NASA confirm `growths` on Phoenix lander

reply to post by StellarX


Oh don't worry Phage and I have had a few "Discussions" before it's all good.

Originally posted by Terapin
Did anyone actually READ THE ARTICLE??? It seems not.

The bumps only appear on the leg strut that has the most shading. This would lead to the idea that condensation could be involved. Condensation combined with mineral salts that blew upon the leg during landing could easily explain the "growths."

That's funny. I read the article, I was disappointed that all three links were the exact same story. I work in the internet and that's called duplicate content, people! Not good for your website, it can get you banned by search engines that don't like duplicate content! Anyway...

I totally agree with you, and this was my theory from the beginning. There is wind on Mars, there is water on Mars, and the lander is a source of heat. I'm guessing the wind is carrying the air heated by the lander right across that specific area, and then particles are collecting there as well. Due to the extreme low temperatures of the environment, the area in question has a mass that is constantly being added to it by condensed air and particles, then frozen onto that leg.

That's what it seems like to me at least.

Maybe it's not a growth or a fungus at all. Maybe it's martian pigeon droppings!! Or maybe, since the Weekly World News says Eskimos live on Mars, one of them was ill and had the "green apple splatters."

In all seriousness, it does look like some kind of fungus. But even if it were, do you think NASA would tell us that there is life on Mars? I'm sure there is already some form of life on Mars -- remember the microscopic bacteria fossils found in that martian rock? The scientific community was split 50/50 on that one.

reply to post by ElectroMagnetic Multivers




I'm just curious as to why it seems the shadows from the legs do not seem to be from one source. the back leg seems to be casting as shadow at about 2oclock, the front leg seems to be casting about 12oclock. Two or more sources of light?

reply to post by pjslug


Of course they would. The people that think NASA is hiding information about aliens from us are insane. Why would they spend billions of dollars looking for something if they already know it exists?

Originally posted by Schmidt1989
Of course they would. The people that think NASA is hiding information about aliens from us are insane. Why would they spend billions of dollars looking for something if they already know it exists?

I suppose you haven't seen the NASA footage of the UFOs then. You know, the ones that were taken onboard the shuttle.

I suppose you haven't seen the moon photos that have been blurred.

I suppose you haven't read or listened to the testimony from NASA employees admitting to the cover-ups that take place there.

I suppose you haven't read or listened to the testimony from several astronauts who have seen these UFOs. Gordon Cooper has talked about seeing a UFO land right before his eyes at Edwards AFB in 1957.

So yeah, I trust NASA alright. I trust NASA about as much as I trust the pope.

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
Two or more sources of light?

No.
The angles of the struts are not the same and the terrain is sloped.




(Yes, I know it's a painting)

[edit on 3/2/2009 by Phage]

IT IS NOT RUST!

They do NOT build the mars landers from HEAVY high carbon steel!

They are built using lightweight materials that DO NOT RUST!


We need to get a rover up there to scrap some of that off and figure out what it is.
I have seen was rust does to steel and I can tell you that this is NOT RUST!

reply to post by bismarcksea


Rust is slow oxidation of Iron. Other materials oxidize as well although it is not called rust. I am sure you have seen old aluminum cans that have deteriorated over time. The lander is made from exotic alloys that are designed to be both lightweight and strong, as well as to resist environmental effects. Despite that, they could oxidize and we know from previous studies that the soil of Mars is highly oxidizing. The soil around the lander contains perchlorate, a highly oxidizing salt.

That being said, it is most likely that condensation on the more shaded leg is reacting with dust that blew upon the leg strut during landing, and what we are seeing it that mineral reaction and not any specific reaction with the lander strut themselves. There is mud on the lander much like you would find on a SUV that went four wheeling. That is what is reacting with the condensation. The other legs do not show it as they are exposed to more sunlight and thus, there would be less condensation.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the closest thing i can compare it with is:

Barnacles?

Looks like salt crystals when you enlarge the image.

Salt crystals grow, but they are not alive. At least not Earth Salt. As far as we know.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I didnt hear anything about it.

This, to me, is some of the most compelling evidence to come out of this latest set of Mars missions.

If we can conclusively prove that life exists on another planet in our solar system, it will be the find of the century and change humanity and the way we look at the cosmos forever.

Even the the notion of the simplest lifeform thriving on another planet gets me giddy with excitment.

Those, to me, certainly look like growths of some sort. This is complete conjecture, but could they perhaps be feeding on the exotic metals those struts are made from?