alrightee then. Question for the brains in this group.

lately there has been a few pics of mars with a blue atmosphere, but
having said that....

ever taken a bike to the beach? notice how the tracks are left
inprinted onto the sandy beach? or any wet ground surface? the tracks
visible on this pics shows blatandly similar to what you would expect
on a sandy beach/wet muddy area

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...M1_str1_br.jpg



also, mars is suppose to be a COLD place.... When the ground is frozen
, is a bit difficult to leave tracks behind. a -30c temperature,
should make the area, or ground are extremelly hard.. if this area
used to hold water, it should be rock hard/fronzen solid. As any
remaining liquid should have frozen right off, and you should not be
able to leave track behind.


I was debating on the idea that perphaps is not rock solid as mars is
an extremelly cold place, and theres no liquid at all on this area.
hence no humidity to to allow for the ground to be frozen solid. But,
if this is the case, why are we exploring an area where " Nasa" thinks
there used to be water?


Now, if theres water on mars... or the soil has enough humidity....

wouldnt that means that mars must have some sort of atmosphere, and
that the temperature should be above freezing point???




I am not a conspiracy crack, just asking questions.

In message , Chris
writes
snipped humorous content

I am not a conspiracy crack, just asking questions.


I name this "Sleeptyping"
don't you just love the human race?

Denis
--
DT
Replace nospam with the antithesis of hills

Chris wrote

lately there has been a few pics of mars with a blue atmosphere, but
having said that....

ever taken a bike to the beach? notice how the tracks are left
inprinted onto the sandy beach? or any wet ground surface? the tracks
visible on this pics shows blatandly similar to what you would expect
on a sandy beach/wet muddy area


http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...2R127428271EFF
0300P1004L0M1_str1_br.jpg



also, mars is suppose to be a COLD place.... When the ground is frozen
, is a bit difficult to leave tracks behind. a -30c temperature,
should make the area, or ground are extremelly hard.. if this area
used to hold water, it should be rock hard/fronzen solid. As any
remaining liquid should have frozen right off, and you should not be
able to leave track behind.


I was debating on the idea that perphaps is not rock solid as mars is
an extremelly cold place, and theres no liquid at all on this area.
hence no humidity to to allow for the ground to be frozen solid. But,
if this is the case, why are we exploring an area where " Nasa" thinks
there used to be water?


Now, if theres water on mars... or the soil has enough humidity....

wouldnt that means that mars must have some sort of atmosphere, and
that the temperature should be above freezing point???




I am not a conspiracy crack, just asking questions.


Interesting questions, Chris. I am looking forward to reading the
responses.


--
Martin
Remove "ilikestars" from email address to reply

The answer is simple. There is no rover on Mars. It's all faked. It's
all an evil conspiracy by the Tri Lateral Commission and Henry Kisinger.
Just ask Lyndon LaRouche. He'll explain it all.

seriously guys.. .lets ponder on the question at hand....





On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 00:19:02 GMT, Lawrence Krupp
wrote:

The answer is simple. There is no rover on Mars. It's all faked. It's
all an evil conspiracy by the Tri Lateral Commission and Henry Kisinger.
Just ask Lyndon LaRouche. He'll explain it all.

Assuming you are serious.

lately there has been a few pics of mars with a blue atmosphere, but
having said that....

ever taken a bike to the beach? notice how the tracks are left
inprinted onto the sandy beach? or any wet ground surface? the tracks
visible on this pics shows blatandly similar to what you would expect
on a sandy beach/wet muddy area

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...M1_str1_br.jpg

Have you ever stepped in, for example, the ash after a fire has gone
out or an area of very fine dust? You leave similar tracks even if
the area is very dry. Consider this. The atmospheric pressure on
Mars is MUCH lower than that of earth and gravity is lower as well.
That means far less pressure compacting the fine dust that has been
raining down on the planet for millions of years. Now you take a
rover, and if you look at the wheels, they were very concerned about
keeping ground pressure to a minimum, and run it over this dust. It
is simply compacting it.

Have a hard time buying it?

Well, do you remember the photos of the first steps on the moon or the
tracks the moon rovers left? They looked pretty much the same, didn't
they?




also, mars is suppose to be a COLD place.... When the ground is frozen
, is a bit difficult to leave tracks behind. a -30c temperature,
should make the area, or ground are extremelly hard.. if this area
used to hold water, it should be rock hard/fronzen solid. As any
remaining liquid should have frozen right off, and you should not be
able to leave track behind.

Only if there is liquid to freeze. The hypothesis is that most of the
ice (if there is any) is located under the topsoil or is trapped at
the polse. The rest of the ground is largely covered by rocks and
fine dust.



I was debating on the idea that perphaps is not rock solid as mars is
an extremelly cold place, and theres no liquid at all on this area.
hence no humidity to to allow for the ground to be frozen solid. But,
if this is the case, why are we exploring an area where " Nasa" thinks
there used to be water?

They are looking for evidence of water. Landing at the poles is
problematic and there is much less solar energy there to run the
rover. So, they simply picked a likely place and are looking for
evidence of weathering, erosion, etc.



Now, if theres water on mars... or the soil has enough humidity....

wouldnt that means that mars must have some sort of atmosphere, and
that the temperature should be above freezing point???

Mars does have a very thin atmosphere, but there is no detectable
water vapor in it.

lets not forget that the moon has a lot more impact craters than mars
Also the moon has far less atmospheric pressure.... also..ost of the
ash you see on the monn has been due to volcanic eruptions..

as far as I am concerned , the area where the rovers landed is an
ancient lake bed, not an extinct volcano.


I am not an expert by any means, I am just asking questions in hope to
learn something new. So, yes, I am serious.



Whats the temperature on the moon anyhow? I dont think it might be
colder than mars. Also, at extreme colder temperatures, even altough
the pressure is not high enough to compact the top soil, shouldnt it
freeze it? hence , making compact/hard?







On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:30:33 GMT, Edward Smith
wrote:

Assuming you are serious.

lately there has been a few pics of mars with a blue atmosphere, but
having said that....

ever taken a bike to the beach? notice how the tracks are left
inprinted onto the sandy beach? or any wet ground surface? the tracks
visible on this pics shows blatandly similar to what you would expect
on a sandy beach/wet muddy area

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...M1_str1_br.jpg

Have you ever stepped in, for example, the ash after a fire has gone
out or an area of very fine dust? You leave similar tracks even if
the area is very dry. Consider this. The atmospheric pressure on
Mars is MUCH lower than that of earth and gravity is lower as well.
That means far less pressure compacting the fine dust that has been
raining down on the planet for millions of years. Now you take a
rover, and if you look at the wheels, they were very concerned about
keeping ground pressure to a minimum, and run it over this dust. It
is simply compacting it.

Have a hard time buying it?

Well, do you remember the photos of the first steps on the moon or the
tracks the moon rovers left? They looked pretty much the same, didn't
they?




also, mars is suppose to be a COLD place.... When the ground is frozen
, is a bit difficult to leave tracks behind. a -30c temperature,
should make the area, or ground are extremelly hard.. if this area
used to hold water, it should be rock hard/fronzen solid. As any
remaining liquid should have frozen right off, and you should not be
able to leave track behind.

Only if there is liquid to freeze. The hypothesis is that most of the
ice (if there is any) is located under the topsoil or is trapped at
the polse. The rest of the ground is largely covered by rocks and
fine dust.



I was debating on the idea that perphaps is not rock solid as mars is
an extremelly cold place, and theres no liquid at all on this area.
hence no humidity to to allow for the ground to be frozen solid. But,
if this is the case, why are we exploring an area where " Nasa" thinks
there used to be water?

They are looking for evidence of water. Landing at the poles is
problematic and there is much less solar energy there to run the
rover. So, they simply picked a likely place and are looking for
evidence of weathering, erosion, etc.



Now, if theres water on mars... or the soil has enough humidity....

wouldnt that means that mars must have some sort of atmosphere, and
that the temperature should be above freezing point???

Mars does have a very thin atmosphere, but there is no detectable
water vapor in it.

lets not forget that the moon has a lot more impact craters than mars
Also the moon has far less atmospheric pressure.... also..ost of the
ash you see on the monn has been due to volcanic eruptions..

The moon is probably much younger than Mars as well, depending on the
theory of the formation of the moon you like. I would disagree on the
source of the dust on the moon, though. A great deal of it is debris
from impact and dust that has been collected over millions of years.
There is no air or water to move it around.

Mars is in a much "dirtier" orbit than we are being so close to the
asteriod belt. The asteroids generate some debris and the thinner
atmosphere means more of the debirs makes it to the surface. Of
course, I haven't visited recently...


as far as I am concerned , the area where the rovers landed is an
ancient lake bed, not an extinct volcano.

I think that is what NASA is hoping, but we really can't know for sure
yet.


Whats the temperature on the moon anyhow? I dont think it might be
colder than mars. Also, at extreme colder temperatures, even altough
the pressure is not high enough to compact the top soil, shouldnt it
freeze it? hence , making compact/hard?


Temperature on the moon is a completely different animal from that on
Mars. There is no atmosphere to heat. On the light side, you "heat"
the rocks. On the dark side, it cools, radiating into space. The way
we think of temperature is pretty meaningless on the moon. When we
say "it is 20C", we are measuring the temperature of the atmosphere.

The way we think about temperature, Mars would be much warmer than the
moon since there is some atmosphere to hold the heat. Both are very
cold relative to us.

In message , Edward Smith
writes
Assuming you are serious.



Now, if theres water on mars... or the soil has enough humidity....

wouldnt that means that mars must have some sort of atmosphere, and
that the temperature should be above freezing point???

Mars does have a very thin atmosphere, but there is no detectable
water vapor in it.


It's depressing that Chris is so uninformed about Mars that he doesn't
know it has an atmosphere, but that atmosphere has enough water vapour
for clouds to form. But the temperature is below freezing, so they are
clouds of ice crystals.
--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.