22 replies to this topic

[the L]

http://www.dailymail...suggest-be.html



Guy Webster, spokesman for NASA said told the Daily News: ‘I would guess that the 'flower' was someone's descriptive term for its appearance, not meant as an interpretation that flowers exist on Mars.’

[Zeta Reticulum]

So was this "flower" dug out and checked out?. If not, why not? If it was, why have they remained silent about it?

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Zeta Reticulum, on 15 January 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:

So was this "flower" dug out and checked out?. If not, why not? If it was, why have they remained silent about it?

When are you going to answer the questions I've asked you twice? Argument from incredulity is a logical fallacy.
Curiosity is still not fully commissioned. It's drill, which would needed to drill into this object has not been tested yet.

Answer me this, why should NASA be interested in this anyway? What is so special about it?

NASA have teams of the best geologists, planetary scientists and astrobiologists in the world. They know what is and isn't an important target.

Maybe some random individual on the internet thinking that because something that looks a little bit like a flower it must be a flower is not the right person to determine what NASA should and shouldn't test.

I've got news for you Zeta Reticulum, it's not you that knows what is happening and NASA that are clueless, it's the other way around.

Now please discuss conspiracy theories in the conspiracies section and beliefs in extraterrestrial life in the extraterrestrial life section. That way those of us that wish to discuss science can continue to do so in the science section... the clues are in the forum names.

[ninjadude]

Waspie_Dwarf, on 15 January 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:

Answer me this, why should NASA be interested in this anyway? What is so special about it?

I'll answer. At the risk of some paradolia, the image showed the bright flower thing and what appears to be shell on the upper left of it. As a person who has dug in the earth for many years, finding fossils of shells and many times the replacement of their soft parts by calcite, pyrite or quartz - it does appear, at first glance, that it could be a shell of that type and disposition. A lot of these are found in limestone and other conglomerates that appear superficially to be similar to what we see on mars. At least I thought maybe a second look.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

ninjadude, on 16 January 2013 - 02:31 AM, said:

I'll answer. At the risk of some paradolia, the image showed the bright flower thing and what appears to be shell on the upper left of it. As a person who has dug in the earth for many years, finding fossils of shells and many times the replacement of their soft parts by calcite, pyrite or quartz - it does appear, at first glance, that it could be a shell of that type and disposition. A lot of these are found in limestone and other conglomerates that appear superficially to be similar to what we see on mars. At least I thought maybe a second look.

What I don't think people are getting is the scale of this thing, because it is taken through the Mars Hand Lends Imager which is effectively a microscope.

How many of the fossil shells you found were roughly the size of a grain of sand? That is the size of the so called flower.

[ninjadude]

Waspie_Dwarf, on 16 January 2013 - 02:44 AM, said:

What I don't think people are getting is the scale of this thing, because it is taken through the Mars Hand Lends Imager which is effectively a microscope.

How many of the fossil shells you found were roughly the size of a grain of sand? That is the size of the so called flower.

Ahh I see. I don't know the scale.

[Zeta Reticulum]

ninjadude, on 17 January 2013 - 03:00 AM, said:

Ahh I see. I don't know the scale.

A quick look at the image link from the original poster clearly shows it is substantially bigger than a grain of sand, which can be also seen in the same picture.

[Chrlzs]

Zeta Reticulum, please return to this related thread and address the questions asked of you, if you would rather that I don't draw some conclusions....

Added..  BTW, before rashly saying how big a typical earth sand grains would look in that image, you might want to take a good hard look here.., and read the text description..

Edited by Chrlzs, 19 January 2013 - 12:18 PM.