I not sure I'm explaining myself right here so bear with me. I'm talking
how they don't seem to level with us when it comes to the reality of the
situation. Like the position of oppurtunity. They describe it as
"jackpot". Granted there is some bedrock there to check out but thats it!
I don't see nothing else. I think Jackpot would have been more correct if
bedrock existed and then over at another spot another type of rock existed.
Almost everything that happens that can be hyped does get hyped.

I don't understand this. The landscapes of the Viking, Pathfinder
and Spirit landing sites are pretty similar, light red brown/tan
soil and dark boulders. This is to be expected, because they
had to pick the same kind of landing sites (ie, safe). This site
is also a safe landing site, but doesn't look at all like the others.
Hardly any boulders, dark red brown soil, and white or very lightly
colored outcrops of rock. It sure looked strange to me when I
first saw it, relative to the other landing sites. Now, if they could
land anywhere, I'm sure you could find even more spectacular
sites from what I've seen of the MGS pictures, like inside
a crater with sedimented deposits, such as here

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/.../26/index.html

or maybe near some frosty sand dunes

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/.../27/index.html

but let's be reasonable. In any case, the mission is not to
provide "jackpot" pictures for the public, but to do some science,
and it looks like they are going to be able to do some great
science at both sites. The "hype" that goes on at the press
conferences is understandable, since the public is where
they get their funds, and putting on a show is a necessary
evil, but I'm not so sure it's hype rather than just genuine
excitement. I'm excited about it, and I have nothing to
do with the project, so why shouldn't they be?


Patrick