Curiosity finds gravel on Mars!

Originally posted by AnarchysAngel
Anyone care to speculate about the origin of......gravel, on Mars?

Do you think the gravel was manufactured, or natural formed?

I think it is quite a find as it is a definite hint of weathering/erosion, usually by liquid water

Large gravel deposits are a common geological feature, being formed as a result of the weathering and erosion of rocks. The action of rivers and waves tends to pile up gravel in large accumulations.

reply to post by Phage


Do you have a source? The presence of this gravel would make it seem like it wasn't that long ago, right?

reply to post by Phage


Exactly, hence the massive canyons and dunes.

Originally posted by mithrawept
reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe

 

NASA's budget is drop in the ocean compared to the military.

For the price of our last war, this mission could be repeated more than 1000 times!!! ... 1000 times ... and we truly would be a spacefaring civilization ... what if the defense industries were paid to waste money pointing upward instead of sideways?

reply to post by stumason

It was pretty much expected.

Scientists chose Gale Crater as the landing site for Curiosity because it has many signs that water was present over its history. Water is a key ingredient of life as we know it.

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Originally posted by schuyler
Fer God's sakes, they just got there less than 24 hours ago. It's a two year mission. They haven't even unpacked yet and y'all are griping about the pics. Do you seriously think that's all there is? That they landed in one piece and are operational is a minor miracle in itself. Nearly half the Mars missions failed "on impact." How about exert some patience and give them a chance?

We want aliens NOW damnit!

/sarcasm off

Originally posted by mithrawept
reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe

 

NASA's budget is drop in the ocean compared to the military. Perhaps that's where we should start first.

Exploring, pushing the boundaries of science is one of the things that define us as a race. I for one say, slash the military budget and let's all go to Mars!

I can agree with you on that as well. I think there is a lot of wasted money everywhere, and I would be for spending less of it on death and more of it exploring if it were a choice.

reply to post by AnarchysAngel

Evidence shows that surface water may have existed about 1 billion years ago. But most indications are that most of it disappeared about 3.5 billion years ago.

reply to post by AnarchysAngel

thought they already figured out water once was there?

reply to post by Phage


You're trying to tell me that a field of gravel formed by water or a glacier can last 1 billion years or more? Are you sure about that?

Well, if you want to talk about funding, if you taxed religious organizations, you would get an estimated 71 billion - think you would have some available funds to go towards space exploration.

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by AnarchysAngel
Anyone care to speculate about the origin of......gravel, on Mars?

Do you think the gravel was manufactured, or natural formed?

I think it is quite a find as it is a definite hint of weathering/erosion, usually by liquid water

A gravel bed should give a wealth of historical information about a place we've never visited and can barely even examine, and will give clues about the superposition of source layers ... at least they haven't 'discovered' of water-ice again yet!

reply to post by AnarchysAngel


Without any more weathering, erosion or other environmental factors, yes it would.

That said, there is some evidence of more recent water flows as well...

reply to post by AnarchysAngel

Where's it going to go once the water is gone?
But I'll let the geologists have a crack at determining if that's what the surface represents.

reply to post by Phage


Wind erosion turns it into sand right? Isn't wind erosion the reason Mars is so featurless? Hence the baffled scientists part.

reply to post by AnarchysAngel

Mars is not featureless. It is covered with rocks and mountains and valleys and plains. And in some places, "gravel".

Time to bring in the Dump trucks to pick up the chat. I want some martian chat and gravel on my drive.

reply to post by Phage


Let me rephrase. It has fewer features than Earth and more wind erosion. Is that accurate?

source

reply to post by AnarchysAngel


Fewer features than Earth? I suppose so since it has less that 1/3 the surface area.
More wind erosion? I don't know why it would. Its atmosphere is a lot less dense than Earth.

reply to post by Phage


I sourced that claim. It seems like wind erosion is fairly common, if not the dominant factor in Mar's landscape.