Notices
Results 1 to 27 of 27

Thread: We have Life on Mars!

  1. #1 We have Life on Mars! 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    I have found undeniable evidence of repetition of Bio-signatures

    Image 1- this is OM from Hortonheardawho of Mars Rover Blogg from sol 110. Notice stemmed feature in white box.



    Image 2- this is OM crop from Dana Johnson of Mars Rover Blogg downloaded on his site 6-18. Looks like we have replication.



    Vincent/Fred


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    So you feel shorelines, snowflakes, clouds and other fractally organised structures are all alive. It is certainly an interesting theory.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    So you feel shorelines, snowflakes, clouds and other fractally organised structures are all alive. It is certainly an interesting theory.
    If that wasn't so ignorant, I would respond.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Ph.D. Leszek Luchowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Gliwice, Poland
    Posts
    807
    If you look long enough in a richly complex structure, you have a fair chance of finding fragments resembling just about anything. Some rocks here on Earth have the unmistakable shape of animal heads. I have seen such "heads" of a wild boar, a cat, and a rather nondescript lizard-like monster. But guess what, they were all stone dead, and the "wild boar" was in a country where wild boars never lived.

    You can find all sorts of shapes in clouds in the sky or, as Ophiolite mentioned, shorelines - think of the Scandinavian dog. Or the Italian boot (I mean the shape of the peninsula) - it was there long before boots were ever invented.

    Consider this too: the number , written as a decimal fraction with sufficient precision, contains your telephone number complete with the area code and contry prefix, immediately followed by your zip code and the number of days between your birth and the day you lost your first milk tooth. And I can say this without even knowing any of those numbers.
    Leszek. Pronounced [LEH-sheck]. The wondering Slav.
    History teaches us that we don't learn from history.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by Leszek Luchowski
    If you look long enough in a richly complex structure, you have a fair chance of finding fragments resembling just about anything. Some rocks here on Earth have the unmistakable shape of animal heads. I have seen such "heads" of a wild boar, a cat, and a rather nondescript lizard-like monster. But guess what, they were all stone dead, and the "wild boar" was in a country where wild boars never lived.

    You can find all sorts of shapes in clouds in the sky or, as Ophiolite mentioned, shorelines - think of the Scandinavian dog. Or the Italian boot (I mean the shape of the peninsula) - it was there long before boots were ever invented.

    Consider this too: the number , written as a decimal fraction with sufficient precision, contains your telephone number complete with the area code and contry prefix, immediately followed by your zip code and the number of days between your birth and the day you lost your first milk tooth. And I can say this without even knowing any of those numbers.
    Well, with that logic we should dismiss all the visible data and leave the camera off the next probe. After all it could be clouds in the distance instead mountains.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Ph.D. Leszek Luchowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Gliwice, Poland
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    Well, with that logic we should dismiss all the visible data and leave the camera off the next probe.
    No, but we should leave critical thinking on and not conclude that the Germans got there first just because a volcanic plume is shaped like the head on a stein of Beck's.
    Leszek. Pronounced [LEH-sheck]. The wondering Slav.
    History teaches us that we don't learn from history.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,738
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    Well, with that logic we should dismiss all the visible data and leave the camera off the next probe. After all it could be clouds in the distance instead mountains.
    extraordinary claims require extraordinary levels of proof - i feel that your sample is not up to the level of proof that i find convincing
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    Well, with that logic we should dismiss all the visible data and leave the camera off the next probe. After all it could be clouds in the distance instead mountains.
    extraordinary claims require extraordinary levels of proof - i feel that your sample is not up to the level of proof that i find convincing
    Now that is a good response. If you had the years of looking at and hearing explanations of Mars images I do you may feel different.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    Why can't be investigate Europa? Theres a greater probability that life is in the water under the ice right? I mean its water H20 so its got to be at least 0 degrees c.
    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Ph.D. Leszek Luchowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Gliwice, Poland
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by 425 Chaotic Requisition
    Why can't be investigate Europa? Theres a greater probability that life is in the water under the ice right? I mean its water H20 so its got to be at least 0 degrees c.
    Just because it's ? No that's no reason why it must be at least . Even if you mean liquid water (as opposed to ice) can exist at subzero temperatures, if either the pressure or salinity is high. And under Europa's ice crust, both are, according to the Wikipedia.

    As for investigation though, a lot will be done, that's for sure.
    Leszek. Pronounced [LEH-sheck]. The wondering Slav.
    History teaches us that we don't learn from history.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Leszek Luchowski
    Quote Originally Posted by 425 Chaotic Requisition
    Why can't be investigate Europa? Theres a greater probability that life is in the water under the ice right? I mean its water H20 so its got to be at least 0 degrees c.
    Just because it's ? No that's no reason why it must be at least . Even if you mean liquid water (as opposed to ice) can exist at subzero temperatures, if either the pressure or salinity is high. And under Europa's ice crust, both are, according to the Wikipedia.
    Geysers indicate liquid water and unsettled pressure, temperature. The ice crust ensures there must be enduring "sweet spots".

    I think the broader answer to "why can't we investigate... under the ice" is that we're just now re-evaluating the expectation of finding life on Mars or life on Europa. IMO, that's like looking for life on Los Alamos or on the Arctic Ocean.

    Bring a shovel, or a drill.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Ph.D. Leszek Luchowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Gliwice, Poland
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    I think the broader answer to "why can't we investigate... under the ice" (...)

    Bring a shovel, or a drill.
    I'm no expert on space exploration, but even I have heard about a better idea: a probe with a nuclear heat source to melt its way down through the crust, explore what's underneath, then drop some weight to achieve positive buoyancy and melt its way back to the surface to tell the story.

    I only hope it will not carry any earthly germs that might irretrievably contaminate the "European" (?) ocean, possibly killing any local life.
    Leszek. Pronounced [LEH-sheck]. The wondering Slav.
    History teaches us that we don't learn from history.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the circuitous haze of my mind
    Posts
    1,028
    We are usually fairly careful when it comes to sanitizing the probe before it is sent into space. (remember the time some idiot sneezed on the sample dish?)

    I believe we should concentrate on Europa far more than Mars. The only problem would be the ice, which is apparently hundreds of miles thick, though if we could harness a nuclear energy source it would be possible to melt through it.
    Of all the wonders in the universe, none is likely more fascinating and complicated than human nature.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

    "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence"

    -Einstein

    http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php

    Use your computing strength for science!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    So you feel shorelines, snowflakes, clouds and other fractally organised structures are all alive. It is certainly an interesting theory.
    If that wasn't so ignorant, I would respond.

    Vincent
    I take this as a clear admission that you are unable to refute my debunking of your alleged replication. Do you want to try again?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Leszek Luchowski
    I only hope it will not carry any earthly germs that might irretrievably contaminate the "European" (?) ocean, possibly killing any local life.
    Possibly seeding the largest source of dietary protein in the solar system. :? Well, I agree we should study first, inoculate second.

    ***

    Ice probes. Hundreds of miles will take time. I think this mission could be very expensive if we're impatient. I guess antenna unspooled behind the probe would be too long/too massive?

    But likely there'd be frozen remains of deeper stuff near the surface, where geyser belched it up, or in Europa's version of lava.

    I would dearly love to see simple core return landers. Simple like: land dumb, core <1m just where landed, package sample in rocket to Earth. They'd be low budget and failure prone so we can send off tens of them each year. They would sample diverse sites on Mars, the Moon, Europa, etc. etc. If only half make it back we're still ahead of the massively expensive rover-tourist type missions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Junior Zitterbewegung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    Now that is a good response. If you had the years of looking at and hearing explanations of Mars images I do you may feel different.

    Vincent
    So years of looking at pictures and listening to explanations makes you an expert in what exactly??

    Humans are extraordinarily good in spotting patterms ( even where there are none), and just because something looks designed it does not mean that this is necessarily the case. See the ID proponents fall for this fallacy time and time over
    I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    I would dearly love to see simple core return landers. Simple like: land dumb, core <1m just where landed, package sample in rocket to Earth. They'd be low budget and failure prone so we can send off tens of them each year.
    Have you calculated the mass requirement in fuel to get off Mars. This is not a cheap option.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    Quote Originally Posted by Leszek Luchowski
    If you look long enough in a richly complex structure, you have a fair chance of finding fragments resembling just about anything. Some rocks here on Earth have the unmistakable shape of animal heads. I have seen such "heads" of a wild boar, a cat, and a rather nondescript lizard-like monster. But guess what, they were all stone dead, and the "wild boar" was in a country where wild boars never lived.

    You can find all sorts of shapes in clouds in the sky or, as Ophiolite mentioned, shorelines - think of the Scandinavian dog. Or the Italian boot (I mean the shape of the peninsula) - it was there long before boots were ever invented.

    Consider this too: the number , written as a decimal fraction with sufficient precision, contains your telephone number complete with the area code and contry prefix, immediately followed by your zip code and the number of days between your birth and the day you lost your first milk tooth. And I can say this without even knowing any of those numbers.
    Well, with that logic we should dismiss all the visible data and leave the camera off the next probe. After all it could be clouds in the distance instead mountains.
    Reproducibility sets pattern apart from randomness. Show us more examples. Show us evidence of repeated replication. At that point you have the beginnings of a hypothesis.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Zitterbewegung
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    Now that is a good response. If you had the years of looking at and hearing explanations of Mars images I do you may feel different.

    Vincent
    So years of looking at pictures and listening to explanations makes you an expert in what exactly??

    Humans are extraordinarily good in spotting patterms ( even where there are none), and just because something looks designed it does not mean that this is necessarily the case. See the ID proponents fall for this fallacy time and time over
    It's also the root of superstition and religion. Ironically, evolved as a means to keep us erring on the side of caution in our primitive days. The wind makes the grass rustle 90% of the time. But 10% of the time, it's a lion. Decisions on limited information kept us alive and now we can't stop seeing the face of Jesus in rock formations.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    The wind makes the grass rustle 90% of the time. But 10% of the time, it's a lion.
    But the rustle made by the wind should sound different from the rustle made by a lion. Surely you can tell the difference.

    Besides, if the wind is blowing on the grass, it should also be blowing on you. That means if you hear a rustle yet feel no wind, you know what to do. RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!!
    Sol Hatebad. Soulmate of Luna Lovegood.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Sol Hatebad
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    The wind makes the grass rustle 90% of the time. But 10% of the time, it's a lion.
    But the rustle made by the wind should sound different from the rustle made by a lion. Surely you can tell the difference.

    Besides, if the wind is blowing on the grass, it should also be blowing on you. That means if you hear a rustle yet feel no wind, you know what to do. RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!!
    Unless it's a breezy night and there are also lions about. Nit picking an example is not a great way to argue against a general principle.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    I would dearly love to see simple core return landers. Simple like: land dumb, core <1m just where landed, package sample in rocket to Earth. They'd be low budget and failure prone so we can send off tens of them each year.
    Have you calculated the mass requirement in fuel to get off Mars. This is not a cheap option.
    50 kilo vehicle to (Martian) orbit needs a ballpark 300 kilos fuel. A lot of this is just the minimum size of engines we can build now. I guess the entry, landing, and coring hardware (surrounding launch vehicle AKA rocket) would be another 100kg but that stuff stays behind.

    The entire land/launch package should be totally bare-bones, without a lot of gadgetry and certainly no roving capability or arms. Nothing sensitive so hard/rough landing OK. Such a low-mass entry can employ simple toss-away heat shield for most deceleration, then parachute, airbags, crushable legs, the usual. Just a wild idea: If it lances into the ground with all the force airbags would normally bounce (imagine a falling syringe with warhead tip) we might get a secure landing on uneven terrain, drilling accomplished, and launch platform stabilized, all with one mechanism.

    Maybe the sample does not need hermetic packaging at this stage. Anyway, it has to get loaded somehow into a rocket and I resent that machinery 'cause it could fail. The rocket itself shouldn't fail if we use solid fuel and little more sophistication than a V-2. Then an orbiter or orbiter-helper goes to transfer our sample to a boxy little vehicle which makes the final thrust away from Mars, bound for Earth. The orbiter would continue transferring additional samples, as many as make it off the surface. A 10-ton orbiter is relatively cheap.

    I understand the costs and failure risks go way up wherever we have landing and takeoff. That's why I envision no-frills and to-the-point vehicles. They may not even include cameras. Just "dumb" sample return, from wherever the vehicles impact.


    Honestly I think NASA is going to overburden the Mars Sample Return project with so much flying/roving/basecamping/robot-hand-waving machinery they declare it too expensive, and shelve the plan.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    84
    Wow,

    Mars to wind to lions to fuel.

    “But the rustle made by the wind should sound different from the rustle made by a lion. Surely you can tell the difference.”

    A shred of intellect. Yes we can see Jesus on a piece of toast. Lets hope we have the intelligence to know we are looking at a piece of toast. If we dismiss all visible data then visible data is irrelevant. Is it clouds on the horizon or mountains. Either we must learn to apply common sense to images or leave all instrumentation of this type off all future probes.

    Sad day for science when we can not see. That means we are blind.

    Vincent
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    50 kilo vehicle to (Martian) orbit needs a ballpark 300 kilos fuel.
    Show me the calculations please.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    50 kilo vehicle to (Martian) orbit needs a ballpark 300 kilos fuel.
    Show me the calculations please.
    I gathered that from several members' posts in this thread.

    How's this...

    Assemble in Earth orbit a collection of vehicles. Connected, they travel to Mars orbit.

    Main vehicle is an orbiter with good onboard computers. It controls the other vehicles directly and by relaying from Earth.

    Orbiter releases a "dumb" collector vehicle and tracks the landing, which is not well controlled, if at all. So we don't pinpoint landing, but at least we have a very good picture of the sample site. Collector takes up to 1kg from atmosphere, surface, or deep core, depending on where/how it happened to land. The bulk of collector's mass is a rocket, which transports the sample to Mars orbit in a few rocket stages.

    Orbiter releases a return-to-Earth vehicle. That intercepts the collector, loads the sample, and thrusts to Earth orbit, where we can pick it up.

    Orbiter only controls one vehicle at a time. So after first return-to-Earth vehicle is underway, it releases a second collector at some wildly different region, and so forth.

    With modifications we can use the same system to sample moons as well. Repetition drives down costs.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent
    Wow,

    Mars to wind to lions to fuel.

    “But the rustle made by the wind should sound different from the rustle made by a lion. Surely you can tell the difference.”

    A shred of intellect. Yes we can see Jesus on a piece of toast. Lets hope we have the intelligence to know we are looking at a piece of toast. If we dismiss all visible data then visible data is irrelevant. Is it clouds on the horizon or mountains. Either we must learn to apply common sense to images or leave all instrumentation of this type off all future probes.

    Sad day for science when we can not see. That means we are blind.

    Vincent
    Vincent, the scientific method was devised because "common sense" is really not that reliable. When it comes to using it to support extraordinary claims, it is in fact utterly worthless.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9
    yes it is quite possible for life to exist on mars. space probes have tooken pictures of rounded pebbles giving great evidence of liquid water on Mars rocky surface, also there is a number of flowing canyons like the grand canyon therefore,again suggesting that there used to be water on Mars and a high possibilty of life aswell. am i right ? .
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •