer funding research in this field. Wait so you're telling me we could possibly have some sort of alien life here and NASA aren't interested in investigating. Isn't this the why we are sending rovers worth billions into outer space ? to find life. If the claims were made from some average Joe i can see why but these are scientists and people with years of research and experience forwarding these claims and asking for help and yet they are turned down.


Why would you send life found on Earth to NASA? Clearly that was done for political reasons to perpetuate a certain belief.


Have you ever heard of a thing that scientist do called getting second opinion ? and who better then NASA as they seem to be the experts.


OccamsRazor04
When you get cancer do you ask NASA for treatment?


What does this have to do with anything ?


OccamsRazor04
There is absolutely zero evidence of any claims made on that program, I watched it. If you disagree with me, show me peer reviewed work based on the case. I will wait for it.


Of course there is evidence supporting this claims the evidence just has been validated conveniently in the "algae" category which we all know is the "swamp gas" play down of any biological find. The simple fact that NASA didn't even want to take a look at such a find is highly unusual i think whether it be politically motivated or not. Of course i disagree , do you want me to accept you're opinion without any evidence besides an argument designed to undermine the question which i put forth ? Why dont you show me peer reviewed work showing otherwise on the exact case oh but guess what I'm not not going to wait for it !



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 05:20 AM
link   

soul44

OccamsRazor04

soul44
I was watching a documentary on the discovery channel about the red rain in India and how it may have been caused by a meteor blast in the upper atmosphere and how the cells found inside the red rain did not contain DNA but the cells could still replicate. The lead astrobioligist from India sent his research to NASA to ask for help and NASA swiftly replied that they were no longer funding research in this field. Wait so you're telling me we could possibly have some sort of alien life here and NASA aren't interested in investigating. Isn't this the why we are sending rovers worth billions into outer space ? to find life. If the claims were made from some average Joe i can see why but these are scientists and people with years of research and experience forwarding these claims and asking for help and yet they are turned down.


Why would you send life found on Earth to NASA? Clearly that was done for political reasons to perpetuate a certain belief.


Have you ever heard of a thing that scientist do called getting second opinion ? and who better then NASA as they seem to be the experts.


OccamsRazor04
When you get cancer do you ask NASA for treatment?


What does this have to do with anything ?


OccamsRazor04
There is absolutely zero evidence of any claims made on that program, I watched it. If you disagree with me, show me peer reviewed work based on the case. I will wait for it.


Of course there is evidence supporting this claims the evidence just has been validated conveniently in the "algae" category which we all know is the "swamp gas" play down of any biological find. The simple fact that NASA didn't even want to take a look at such a find is highly unusual i think whether it be politically motivated or not. Of course i disagree , do you want me to accept you're opinion without any evidence besides an argument designed to undermine the question which i put forth ? Why dont you show me peer reviewed work showing otherwise on the exact case oh but guess what I'm not not going to wait for it !



Why is NASA an expert on life found on EARTH? Can you give me any examples of anyone going to them for anything like this in the past?

If they have life with no DNA that replicates they will win every award imaginable and should have no problems showing me their peer reviewed published work.



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 05:41 AM
link   

wildespace

DrunkYogi
reply to post by Arken
 


NASA trying to hide the evidence of life in the Solar System and possibly elsewhere. The big question is why? Why are they doing this? I suspect the answer maybe part of a control mechanism.


This indeed doesn't make sense, because any evidence of life in the Solar System would make NASA budget skyrocket and give them amazing publicity and support.


No. Nothing at all.

The "Game" goes Beyond NASA and its poor employees.

The cuts of NASA budget regard only the "official" NASA, nothing can delete the huge budget of the real "Black" Military Space Agencies above NASA and who really rule NASA.



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 05:42 AM
link   
The real problem on here with the ATS NASA hater crowd (the thread starter one of many on here) is that if NASA say or show one thing that vaguely supports evidence of life on Mars or elsewhere or ET evidence elsewhere then NASA is great, but anything said or shown in the other direction and NASA is lying or hiding things make your mind up people!!!!!



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 05:43 AM
link   

OccamsRazor04

AleisterAnd NASA's explanation seems fine to me. The Rover was going to leave the area and not just sit there and look at the object, and it wasn't going to cut the rock apart, collect the potential fossil, and send it back to earth. So why not grind it down to see if there was more structure or evidence in there. Thinking more about it, that's what I would have recommended too.
edit on 21-2-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

I already posted this. The guy criticised them for not collecting it. How does collecting it make sense, how is it getting to Earth?

I then posted a possible motive for him to say these things.


My comment, like yours, was about the OP's premise that these possible fossils were destroyed on purpose. Richard Hoover also mentioned that he'd just heard of this a year before the video was filmed, so he wasn't aware that Richard Hoagland at Enterprisemission had been pointing this out when and since in occurred in 2004. And since NASA ground the object down, it too had the thought of "this is a possible fossil", now confirmed by the video. But yes, I agree with you, what else could they have done but do as full an investigation as possible before moving the Rover out of its landing crater and continue with the expedition.



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Arken

wildespace

DrunkYogi
reply to post by Arken
 


NASA trying to hide the evidence of life in the Solar System and possibly elsewhere. The big question is why? Why are they doing this? I suspect the answer maybe part of a control mechanism.


This indeed doesn't make sense, because any evidence of life in the Solar System would make NASA budget skyrocket and give them amazing publicity and support.


No. Nothing at all.

The "Game" goes Beyond NASA and its poor employees.

The cuts of NASA budget regard only the "official" NASA, nothing can delete the huge budget of the real "Black" Military Space Agencies above NASA and who really rule NASA.


Tell us then, what should NASA have done?



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 05:55 AM
link   

OccamsRazor04

soul44

OccamsRazor04

soul44
I was watching a documentary on the discovery channel about the red rain in India and how it may have been caused by a meteor blast in the upper atmosphere and how the cells found inside the red rain did not contain DNA but the cells could still replicate. The lead astrobioligist from India sent his research to NASA to ask for help and NASA swiftly replied that they were no longer funding research in this field. Wait so you're telling me we could possibly have some sort of alien life here and NASA aren't interested in investigating. Isn't this the why we are sending rovers worth billions into outer space ? to find life. If the claims were made from some average Joe i can see why but these are scientists and people with years of research and experience forwarding these claims and asking for help and yet they are turned down.


Why would you send life found on Earth to NASA? Clearly that was done for political reasons to perpetuate a certain belief.


Have you ever heard of a thing that scientist do called getting second opinion ? and who better then NASA as they seem to be the experts.


OccamsRazor04
When you get cancer do you ask NASA for treatment?


What does this have to do with anything ?


OccamsRazor04
There is absolutely zero evidence of any claims made on that program, I watched it. If you disagree with me, show me peer reviewed work based on the case. I will wait for it.


Of course there is evidence supporting this claims the evidence just has been validated conveniently in the "algae" category which we all know is the "swamp gas" play down of any biological find. The simple fact that NASA didn't even want to take a look at such a find is highly unusual i think whether it be politically motivated or not. Of course i disagree , do you want me to accept you're opinion without any evidence besides an argument designed to undermine the question which i put forth ? Why dont you show me peer reviewed work showing otherwise on the exact case oh but guess what I'm not not going to wait for it !



Why is NASA an expert on life found on EARTH? Can you give me any examples of anyone going to them for anything like this in the past?

If they have life with no DNA that replicates they will win every award imaginable and should have no problems showing me their peer reviewed published work.


Your joking right? NASA has an astrobiology lab thats world renowned and are often called on For example NASA researchers were involved in this.

www.cell.com...

And this

www.wired.com...

And this one which is pertinent to why they attempted a spectral anaysis.

iopscience.iop.org...

See they can use the laser to see what elements are realeased just like he did in his lab with the meteorites. Im going to assume he didnt know this. Just like he says gave me some excuse about carbon or something. They were looking for PAH (POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS) this is a great indicator you have a fossil instead of a rock. Im really surprised with his credentials he didnt know this. Makes me wonder if he has an ulterior motive like a new book?



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 05:55 AM
link   

wmd_2008
The real problem on here with the ATS NASA hater crowd (the thread starter one of many on here) is that if NASA say or show one thing that vaguely supports evidence of life on Mars or elsewhere or ET evidence elsewhere then NASA is great, but anything said or shown in the other direction and NASA is lying or hiding things make your mind up people!!!!!


I haven't seen that much criticism of NASA concerning these matters, other than a "if we were driving the rover we'd go to such and such an object and explore it further" once in awhile. Arken seems to be irritated about one individual in particular, and maybe he can address your post fully, but I don't see any hate for NASA.

We all know that the agency can't just come out and announce life has been found, because it hasn't and no definitive proof exists. There are many things which indicate possible life, especially in the past, but they also know that if they talk about this in an official capacity the words would have to be chosen in such a way as to not jump to a conclusion and in that way mislead the public. I would think that there are people working at NASA and JPL who are advocates for taking note of some of the same objects that ATS Mars-explorers continue to locate and point out, and they know that they are even expected and encouraged to do so - Mars-dust-devil's advocates for keeping the agencies eyes on these objects.



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 06:04 AM
link   

dragonridrYour joking right? NASA has an astrobiology lab thats world renowned and are often called on For example NASA researchers were involved in this.

www.cell.com...


At Mistaken Point, Newfoundland, Canada, rangeomorph fronds dominate the earliest (579565 million years ago) fossil communities

This has NOTHING to do with present day Earth life, nothing.



And this

www.wired.com...

This is a NASA run experiment. They are not a 3rd party inspecting an unknown lifeform. So it has absolutely nothing to do with NASA acting as a 3rd party looking at EARTH life.


And this one which is pertinent to why they attempted a spectral anaysis.

iopscience.iop.org...

See they can use the laser to see what elements are realeased just like he did in his lab with the meteorites. Im going to assume he didnt know this. Just like he says gave me some excuse about carbon or something. They were looking for PAH (POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS) this is a great indicator you have a fossil instead of a rock. Im really surprised with his credentials he didnt know this. Makes me wonder if he has an ulterior motive like a new book?

There is nothing in this link, or ANY LINK you provided, where NASA is a 3rd party investigating "unknown" lifeforms. I am welcome to listen if you find any.



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


Your right NASA isnt hiding it they are doing everything short of jumping up and down and waving their hands in the air. They have stacked up so much evidence for the possibility they just cant get that one piece of evidence. Heres a neat article thats on mars and its habitable zones.

www.sciencemag.org...

and this was close but couldnt be confirmed.

www.space.com...

And here is the reason our former NASA scientist is upset because his findings were wrong.And it wasnt NASA that found out.So he went from the guy that found mars used to contain life to the guy that was wrong i think his ego is having a problem with it.



The investigators now reveal that organic molecules within these meteorites did originate on Mars.

"Mars apparently has had organic carbon chemistry for a long time," study lead author Andrew Steele, a microbiologist at the Carnegie Institution of Washington, told SPACE.com.

However, these organic molecules do not appear biological in origin.

"They formed from volcanic processes," Steele said.




www.space.com...
edit on 2/21/14 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 07:28 AM
link   


Unfortunately, the Mars Exploration Rovers only had the Rock Abrasion Tool (RAT) at their disposal


It's part of the human thought process of "if all you have is a hammer, everything becomes a nail".



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Surely the point Richard Hoover was making was that the critoid on Mars looked like critoids on earth and after a lot of scientific discussion left the situation open saying that it was a pity that the rock had been disturbed because, although the mission did not have the right equipment to collect it, perhaps it could possibly have been picked up at a later mission and examined thoroughly.

We are going to find out a lot more about Mars especially when man lands there and hopefully gets back with some really good samples.

I find it difficult to see life, as we know it, developing on many other planets because there are a number of things that make life as we know it, possible and unique on earth, one our moon and its effect upon our planet, its tilt and distance from the sun etc. Life on Mars could be similar but surely it would be different because of the lack of the unique qualities Earth has. When looking at the way life/nature evolves its hard to see why it would not be a similar process on other planets according to what is natural to each one. Its only when one gets ibto the realm of a grand designer/conductor who is credited with creating life to his desire that we get into trouble. When its left to the natural condition of the world life starts up on, we may find there is a blueprint with variations depending on what is available.



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 08:53 AM
link   

dragonridr
And here is the reason our former NASA scientist is upset because his findings were wrong.And it wasnt NASA that found out.So he went from the guy that found mars used to contain life to the guy that was wrong i think his ego is having a problem with it.
www.space.com...





www.space.com...


The investigators now reveal that organic molecules within these meteorites did originate on Mars.

"Mars apparently has had organic carbon chemistry for a long time," study lead author Andrew Steele, a microbiologist at the Carnegie Institution of Washington, told SPACE.com.

However, these organic molecules do not appear biological in origin.

"They formed from volcanic processes," Steele said


Yes,,but you left out the fact that , part of his reasoning ,that these formations could only have been form by volcanic processes,,is ---"Mars does not have tectonics----in which microorganisms could intermix with the volcanic rock when they were formed....but that may not always been the case,,Plate Tectonics on Mars
...beside the point that in order for the rocks to leave Mars a gaint asteroid collision of somekind must of occured..that has been known to heat rock into very high temps...



"When the minerals crystallized from the magma, they trapped carbon in them, and over time, organic compounds formed within these mineral bottles," Steele said.
One might wonder if organic molecules from potential microbes on Mars made their way into this magma via geological activity, much as how tectonic processes on Earth shifts matter around our planet. However, "such processes are very peculiar to Earth — Mars does not have tectonics," Steele said.
www.space.com...



Steele also starts off by saying that

However, these organic molecules do not appear biological in origin


That means they could or could not be biological......He's not 100% sure,,meaning that he hasnt proved the findings were wrong.
of course the guy is going too be a little ticked off

Looks like the whole life on Mars thing has been a big whitewash from day 1 if ya ask me...



edit on 21-2-2014 by Misinformation because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by wildespace
 





It's not about people, it's about the methods they use.


Methods used to work toward truths that are irrefutable (proved) are a good thing, but the same methods are sometimes abused.
Making an infallible God of science is as foolish as expecting that a pure sense of knowing is enough to prove your ideas to others.

Some truths are ...in your face. Denying those things until you gain "scientific proof " is nearly childish, and yet that is what some will always do. Their God must speak before they believe.



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 11:51 AM
link   

wildespace

DrunkYogi
reply to post by Arken
 


NASA trying to hide the evidence of life in the Solar System and possibly elsewhere. The big question is why? Why are they doing this? I suspect the answer maybe part of a control mechanism.


This indeed doesn't make sense, because any evidence of life in the Solar System would make NASA budget skyrocket and give them amazing publicity and support.


You are supposing that you know all of the angles, all of the possible reasons behind such misleading.



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 





There is absolutely zero evidence of any claims made on that program, I watched it. If you disagree with me, show me peer reviewed work based on the case. I will wait for it.


What do you mean by evidence of claims? I spoke to the scientist who had collected and was studying the red rain. His findings were astonishing and yet he was frustrated to find he could get no interest from any other scientists to work on the project because they we all afraid they would have to put their name on a claim of "alien life" and what it would do to their Careers!

That is an old story, career first truth will have to wait until it is mainstream acceptable!

www.technologyreview.com...

Here is the truth, I don't have any proof but this is the truth. There is life in space itself...a lot and varied life. There is life on most planets and moons and all space bodies.



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 





If they have life with no DNA that replicates they will win every award


Yes or it will be taken for possible weapons development and hidden.




Why is NASA an expert on life found on EARTH? Can you give me any examples of anyone going to them for anything like this in the past?





Dec. 2, 2010: NASA-supported researchers have discovered the first known microorganism on Earth able to thrive and reproduce using the toxic chemical arsenic.


Please take a look at what NASA studies. They are the experts on unusual and extreme life on Earth. They are the ones in the know for such things, does that surprise you?
edit on 21-2-2014 by Char-Lee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2014 @ 12:14 PM
link   

wmd_2008
The real problem on here with the ATS NASA hater crowd (the thread starter one of many on here) is that if NASA say or show one thing that vaguely supports evidence of life on Mars or elsewhere or ET evidence elsewhere then NASA is great, but anything said or shown in the other direction and NASA is lying or hiding things make your mind up people!!!!!


Sadly both things can be true. NASA is not one person, any hidden agenda may not belong to every NASA scientist...in fact clearly it can't, and yet when you work for someone you follow orders.





new topics

top topics



 
66
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join