Meridiani Planum: 'Drenched'

chris wrote:

Actually, I was expecting something more spectacular...The hype
suggested it was more. I was particularly interested in the report our
local news had about mud on mars. They had some one from the Viking
team showing how bright spots in the tracks had to be ice made from the
water being squeezed out by the wheels as they drove along. Mud means
water...water means...

Yeah, that was apparently this Levin fellow who appears to have found
himself out in left field. He tried to steal their thunder (a petty
self serving act IMHO). Any hype was due to him, not JPL, NASA, or the
science team. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't hold the
press conference early just because of the stuff this guy was spewing to
any media outlet that would listen. On Monday AM there was a story at
space.com in which the reporter suggested a big press conference "late
next week". Later that morning the JPL web site announced a special
press briefing on Wednesday. By the end of the day it was scheduled for
Tuesday...

We have multiple instruments in orbit now that can detect water near the
surface. Evidence of such has been found, but not at either of these
sites. This guy stirred a lot of people up about liquid water at the
surface and that he found life in his ambiguous Viking experiment.
That's unfortunate.

One last thing: the news at this press briefing *was* exciting! Go find
a basic textbook with a chapter on mars. It's all about questions. And
we are in the process of answering those questions! Science doesn't get
any more exciting than that!

--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)

SkyTools Software for the Observer:
http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html

Skyhound Observing Pages:
http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html

To reply remove spleen

In article ,
chris wrote:
Actually, I was expecting something more spectacular...The hype
suggested it was more. I was particularly interested in the report our
local news had about mud on mars. They had some one from the Viking
team showing how bright spots in the tracks had to be ice made from the
water being squeezed out by the wheels as they drove along. Mud means
water...water means...

But, the pictures we see don't necessarily mean mud. See:
http://www.earthfiles.com/news/news....tegory=Science
--
Hud Nordin Silicon Valley

" George" wrote in message ...

Although I wouldn't count out the Spirit site yet, I get a strong feeling
that as far as sedimentary structures are concerned, it may be a dud. I
hope I end up eating those words. Even so, there is a lot of unique geology
that can be conducted there. After all, it is another planet.

Balls. Seen one planet, you've seen em all. What's with this accretion theory?

"don findlay" wrote in message
om...
" George" wrote in message
...

Although I wouldn't count out the Spirit site yet, I get a strong
feeling
that as far as sedimentary structures are concerned, it may be a dud. I
hope I end up eating those words. Even so, there is a lot of unique
geology
that can be conducted there. After all, it is another planet.

Balls. Seen one planet, you've seen em all.

Ok, let's test your theory. What makes Mars just like Neptune?

Greg Crinklaw wrote in message ...
chris wrote:

Actually, I was expecting something more spectacular...The hype
suggested it was more. I was particularly interested in the report our
local news had about mud on mars. They had some one from the Viking
team showing how bright spots in the tracks had to be ice made from the
water being squeezed out by the wheels as they drove along. Mud means
water...water means...

Yeah, that was apparently this Levin fellow who appears to have found
himself out in left field. He tried to steal their thunder (a petty
self serving act IMHO). Any hype was due to him, not JPL, NASA, or the
science team. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't hold the
press conference early just because of the stuff this guy was spewing to
any media outlet that would listen. On Monday AM there was a story at
space.com in which the reporter suggested a big press conference "late
next week". Later that morning the JPL web site announced a special
press briefing on Wednesday. By the end of the day it was scheduled for
Tuesday...

We have multiple instruments in orbit now that can detect water near the
surface. Evidence of such has been found, but not at either of these
sites. This guy stirred a lot of people up about liquid water at the
surface and that he found life in his ambiguous Viking experiment.
That's unfortunate.

One last thing: the news at this press briefing *was* exciting! Go find
a basic textbook with a chapter on mars. It's all about questions. And
we are in the process of answering those questions! Science doesn't get
any more exciting than that!

One example of real exciting science that comes to mind was the
discovery of what appeared to be fossilized evidence of microbial life
on a Mars meteorite. Now *that* was exciting science, not an
announcement that merely confirmed something that most everyone
already pretty much knew to be true.

el_encubierto

"Luis" wrote
One last thing: the news at this press briefing *was* exciting! Go find
a basic textbook with a chapter on mars. It's all about questions. And
we are in the process of answering those questions! Science doesn't get
any more exciting than that!

One example of real exciting science that comes to mind was the
discovery of what appeared to be fossilized evidence of microbial life
on a Mars meteorite. Now *that* was exciting science, not an
announcement that merely confirmed something that most everyone
already pretty much knew to be true.

However, the meteorite announcement had no basis in the long run. Not a very
good tradeoff.

One vibe from the press conference... there was an air of "mission
accomplished" about the whole thing--that this result (water on Meridiani,
how much, how long, in what form, who knows?) is about as much as we can
expect to get from Opportunity, & that future missions (sample return) will
be needed to even answer the question of how long did the water persist. To
that extent, there definitely was a political aspect to the press
conference, i.e., "this result shows how we need to continue with the
President's plan."

First sample return: 2014.

Joe

March 4, 2004

Luis wrote:

One example of real exciting science that comes to mind was the
discovery of what appeared to be fossilized evidence of microbial life
on a Mars meteorite. Now *that* was exciting science, not an
announcement that merely confirmed something that most everyone
already pretty much knew to be true.

And the crackpots really came out of the woodwork after that, didn't they?

Ralph Harvey and Hap McSween come immediately to mind, just to name a few.

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

"Greg Crinklaw" wrote in message
...
George wrote:
"Joseph Lazio" wrote in message
...

"TLE" == Thomas Lee Elifritz writes:

I think Greg was referring to a more general phenomenon. A science
writer once told me about the percentages of people who pay attention
to this kind of stuff. Something like 50% (at least) of the (US)
population simply doesn't care about space exploration. Period. They
don't care about whether Mars was wet or dry, they won't read
newspapers stories about Mars or space in general, etc. Of the
remainder, most of the people only will read the occasional front-page
story. The number of people who care at the level of following the
news intensely and are willing to wonder about whether Mars was once
wet or dry is actually fairly small.



But that has always been the way of exploration. It has never been easy
or
cheap. And most people didn't care that there was another continent on
the
other side of the Atlantic ocean until it became necessary to care.

Yes, and most people didn't care about the advances in physics in the
early 20th century, yet it ended WWII and was at the root of the fears
of the cold war. Most people just don't have time for science in their
daily lives, but they realize that it *is* important and I am always
amazed at how many can be interested if you simply engage them and share
your own wonder. It's the culture of the mindless TV media who are
mostly incapable of engaging anyone about science and so give up on it
entirely that I despise.

Is "The Mindless TV Media Culture" capable of engageing anyone about
anything, much less Science?
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)

SkyTools Software for the Observer:
http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html

Skyhound Observing Pages:
http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html

To reply remove spleen

Ralph Nesbitt

"Ron" skrev i en meddelelse
om...
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...dianiwater.htm


Long ago, parts of Mars were soaked in liquid water, say scientists
analyzing data from NASA's Mars rover Opportunity.

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...302a/03-ss-03-
outcrop-mosaic-B033R1.jpg

I'm caving in!
I had a look at the facies described by Gerhard Einsele of the
'Mediterranean salinity crisis'.
The very thin varves in the picture above can be described as seasonal
changes in evaporites that settle through the watercolumn. The loose
sediment on top has a heavy caliber and may belong to the costal facies
passing the site through the regression.
Some of the implications obviously is that it has been a very large sea. It
seems odd that Mars has not been peneplaned or lack a structuring by the
watererosion - did it regain relief? The lowest parts of Mars could perhaps
contain more soluble salts - would it be visible from orbit?
Score for Elifritz and Jonathan.

Carsten

"Ralph Nesbitt" wrote in message
m...

"Greg Crinklaw" wrote in message
...
George wrote:
"Joseph Lazio" wrote in message
...

"TLE" == Thomas Lee Elifritz writes:

I think Greg was referring to a more general phenomenon. A science
writer once told me about the percentages of people who pay attention
to this kind of stuff. Something like 50% (at least) of the (US)
population simply doesn't care about space exploration. Period. They
don't care about whether Mars was wet or dry, they won't read
newspapers stories about Mars or space in general, etc. Of the
remainder, most of the people only will read the occasional front-page
story. The number of people who care at the level of following the
news intensely and are willing to wonder about whether Mars was once
wet or dry is actually fairly small.



But that has always been the way of exploration. It has never been
easy
or
cheap. And most people didn't care that there was another continent
on
the
other side of the Atlantic ocean until it became necessary to care.

Yes, and most people didn't care about the advances in physics in the
early 20th century, yet it ended WWII and was at the root of the fears
of the cold war. Most people just don't have time for science in their
daily lives, but they realize that it *is* important and I am always
amazed at how many can be interested if you simply engage them and share
your own wonder. It's the culture of the mindless TV media who are
mostly incapable of engaging anyone about science and so give up on it
entirely that I despise.

Is "The Mindless TV Media Culture" capable of engageing anyone about
anything, much less Science?

I think they can, but it is simply not profitible for the general media to
do so. However, the success of media outlets such as the cable channel
Science TV is proof that there is a thirst for knowledge in the general
population. Unfortunately, it is not being nutured enough to make a
difference to the rest of the networks.