Spherules found at the Spirit site.

So it would appear from the low-res images.

http://calspace.ucsd.edu/Mars99/docs...e_layers2.html


Another here mentioned he thought the spheres are sponges. I
think he may be correct. Demosponges I believe!

More on this later.

But if this turns out to be the case, what would the
religious implications be? Didn't Mars cool sooner
than earth? What would be the world-wide reaction
to Nasa announcing life on Mars predates us???

Obviously this is very speculative, but it's great fun to
think about.


Jonathan

s

"Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message
...
February 15, 2005

George wrote:

Mineral laden ice sheets obviously would be volcanic/impact related,
as I
just pointed out.

Really? Based on what? Where is the ice at the opportnuity or the
spirit
site?

I just said it was underground. Gusev is much lower in elevation,
therefore, most, if not
all, of the ice sheets that were there, are now gone.

Oh, they are there, but they are now gone? Now you see them, now you don't?

Mineral laden ice sheets occur all the time on earth, and few, if any
are
related in any way to volcanics or impacts. They are called glaciers.

On Earth they are weather and climate related, on Mars the weather and
climate is driven by
volcanism and impacts, orbital variation, etc.

And you think these events do not affect the earth's climate in any way?

In fact, I think it is far more likely
that this is the case.

It's nice that we agree, but the problem remains, the process by which
the
spherules were
formed.

http://ads.harvard.edu/books/chto/toc.html

So you claim the martian spherules are chondrules. Very astute.

They could be chondrules. They could be spherules much like what was found
at rhe Apollo 14 landing site:

http://tinyurl.com/2jpka

Certainly there is evidence now for a biogenic origin of
terrestrial
banded iron
formations.

No doubt. But that is not what we are talking about here.

We certainly are - hematite.

Have you seen banded hematite at the Opportunity site?

No, but I see structures and processes which appear to be precursors of
banded iron
formation processes, and the hematite demonstrably exists.

Perhaps you can inform the rest of us where at the opportunity or the spirit
landing sites you believe these banded iron formations apear to be located.

Whether or not the spherules rain out of a water vapor and mineral
rich
sky, or out of
a water and mineral rich surface, is almost irrelevant.
Precipitation
is
required for
mineral rich ice sheet formation, and this is what I see here.
Regardless,
this
indicates a very wet Mars in the distant past, and a very icy Mars
in
the
present.

So where's the ICE?

Under the desiccated regolith. Look at the orbital images.

The orbiter images for the opportunity site do not indicate the presence
of
ice!

I wasn't aware the imagery was ground penetrating. It's in the morphology,
crackpot.

I wasn't aware that you could see below the ground either. You must tell us
your secret.

In particular, look at the
larger craters. By simply looking at the rover images you suffer from
tunnel vision.

I have. There is no ice exposed in the craters at the opportunity site.

It's in the crater morphology and incidence, crackpot.

Please explain to the rest of us what morphology of the crater you think
best indicates that water is or has been present, whether in the form of
ice, or liquid water.

I would recommend that you read the following article. It is
worthwhile,
and
addresses some of the same issues:

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches...es_040211.html

Space.com eh?

The article is nonsense, if we are looking at biogenically
precipitated
spherules, that
underwent subsequent geological transformation, then they may
certainly be
classified as
'fossils'.

And where is the evidence for this?

Perhaps you can ignore ALH80001,

Dude, the data from that meteorite is very controversial.

Only to a crackpot like you.

Really? Tell these guys that they are crackpots, then ask them for a job.
I'll hold the gun for you so you can kill yourself later:

http://cc.ysu.edu/physics-astro/column/march42001.html

http://www.planetary.org/html/news/a...ln-081798.html

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3078049/

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...te_020320.html

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom..._010327-1.html

http://www.planetary.org/html/news/a...ontroversy.htm

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?art...81809EC588EF21




Even NASA has
backtracked on the findings.

No they haven't.

Yes they have, dork. What planet are you living on?

Secondly, the "biota" allegegly found in that
rock were observed with an electron microscope, a piece of equipment
which
is obviously not a part of the rover instrucmentation package.

Lack of inference ability noticed. It must be a glial cell problem.

I agree. You should increase the dosage of your prozac.

but doing so puts you firmly into the
'crackpot' category.

If you feel obliged to call me a crackpot, go right ahead. Just
remember, I
am not the one claiming that mineral spherules are proof of biological
activity on Mars.

Proof is mathematical, science is demonstrative, and speculation is
allowed, indeed,
encouraged in hypothesis formation. The fact that you imply that I claim
'proof' clearly
indicates you do not fully understand or appreciate scientific methods.

Hahahahahaha!!!!

As far as I know, however, speculation is allowed in the scientific
method, whereas outright dismissal is not.

Things are dismissed all the time, especially when it comes to making
profound statements based on dubious interpretations of data.

Dismissal without evidence is evidence of a crackpot.

Excuse me but you are the one making unprovable claims here, not I.
Demonstrate clearly that the Opportunity landing site contains life.
demonstrate clearly that the spherules are anything other than abiotic
minerals of volcanic/impact origin. Demonstrate clearly that water exists,
or ever existed at either site. Well? I'm waiting!


Conclusion : you are a crackpot.

You may attempt to refute me.

You've done that yourself. You need no help from me.

"Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message
...
February 15, 2004

George wrote:

Perhaps he could ask the JPL team to beam up a messege asking the
spherulites to take us to their leader! :-o

Ridicule is clear evidence of a crackpot.

I have addressed every one of the issues that have come up in these
discussions. If you care to ignore them, or the evidence I have provided to
make my case, that is your problem, not mine. I duly note that in making
the case for my being a crackpot, you used ridicule as "clear" evidence.
Since you have ridiculed my ridicule, I guess you'll just have to join the
club. However, there is a membership fee. You have to go to every spherule
location on the planet earth, collect samples of every known terrestrial
example of spherules, analyze them and the locations where they are found,
and publish your work in Nature. You have two days to complete this project
or your dick will fall off.

"Eric Pouhier" wrote in message
...

" George" a écrit dans le message news:
...

"Eric Pouhier" wrote in message
...

They are Blue at spirit site too !

Color is irrelevant to proving that the spherules are alive!!!



http://mars.gh.wh.uni-dortmund.de/me...4L5L7.jpg.html

More colors here http://mars.gh.wh.uni-dortmund.de/mer/

Enjoy, ERic

I never wrote that color was a clue BUT I found few "true color" images of
the spherules, it uses 3 images with L4 L5 and L6 filters and the
corrections looks almost perfect
(the calibration seems to be almost perfect with L4 L5 and L6 filters

http://mars.gh.wh.uni-dortmund.de/me...5M1_L4L5L6.jpg)

The terrain in true colors (from opportunity day 11) is really interesting

http://mars.gh.wh.uni-dortmund.de/me...5M1_L4L5L6.jpg

1. The just emerging ones are *ALL* white.
2. Spherules of all size are white and blue.
3. Broken ones are *ALL* blue.
4. *ALL* the small debris are blue.

The "minerals" ) spherules are turning from white to blue (and from
spheres to debris) when they fade, Oooops could minerals grow and die ?

Not yet an evidence but quite interesting, isn't it George ? ))

Eric

If you look at the Apollo data, spherules of all sorts were found at
several
of the sites. They were interpreted as having come from more than one
impact location. Given the number of impact sites in the region where
Opportunity is working, I don't think that it is unreasonable to assume
that
not all of these spherules have come from the outcrop at the site. Given
that the spherules in the outcrop appear to be all the same color, I think
that makes a stronger case that an explanation for the different colors
reflect different impact origins. I think that may be made clearer if
they
find additional outcrops once they proceed to the large impact crater. Of
course, this is all speculation anyway, and we won't know a whole lot more
until additional results are published.

Here is what, in my opinion, we may know so far (correct me if I leave
anything out):

1) The Opportunity site appears to be littered with spherules of
apparently
multiple colors;

Yes 2 colors. (white and blue

And apparently gray and brown, as well.

2) The bedrock at the Opportunity site is light-colored, fine-grained,
thinly bedded, weathered by wind abrasion, (apparently cross-bedded in
places, which may be a primary structural feature of the rock), contains
abundent sulfur, is low in hematite, and contains fine-grained spherules
of
aparently similar color that are obviously harder than the matrix in which
they are embedded;

YEs

3) It has yet to be determined the exact composition of any of the
spherules, although NASA is currently working on the issue.

Of course and we are all waiting for the composition.

4) It has yet to be determined what is the source of the hematite
identified at the site - whether it will be found in a topmost thin soil
layer, or whether the hematite is found in the spherules. My feeling at
this time is that the spherules that have their origin at the site
(embedded
in the outcrop, or weathered from it) are not the source of the hematite,
based on the analysis of the rock outcrop, which contained embedded
spherules. There is a possibility that there exists more than one type of
spherule located at the site, and that spherules originating from another
source (an impact from somewhere else, or from an event other than the
event
which formed the outcrop) may be present at the site. It is possible that
these spherules may be the sourse of the hematite.

Possible yes indeed !
spherules hematite from earth
http://geography.lancs.ac.uk/cemp/at...o/j-matzka.htm

Surely you are not suggesting that the spherules on Mars came from a
Bavarian power plant?

5) The soil is fine-grained sandy material, for the most part, and much of
anything that was finer has been mostly blown away by the wind. Soil
below
the layer disturbed by the airbags and the rover wheels appear to be
hematite-poor, yet olivine-rich.

Absolutly !

6) To date, no water/water-ice has been detected at either site.

No !


7) To date, no olivine alteration products have been identified.

Well maybe !

Care to specify what you mean by "well maybe"?


8) To date, no carbon or hydrocarbons have been identified at the site,
although to be frank, I don't know if the rover instrumentation could
even
identify hydrocarbons.

)))

9) No spherules or groups of spherules have stood up and walked away.
:-))

NO BUT a new microsopic images from opportunity shows several hairs on 2
spherules (upper left corner of the image):

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...2P2959M2M1.JPG
On that one some traces appear on the "sand" too +++ more surprising
features ! Very Exciting !!!

You are seeing things. However, I did look very closely at the largest
specimen in the image (the one in theupper right quadrant). I increase the
resolution to 400 dpi, increase the contrast 8% and zoomed in as closely as
I could and still see detail. There is definitely a crystal located on that
specimen just below the middle of the right edge It has a definite
tetragonal or orthrombic prismatic shape (its impossible to get any more
detailed than that since only one crystal face can be seen. That face
definitely has tetragonal look to it. And the top and bottom of the crystal
appears to be flat. I can e-mail you a copy of it if you care to see it. I
am not currently able to access my FTP site, as there is a problem with the
server.

An other picture already shows one hair:
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...8P2953M2M1.JPG

Here is one definite prediction I can make:

10) Findings from these rover missions will present more questions than
answers: The results may take many years to complete.

Let's be optimistic !
ERic

"jonathan" wrote in message
...

So it would appear from the low-res images.


http://calspace.ucsd.edu/Mars99/docs...e_layers2.html


Another here mentioned he thought the spheres are sponges. I
think he may be correct. Demosponges I believe!

More on this later.

But if this turns out to be the case, what would the
religious implications be? Didn't Mars cool sooner
than earth?

Yes. It also lost its magnetic field early in its history.

What would be the world-wide reaction
to Nasa announcing life on Mars predates us???

I certainly won't go there.

Obviously this is very speculative, but it's great fun to
think about.


Jonathan


Problems with the "sponge" theory include the fact that terrestrial sponges
require specific water conditions in order to survive, and have a definite,
identifiable structure. Needless to say, we are not talking about anything
terrestrial here. Another problem is that high resolution images of some of
the spherules show a definite crystalline structure that appears to be
organized in a similar manner to mineral specimens I've seen here on Earth.
I have forwarded the copy of the image I have to the Harvard Mineralogy
Museum to see if they can identify the mineral, or mineral class by its
crystal structure.

Well, we just spotted another one!

In groups alt.life-mars and alt.planets.mars check out the recent posts
about the hair like filaments we've been looking at.

Go here for background on the first unexplained filament feature
http://www.earthfiles.com/news/news....tegory=Science

February 15, 2004

George wrote:

They could be chondrules. They could be spherules much like what was found
at rhe Apollo 14 landing site:

http://tinyurl.com/2jpka

And they could be fossilized biogenic precipitates. It's a hypothesis.

Have you seen banded hematite at the Opportunity site?

No, but I see structures and processes which appear to be precursors of
banded iron
formation processes, and the hematite demonstrably exists.

Perhaps you can inform the rest of us where at the opportunity or the spirit
landing sites you believe these banded iron formations apear to be located.

Lack of reading comprehension noted.

Whether or not the spherules rain out of a water vapor and mineral
rich
sky, or out of
a water and mineral rich surface, is almost irrelevant.
Precipitation
is
required for
mineral rich ice sheet formation, and this is what I see here.
Regardless,
this
indicates a very wet Mars in the distant past, and a very icy Mars
in
the
present.

So where's the ICE?

Under the desiccated regolith. Look at the orbital images.

The orbiter images for the opportunity site do not indicate the presence
of
ice!

I wasn't aware the imagery was ground penetrating. It's in the morphology,
crackpot.

I wasn't aware that you could see below the ground either. You must tell us
your secret.

It's a hypothesis inferred from morphology.

Please explain to the rest of us what morphology of the crater you think
best indicates that water is or has been present, whether in the form of
ice, or liquid water.

Really? Tell these guys that they are crackpots, then ask them for a job.

Tell them yourself, the original authors have not yet published a retraction.

http://cc.ysu.edu/physics-astro/column/march42001.html

No controversy there.

Is that where you get your news? You really need to spend more time in your local world class
university research libraries. In lieu of that, try this, crackpot :

http://www.scirus.com/srsapp/search?...&t=all&sss=jnl

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net

"WTF" wrote in message ...
Well, we just spotted another one!

In groups alt.life-mars and alt.planets.mars check out the recent posts
about the hair like filaments we've been looking at.

Go here for background on the first unexplained filament feature
http://www.earthfiles.com/news/news....tegory=Science

Kook site, without a doubt.

George wrote:

"WTF" wrote in message ...
Well, we just spotted another one!

In groups alt.life-mars and alt.planets.mars check out the recent posts
about the hair like filaments we've been looking at.

Go here for background on the first unexplained filament feature
http://www.earthfiles.com/news/news....tegory=Science

Kook site, without a doubt.

Perhaps, but the filaments do show up in the images on the offical rover
website.

"Eric Pouhier" wrote in message ...

They are Blue at spirit site too !

Color is irrelevant to proving that the spherules are alive!!!

Oooops could minerals grow and die ?

Yes, by cell division, same as the mantle grows:-
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/pr/transprofile.html#snap
df.


Not yet an evidence but quite interesting, isn't it George ? ))

Eric
--