Phoenix Digs on Mars

re mining and planetary resources (I reserve the right to be completely wrong about this and have it pointed out.) but isn't it scientifically accepted for quite some time now that the moon has a lot of helium 3, and that this is a viable energy source for advanced reactors that do not pollute?

I read somewhere the space shuttle could load up on this stuff and it would give us a lot of power?

makes you wonder.

Oh. It's just Wikipedia's planet Mars entry.
And, yeah. Your proposition sounds perfectly reasonable, but no, they aren't stating anything like that as a purpose for the mission.
I'm so sick of NASA... so sick. They don't even come up with cool new lies. They just recylce the old ones. You know it's bad when even the lies are lazy.
Also. The place is literally crawling with higher life forms. Just look at the southern and northern sub-polar regions. Those areas are shielded from solar winds and Mars has a very strange capcity for distinctly localized atmospheric conditions. i.e. one (or someone)may be able to breathe without artificial aid in one valley here, but over the next ridge the air is bad. The South is alot warmer and wetter than the North.

www.msss.com...

reply to post by djerwulfe


we've been on mars since the 50's.

a friend from project camelot showed me
images of a few us/russian/japanese bases there.
exactly where you pointed out.

wouldnt let me take pictures though.

[edit on 6-6-2008 by CommanderSinclair]

Another piece of quality work by "my favorite Martian", internos the edifying wonder of ATS!

I wish every article in MSM was as understandable and indepth as yours are.

Great job, sir!

As I'm no geologist, hydrologist, or any other type of "ologist", can someone answer a question for me?
If Mars' atmosphere "blew" away and now water can exist only in ice form, how did the ice originally come to be? Or, why is it still there?
In other words, if it was Martian warming resulting from some catastrophe, Iwould think the ice layer would be much deeper.
I guess what I would like to know is a sort of chicken/egg type question.
What happened first, loss of atmosphere or the ice layer that our friends at NASA say is only a few inches below some dirt?
Either answer seems incongruous.
BYW, Internos, you are the Man! S&F

reply to post by ziggystar60


It's because of the filters and because those photos were not taken at the same time, so the shadows of objects that are at some distance from the surface where the shadow is projected (the ground, in this case) had moved a little because of the rotation of Mars.

Although the angle of the light is the same, objects near the ground have a smaller difference because of the smaller distance between the object and the ground, so it is not noticeable in these photos.

PS: I think the photos used to create that false colour image were this and this.

Edit: thanks for the U2U, internos.

[edit on 6/6/2008 by ArMaP]

Originally posted by TKainZero
To the person with the pic. Im not sure why. I belive its a common thing though. It might be a sideeffect of them adding color to the pic.

Colour is not added to the photos, it's the result of adding several photos from different filters.

Off-topic post removed

[edit on 7/6/08 by masqua]

reply to post by ziggystar60


To answer your question the Phoenix has a stereo camera so they can send back 3D images that's why a lot of the color pictures seem funny colored and slight blurry once they process the images they literally look they are right there on mars

reply to post by ArMaP


Thanks for the answer, ArMaP, once again I have learned something from you! And thanks to Internos, who took the time to pass my question on to you. You two are among ATS's biggest assets. And yes, this is shameless sucking up to you - because you deserve it.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Are you talking about images like this one?


This is the result of using two images from the left and right cameras to create a fake 3D effect when seen through those special glasses with a blue (or green) and a red lens.

This is not related to that aura effect seen on the shadows, as I said before, that happens only with photos taken at different times because the shadow moved.

reply to post by bakedbean


Skepticism, sarcasm and bluntness appreciated!!
What can I say?
Maybe, there might be some repercussions from this minor oversight or omission of detail? I'm pretty sure the taxpayers have footed the bill for much of the extraplanetary research . . . and so.. I suspect that a few people may be slightly disturbed by some of the facts as they emerge.
I will say this, though; I suspect there is a bit of internal hemorrhaging at play. Some defectors perhaps. Unfortunately those brave souls usually end up floating down the Potomac after late night fishing excursions...

..with Dick Cheney...

[edit on 7-6-2008 by djerwulfe]

reply to post by LAUGHING-CAT


Well, I don't know for certain, but I can propose a model. While there are huge differences between Mars and Earth, there are striking similarities. One might think of Mars as a sort of 'future-earth" in that Mars planetary life cycle is farther advanced. Say, earth is like a middle aged guy and Mars is entering retirement. Mind you, I don't believe this necessarily, but this model may help.
Taking this into consideration, Mars active planet core has wound down. It is less active volcanically/techtonically. One of the major contibutor to the inner planet's atmosphere is volcanism, i.e. the planet itself spews gases and materials out of the crust. Mars doesn't do this as much as it used to. As the gases and materials coming out of the Martian interior wound down, the atmosphere thinned and allows a sort of blowing effect. essentially, without a supply of gases from the planet itself what gases were present slowly leached away into space. All the while, the planet was cooling which was exacerbated by the loss of atmosphere. Water froze at a certain point and liquid, for the most part, froze or sublimated into the ether.
Now, to what degree this has occurrred and what the current state of the planet is today is one of the major frustrating things about NASA/JPL's official line on Mars and its incongruity with data they themselves present.
It's really absurd. But if you don't have the impetus to dig, pry and reason, and if you make the understandable error of actually believing the words that come out of their mouths as opposed to interpreting their data, these incongruities will pass you by.

Bottom Line: Life is ubiquitous and tough. It exists on earth in places much less hospitable than the surface of Mars even in the "dead planet" scenario. And the thousands of square kilometers of photosynthetic-like forms in the South argue against the 'dead planet" scenario. Not to mention the widespread statistically improbable regular "geological" perpendicular and angular features that are strangely reminiscent of designed feature one might find on earth.

www.msss.com...
zebu.uoregon.edu...
www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

Originally posted by djerwulfe
But all of the stated missions goals for Phoenix have already been conclusively evidenced elsewhere directly and indirectly.
So what is this mission really all about?

Here's what the mission is all about.

NASA's science goals for the Phoenix mission in brief:

Phoenix seeks to verify the presence of the Martian Holy Grail: water and habitable conditions. In doing so, the mission strongly complements the four goals of NASA's Mars Exploration Program.

Goal 1:

Determine whether life ever arose on Mars by searching for signatures of life at the soil-ice interface just below the Martian surface. These samples may hold the key to understanding whether the Martian arctic is a habitable zone where microbes could grow and reproduce during moist conditions.

Goal 2:

Characterize the climate of Mars. Phoenix will provide the first weather station in the Martian polar region, with no others currently planned. Data from this station will have a significant impact in improving global climate models of Mars.

Goal 3:

Characterize the geology of Mars. As on Earth, the past history of water is written below the surface because liquid water changes the soil chemistry and mineralogy in definite ways. Phoenix will use a suite of chemistry experiments to thoroughly analyze the soil's chemistry and mineralogy.

Goal 4:

Prepare for human exploration by providing evidence of water ice and assess the soil chemistry in Martian arctic. Water will be a critical resource to future human explorers and Phoenix may provide appreciable information on how water may be acquired on the planet.

Ref:
phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu...

reply to post by mikesingh


Yes... and? I firmly stand by my previous statements. The question was rhetorical.

I can't provide links to journal articles from the only respected astrobiology journal, Astrobiology, but if you have a password from an American university you can access the primary sources and read them for yourself.

But I can do this:
www.msss.com...
curator.jsc.nasa.gov...
www.bccmeteorites.com...
news.bbc.co.uk...
zebu.uoregon.edu...
astrobiology.cf.ac.uk...
www.enterprisemission.com...
www.metaresearch.org...
www.direct.ca...
www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

I strongly suggest that anyone interested in the "truth" about Mars review this information critically. And then see if you don't find that there's more to this than is explicity presented to the general public.


oops.. forgot one...
Look at the still image gallery..
www.esa.int...


[edit on 7-6-2008 by djerwulfe]

Originally posted by djerwulfe
Bottom Line: Life is ubiquitous and tough. It exists on earth in places much less hospitable than the surface of Mars even in the "dead planet" scenario. And the thousands of square kilometers of photosynthetic-like forms in the South argue against the 'dead planet" scenario. Not to mention the widespread statistically improbable regular "geological" perpendicular and angular features that are strangely reminiscent of designed feature one might find on earth.

Life is though, but only if it was already there.

We know that in a planet that has the conditions to sustain life and that has had life for millions of years it is easy for life to appear in the most inhospitable places, but we do not know if life appears as easily as it sustains itself.

If it really does appear as soon as it finds the right conditions, then Mars probably had life at some point in time, and in that case, judging by how easy it is for life to keep on evolving and adapting here on Earth, it is very likely that there still exists life on Mars.

But if life is not that easy to start then Mars may have been always a planet without life, and if that was the case then I think that after it reached its present condition it is much more difficult for it to have life.

As for those "thousands of square kilometers of photosynthetic-like forms" (that do not look that much photosynthetic-like to me), having the same shape does not guarantee that it behaves in the same way, a life-like statue of someone is not alive although it looks like the real thing.

reply to post by djerwulfe


Ok, I know what you're getting at! If so, I think you may find this thread of mine interesting...

Scientific Evidence Of Life On Mars!! Why is NASA Obfuscating The Truth?

Cheers!

reply to post by ArMaP


"Life is tough."
Of course, I don't want to debate something as silly as what looks "photosynthetic-like," but appearances aren't the only reason I suspect widespread photosynthetic activity. Methane levels. Many bacters are photoautotrophs. On earth, surface crypto- communities generally have a photosynthetic component. Food, beyond chemotrophic processes, is most likely a result of carbon fixation. It's a base. Mars has light and Carbon. Maybe take a look at some of these images from the ESA in their Mars still image gallery. They mysteriously avoid publishing Hi-Res materials from the Southern polar region, but the North has some rather odd . . . geology.

ESA Mars Express Gallery:
www.esa.int...

Of particular immediate interest are images found on pages 16,17, and especially ***page 20.*** They are Northern and are alleged lava cone fields.
Again, page 20.


[edit on 7-6-2008 by djerwulfe]

reply to post by djerwulfe


Again I believe NASA is on the verge of announcing and verifying the findings of ALH 80041 meteorite found in Antarctica with the Phoenix Lander soil sample discoveries that in my opinion exhibits evidence of life that existed or exists on Mars today.

To this day I believe the ALH 80041 meteorite from Mars was planted in Antarctica by our secret astronaut program that is already on Mars. Rik Riley

First, I would like to say Hello to everyone. What a splendid post.
Do they intend on digging directly into ice or scraping the surface with the digger?