Augustine Commission Summary Report Available

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
one...
j0nathan wrote:
That's all wrong, they are concretions, not impact ejecta.

You have just ended up in a area where your interpretation of the
"Blueberries" is exactly what NASA would _dream_ of being the case, as it
would greatly up their Mars exploration budget if that could be shown to be
the situation...by greatly increasing the odds of past or present life on
Mars.

Was I just trolled? That's ok.The blueberries are the reason I came here
to begin with. The debate is pretty much settled that they are concretions.
However, there's still two camps on whether they are the result of
completely abiotic processes, or if some kind of microbial activity
contributed to their formation. It's clear they're simple mineral concretions
however, almost entirely silicon and the kind of iron deposited in wet
conditions. I've been very pro-life of course, and still convinced
they show a level of order simple geology and chemistry can't
fully explain.

I also...want....NASA to find evidence of life so the exploration of
Mars would continue and even increase dramatically.


So the logic breaks down; why would you argue _against_ a scientific finding
that would benefit _your own funding_ if shown to be true?

Well there is some conflict with my opinions. I can see why you say that.
I'm impatient, I want those big 'answers' soon, and I think robotic missions
can answer them and do so much much faster than manned missions.
I think manned missions to the Moon are very counterproductive in getting
NASA more support and funding, since they are hugely expensive, slow
and starve the kind of space science I find more timely and exciting.

Remember the kinds of Internet traffic the rovers first got? It was
monstrous, the entire world clicked in and also wondered what
the heck those blueberries are. They were, and still are, the first
mysterious 'artifact' so to speak from the surface of another planet.

Since I was a kid the idea of exploring another world, and walking
upon a true mystery, one that no one can quite figure out, while also
possibly leading to one of the more meaningful and timeless discoveries
of all, is like the ultimate space science fantasy imo.

I've seen most of the pictures and data from the Moon, it's just
not a very interesting place.


That's a pretty strange conspiracy theory to justify, somewhat like the CIA
coming out one day and stating: "You know the JFK assassination?
We were in that up to our necks...that's why we should be defunded and
abolished ASAP."


I want NASA to have a budget ten times it's current level.
But for that to happen NASA has to offer something in return.
More moon rocks isn't the answer, only dramatic solutions to
equally pressing problems on Earth can justify more money.
Which is why I go on and on about Space Solar Power.

A gilded safari to the Moon is the way to destroy NASA.

But let me throw out what I think is an ongoing mystery about those
spheres. Go to this link again and compare the actual MER spheres
on the left and the synthetic ones on the right. The two look
astonishingly similar.
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2008/pdf/2053.pdf

Keeping in mind the surface of Mars is highly oxidizing, with wind storms
and lots of UV, a harsh overall environment. If the current view of Mars
geology is to be believed, the spheres on the left are two or three
BILLION YEARS OLDER, then the synthetic spheres.

I don't buy that, everything I see points to concretions which grow
faster, and more recently, than abiotic processes can explain.

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...nity_m014.html
http://areo.info/mer/opportunity/183...5L7L7.jpg.html

Look at how pristine they are, sitting out in the open air.
For how long? When I look at the red color of the surface of Mars
I see it as a result of a planet-wide banded iron formation like
we would see here on Earth. Lots of thin layers of iron deposited
on the surface as a by-product of microbial activity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banded_iron_formation


And look at the pancake flat horizon at Meridiani in all directions.
Only a body of water can create that horizon. And if Mars
died several billion years ago, that's long enough for geology
to remake that horizon.
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...P2262L2M1.HTML


Like it did at the ancient Spirit site.
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...P2218R2M1.HTML


IMHO!
The water on Mars didn't mostly evaporate into space billions of years ago
leaving a dead desert since the early days of it's formation The water went
underground and is still mostly there. Mars has a complex orbit and must
have similarly complex ..... ice ages.

I think the best is yet to come with the discoveries on Mars, by far, and I want
to know now, not in forty years when men finally get there.

Keep in mind, the amount of knowledge concerning concretions was rather
limited before Meridiani. When I first saw the blueberries I quickly scoured
all the available papers on such things, and realized the science was very
weak and full of holes, and I tried to take advantage of that hole to help
spur whatever excitement I could.

And to this day, several years later, the debate rages on....notice the date of
this.


"OVERVIEW OF IRON OXIDE CONCRETIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
FOR MARS: CURRENT KNOWLEDGE AND GAPS. (2009)

"Terrestrial studies of concretions
have been strengthened from the NASA programs,
with the study of "blueberries" in the Burns formation
discovered by the Mars Exploration Rover (MER) Opportunity.
Scientific interest on iron oxide concretions
has increased from a point just a decade or two ago,
when concretions were viewed simply as geologic "curiosities"."
"The role of biomediation is still unclear, and while
it seems very likely that bacteria played a role in
terrestrial concretion formation, original organic
matter it is not well preserved and is currently difficult
to detect"
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2009/pdf/2187.pdf



Patrick Flatulence


s