Mars - Substantial Fossil Biota

February 28, 2004

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...0P2933M2M1.JPG

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

"Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message
...
February 28, 2004

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...0P2933M2M1.JPG




I see Nasa has taken to cutting the spheres in half and still claim
to be mystified by them. At least they seem curious about them.
That's a start.

I think there's more then enough evidence to make a case
they're gemmules. It's time to put it all together in
a more organized fashion and try to find someone with
'authority' in the field to listen. Any ideas? How could
we get the ear of a good invertebrate biologist?

Unfortunately I promised by Mom a visit this weekend
and will be traveling. I wish I had more time.

Jonathan

s




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

"jonathan" wrote in message
...

I see Nasa has taken to cutting the spheres in half and still claim
to be mystified by them.

How old are you?

At least they seem curious about them.
That's a start.

When have they not been curious about them?
Where did you hear anyone from NASA say
or write that NASA wasn't curious about them?
What led you to such a weak conclusion?
A start?

I think there's more then enough evidence to make a case
they're gemmules.

Show your evidence. You haven't shown any
scientific evidence yet, you know.

It's time to put it all together in
a more organized fashion and try to find someone with
'authority' in the field to listen.

Who in NASA was speaking without "authority in the
field"?

Any ideas? How could
we get the ear of a good invertebrate biologist?

How certain are you that there are no biologists on the
Rover teams? What research have you done to rule
that out? Perhaps, because you, personally, haven't
seen one? Perhaps you have some inside connections?
Perhaps you looked up the qualifications of the researchers?
Did you?


Try a biology newsgroup.

You say nothing Chosp.
Not a single substantive argument.

This is the most interesting post in this newsgroup since years!!!


Thanks for your posting Jonathan

"jacob navia" wrote in message
...
You say nothing Chosp.
Not a single substantive argument.

Be specific or quit lying.

"Chosp" a écrit dans le message de
news:_G60c.6090$id3.4763@fed1read01...

"jacob navia" wrote in message
...
You say nothing Chosp.
Not a single substantive argument.

Be specific or quit lying.

Specifically there is an organisml on earth that matches those
things in Mars.

Carbon hardware seems very resourceful. It can live in Mars
apparently.

I have long believed that this was normal. Carbon-life in
Mars-like environments in Earth exists. A more developed
version in Mars isn't all that surprising isn't it?

Why not?

We were looking for marsians. We found them. What's
the fuzz?

jacob

"jacob navia" wrote in message
...

"Chosp" a écrit dans le message de
news:_G60c.6090$id3.4763@fed1read01...

"jacob navia" wrote in message
...
You say nothing Chosp.
Not a single substantive argument.

Be specific or quit lying.


Specifically there is an organisml on earth that matches those
things in Mars.

Superficial similarity does not constitute a match.
That wasn't specific at all.

Carbon hardware seems very resourceful.

No doubt. Not a very specific response.

It can live in Mars apparently.

Leap of faith on your part. Not remotely specific.

I have long believed that this was normal. Carbon-life in
Mars-like environments in Earth exists.

Which earth are you talking about?
Where is there Martian gravity on earth? Where is
Mars' atmosphere (or atmospheric pressure) on earth?
Without these, you absolutely do not have a Mars-like
environment.

A more developed
version in Mars isn't all that surprising isn't it?
Why not?
We were looking for marsians. We found them. What's
the fuzz?

The fuzz is that you are merely speculating
from insufficient evidence.
If the chemical composition of the outcrop was
determined to be volcanic ash or the chemical
composition of the spherules turned out to be
basaltic glass, would YOU change your mind?
Why or why not?
Be specific this time.

"Chosp" a écrit dans le message de
news:CJ70c.6251$id3.332@fed1read01...

Specifically there is an organism on earth that matches those
things in Mars.

Superficial similarity does not constitute a match.

No. We have time. In two years a biological expedition
(not a geological like this time by the US) will be started
by the europeans.

They will carry a good microscope around, and we will
know for sure what this spherules are made of.

What is their ADN equivalent?

Do they use our code?

Amino acids in there?

That wasn't specific at all.

Carbon hardware seems very resourceful.

No doubt. Not a very specific response.

Very specific in the sense that this similarities
imply the same code and many other common
ground. This would confirm the magnetite findings
some years ago.


It can live in Mars apparently.

Leap of faith on your part. Not remotely specific.


Sorry but there is no blinder man as the one that
doesn't want to see.

I have long believed that this was normal. Carbon-life in
Mars-like environments in Earth exists.

Which earth are you talking about?

Ours of course.

Where is there Martian gravity on earth?

Nowhere. I am speaking of cold temperatures
of course. Cold temperatures would be a boon
for this cold loving organisms.

In Earth they can't develop. Too hot. They feel
much better in Mars.

Where is
Mars' atmosphere (or atmospheric pressure) on earth?

In some high mountains, but anyway pressure and
gravity are not very determining as environment
factors. Temperature is much more important.

Without these, you absolutely do not have a Mars-like
environment.


But that is obvious Chosp. Obvious. Earth is not Mars!
Those are marsians, not terrestial organisms.

A more developed
version in Mars isn't all that surprising isn't it?
Why not?
We were looking for marsians. We found them. What's
the fuzz?

The fuzz is that you are merely speculating
from insufficient evidence.

How can I have more evidence since this connection
has been published some hours ago. With the
JPL blackout it is impossible to have any other evidence
as what we see. When my wife saw them she startled:

what is THAT?

It is something I expected, so maybe I am biased.

If the chemical composition of the outcrop was
determined to be volcanic ash or the chemical
composition of the spherules turned out to be
basaltic glass, would YOU change your mind?

Yes of course. Volcanic ash.
Basaltic glass.

But JPL would have published that fact already
if it was so innocuous. What makes this fact
interesting is the blackout of JPL.

Silence means many things.

In sci.space.policy jonathan wrote:

"Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message
...
February 28, 2004

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/galle...0P2933M2M1.JPG




I see Nasa has taken to cutting the spheres in half and still claim
to be mystified by them. At least they seem curious about them.
That's a start.

I think there's more then enough evidence to make a case
they're gemmules. It's time to put it all together in

There is? like what?

a more organized fashion and try to find someone with
'authority' in the field to listen. Any ideas? How could
we get the ear of a good invertebrate biologist?

If you want to listen to laughter, you can simply watch Loony Tunes.


Unfortunately I promised by Mom a visit this weekend
and will be traveling. I wish I had more time.

Jonathan

s



--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

"jacob navia" wrote in message
...

"Chosp" a écrit dans le message de
news:CJ70c.6251$id3.332@fed1read01...

Specifically there is an organism on earth that matches those
things in Mars.

Superficial similarity does not constitute a match.

No. We have time. In two years a biological expedition
(not a geological like this time by the US) will be started
by the europeans.

Which specific mission is that?

They will carry a good microscope around, and we will
know for sure what this spherules are made of.

The chemical composition of the spherules will be
determined much sooner than that.