Forest on Mars !?!?

Looks to be lakes with trees surrounding them

Originally posted by Gonjo
Now tell are those "lakes" on top the ground like you seem to think they are on the non-inverted version?

Well in the case of these "lakes" they are not on top of the "ground" That whole area is ice (either water or co2 or both) but there is no ground in that image...

And here is a bone for you ArMaP... in the Antarctic Lake one you forgot to mention one other effect that is visible... the reflection of the shoreline...

But don't get too excited... you would not see that from straight above

Here is Antarctic lake - and if you rotate the image - like here: well, there is impression that water is over land.

source


- or like on my previous example: bear in mind, that this is water in pit on Earth...







- or Antarctic lake from my previous example - rotated:

[edit on 7-6-2007 by blue bird]

Originally posted by ArMaP



See, this is what I meant. They probably felt the need to invert the image to make them look more like lakes.

_ Here is the (by now) ESA famous image of FROZEN LAKE : how come that it looks like the lake is over crater floor...

-hi-res image






[edit on 7-6-2007 by blue bird]

These are what scientists think about Mars past: namely Ma'adim Vallis channel flown into Gusev Crater /impressive images /:








source

Originally posted by ArMaP
See, this is what I meant. They probably felt the need to invert the image to make them look more like lakes.

I should have said they inverted the colours, that is more correct and that is what I was thinking.

Originally posted by blue bird
Here is the (by now) ESA famous image of FROZEN LAKE : how come that it looks like the lake is over crater floor...

-hi-res image

Probably because it is.

The difference between this photo and the other that I said that the "lakes" looked like they were over the ground is that the "lakes" on that photo look like something that is covering the ground and following its relief, while the ice on this crater photo looks like the crater had some liquid inside it that maybe froze around that darker area (maybe an island when the lake was liquid), resulting in a deposit of iced liquid in the bottom of the crater but not spread over it.

I hope you understand it, I suspect that I have made a mess of my explanation, once more.

Here is a nut to crack for you though. One would think there would be more of a temperature raise in Mars I mean theres like 95% co2 in the athmosphere so why isnt the whole place a hot boiling furnace btw? I mean apparentyly thats whats driving our warming and our athmosphere has 0.038% co2 of the total athmosphere gas? I mean the whole place should be filled with plant life and heating up like a mofo right? It has however showed the same 0.4-0.5c increase as we got here on earth so... Whats going on? And yes I know im kinda off topic here but shouldnt there be plenty of heat and plant life in mars if you look at the co2 the athmosphere has?

[edit on 7/6/07 by Gonjo]

Originally posted by ArMaPwhile the ice on this crater photo looks like the crater had some liquid inside it that maybe froze around that darker area (maybe an island when the lake was liquid), resulting in a deposit of iced liquid in the bottom of the crater but not spread over it.

I hope you understand it, I suspect that I have made a mess of my explanation, once more.

No ArMaP very good explanation... "it looks like the crater had some liquid that froze..."

The thing is that frozen liquid when temperatures rise back to 80F become liquid

Your getting there slowly... but surely

Oh and was that a JOKE???

I nearly fell out of my chair

Originally posted by Gonjo
Here is a nut to crack for you though. One would think there would be more of a temperature raise in Mars I mean theres like 95% co2 in the athmosphere so why isnt the whole place a hot boiling furnace btw?

Good for you!!! You just proved CO2 levels is NOT the onlyfactor in global warming... But don't forget that the sun is a LOT further away, and thus less heat reaches Mars

It has however showed the same 0.4-0.5c increase as we got here on earth so... Whats going on?

According to NASA and others the general warming of the solar system is caused by changes on the sun and the new region of space we are entering, which is denser. I don't have all the data collected on that yet, and I bet neither do they...

And yes I know im kinda off topic here but shouldnt there be plenty of heat and plant life in mars if you look at the co2 the athmosphere has?

Not at all off topic The reason we want to show how much water is likely, is to show that life is also likely

You are quite correct, there SHOULD BE plenty of life, most certainly at the smaller levels... though I haven't seen any dinosaurs in recent images.

The answer would be: it is not the amount of CO2, but the 'thin' atmosphere on Mars, so thin - that it cant keep Suns energy...and it is 2.5 times farther from the Sun than Earth is - and the amount of Suns radiant energy is less to be received....and is colder to, no much of heat emitted back from Mars to be trapped in atmosphere....so, they say

And on Earth for greenhouse effect ( beside CO2 ) you have water vapor + methane + nitrous oxide....all of them greenhouse effect gases..

[edit on 7-6-2007 by blue bird]

It is interesting that Mars (and Venus) have CO2 atmosphere - considering that CO2 is known as 'carbon cycle' - which is produced by volcanic activity and decaying of organic matter.


I was found that Martian crust ( Opportunity) have a substantial amount of water in upper two meters of its crust - up to 50% of weight. It would be interesting if rover found any of calcium carbonate - which h must be somewhere , if Mars has a fair amount of hydrosphere - and we can see, that is the case: geological structure is more than nuff proof of Mars watery past ( and I think present).

Inside craters - well defines rims strongly suggest presence of standing body of water - lakes ( again: past or even present). What about all these FLAT FLOORS in craters? No impact could form such flatness and smoothness - except the fact, that water was present. You know what we need - mineralogical and biological analysis of those crater floors.


What do we know (nothing) about deep aquifers ( suggested by visible morphology of hydrothermal processes)? All those wet gullies, we see melting all over Mars, outflow channels , thermal expansion resulting in visible erosial deformation............hydrothermal system in full swing.

[edit on 8-6-2007 by blue bird]

Stromatolite fossils!?

- earth



source



-mars






source


* stromatolites


source

Originally posted by blue bird
What about all these FLAT FLOORS in craters? No impact could form such flatness and smoothness - except the fact, that water was present.

You are almost right.

An impact strong enough can melt the meteor and the impact area. When all the melted material solidifies it can create a very flat and smooth crater floor.

So, in those cases, the crater floor was full of liquid, but it was not water, it was liquid rock.

But this is not to say that all Martian craters with flat and smooth floors were made in this way, it is just to say that it is possible to have a flat floor crater without the presence of water or any other liquid after the crater floor as solidify. In fact, I don't remember if I ever saw any of these craters on Mars.

There is no doubt that there are classic impact crater - but I am speaking of this extra smooth - flat floors - reflecting light onto crater walls -high albedo....that is not created only by impact or vulcanite activity - but with relished water.

William Hartman and Gilbert Esquerdo (1999) identified surface craters on Mars, which may suggest processes of deformation involving ice on Mars. Their scenario suggests that early Mars had a very ice-rich permafrost layer and suggest a model for the formation of ice in surface craters (Figure 4 and Figure 5). These craters, they point out, develop a pool of water, which then freezes and forms a flat floor in the crater. Wind blown dust then forms a thin cover over the ice layer.

The 1997 NASA Pathfinder’s meteorological station on Mars revealed data that supports the concept of environmental conditions favorable for liquid water at or near the surface. Their data revealed air temperatures ranging up to 21 degrees C at the surface (Mars Pathfinder Mission Status, 1997).

It was also reported (Malin Space Science Systems, 1998) that a crater in the Southern Hemisphere of Mars (located and photographed by the Mars Global Surveyor) probably once held water. It was suggested by Malin and his research team that the Southern Hemisphere crater, which has channels in the walls and dark sediments on the floor, was probably carved by torrents of water that seeped into the crater forming a pool that evaporated eons ago.

Another scenario is that the flat floor of the crater represents a possible water table, frozen in place. This is thought to have taken place at some point in the geologic history of Mars.

source




[edit on 8-6-2007 by blue bird]

Holden Crater



where water once flowed over the rim of holden crater

Originally posted by blue bird
And on Earth for greenhouse effect ( beside CO2 ) you have water vapor + methane + nitrous oxide....all of them greenhouse effect gases..
[edit on 7-6-2007 by blue bird]

Yeah there is though they dont really talk about anything but the CO2 which I find hilarious considering how stupid the whole idea behind that is. And the heating on Earth has officially nothing to do with the sun, ifs aaaall CO2. But enough of that...

Good job with interesting photos, keep up the good work.

I see we finnaly got out of the "everything that lives needs oxygen" crud.

lol this is very interesting, got to admit life elsewhere as far as we know could live off of radiation from stars lol or being that eat planets to live.

"Think outside the box, cuz inside the box is a lil cramed." - Trance

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by blue bird
What about all these FLAT FLOORS in craters? No impact could form such flatness and smoothness - except the fact, that water was present.

You are almost right.

An impact strong enough can melt the meteor and the impact area. When all the melted material solidifies it can create a very flat and smooth crater floor.

So, in those cases, the crater floor was full of liquid, but it was not water, it was liquid rock.

But this is not to say that all Martian craters with flat and smooth floors were made in this way, it is just to say that it is possible to have a flat floor crater without the presence of water or any other liquid after the crater floor as solidify. In fact, I don't remember if I ever saw any of these craters on Mars.

This is what bothers me with the current state of "science".

You say above: "An impact strong enough can melt the meteor and the impact area. When all the melted material solidifies it can create a very flat and smooth crater floor."

However, i don't recal seeing any eyewitness observations of these impacts. What you are left with is you, above, providing the standard line theory. Then you have bluebird proposing her own theory. What is it that validates one over the other? A bunch of stuffy white shirts telling us? I don't see the logic in that.

I know that science is made up of "logic" and "proof", but i say that we tend to get loose and fast with facts when it suits us. Assumptions are made. How long does it take before the distance travelled down the wrong path has led you into a completely illusory belief system, which is still called "scientific fact".

The whole concept seems silly. Humans are incapable of objectivity, despite repeated attempts to feign such.

Mars rover finds "puddles" on the planet's surface

* 15:33 08 June 2007
* NewScientist.com news service
* David Chandler

A new analysis of pictures taken by the exploration rover Opportunity reveals what appear to be small ponds of liquid water on the surface of Mars.

The report identifies specific spots that appear to have contained liquid water two years ago, when Opportunity was exploring a crater called Endurance. It is a highly controversial claim, as many scientists believe that liquid water cannot exist on the surface of Mars today because of the planet’s thin atmosphere.

space.newscientist.com...

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
What you are left with is you, above, providing the standard line theory. Then you have bluebird proposing her own theory. What is it that validates one over the other? A bunch of stuffy white shirts telling us? I don't see the logic in that.

Both theories can co-exist, they do not exclude each other.

This type of crater that I was talking about is common on the Moon, for example, where we can see a flat, smooth, usually dark, floor on the crater.

As I said, I don't remember seeing a crater of this type on Mars, but after I have wrote my post I went looking for craters of that type on Mars and they are the biggest craters that are so big that they do not even look like craters, like Hellas Planitia.

Bluebird's theory is not about the creation of the crater, it's about the creation of the floor of the crater, a process that starts after the creation of the crater but that keeps on happening during the "life" of that area.

Both theories can be confirmed by observation of the material of the crater's floor, if it's the same material as the rocks under the crater it could have been a melted rock lake, if it's sedimentary material, especially with characteristics of being transported by liquid, then it could have been made by liquid depositing the suspended dust on the crater's floor.

Here you can see one of the reasons they think that Holden crater was once flooded.

Edit: Sorry, bluebird, for duplicating your link in my post, I didn't noticed it was (indirectly) the same page.

[edit on 8/6/2007 by ArMaP]