A CIVILIZATION on MARS? 1B/200M Years Ago? (Pt. 2)

yevaud · May 23, 2005

Not sure which post to answer. So I'll answer both. Yes, surely it's a natural feature. It's in the analysis and interpretation of the photos where the issue comes in. I think Silylene was spot on when she showed traces of giant butt-cheeks, instead of the face. Trace the face? No, I don't think so. Neither the time nor inclination. Besides, all of you have done so dozens of times, pretty well. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

thechemist · May 23, 2005

"Holly giant butt-cheeks from outer space, Batman!" Silylene is a guy <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I feel better than James Brown. </div>

maxtheknife · May 23, 2005

Anyone measure the angles of the lines that converge at Colin's pimple yet? They appear to be pretty symmetrical to me..... Could this be the perfect symmetry you're looking for, Jon? Colin, have you done this yet?

yevaud · May 23, 2005

Well. (*embarrassed shrug*) Yeah, holy butt-cheecks! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Look, all of you have now determined that there's nothing wrong with the imaging technology, so ground rule number one is a done deal. However: John Archibald Wheeler once said about Margaret Geller, and her envisioning the "Great Wall" effect, "Beware of patterns. The Human eye is a deceiver, and a great recognizer of patterns." Meaning, you now have to decide: Are you anthromorphizing the shapes you see? Can you be convinced that "Martians" would resemble us? Why would they build such a thing? Whay is it the only object of it's kind? Etc. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

thechemist · May 23, 2005

I encourage everyone to pay a visit to this great educational site : Optical Illusions & Visual Phenomena It pretty much shows the kind of silly games our mind can play with our eyes. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I feel better than James Brown. </div>

thechemist · May 23, 2005

Find the Face (in the Beans) Edit : Face in blocks is also impressive. Interaction of science and art by Dali <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I feel better than James Brown. </div>

yevaud · May 23, 2005

No, that's very good. Hyp 1: Mars has carried significant volumes of liquid water in the past which is a potential basis of a life evolution process. True/False? So the evidence would seem to indicate. Hyp 2: Such water on Mars in the past may have constituted large-scale oceans and seas forming an even larger basis of a life evolution process. At one point, a global ocean may have covered Mars expect for Olympus Mons and other high points. True/False? Not enough raw data to indicate that definitively, but for the sake of argument, sure, ok. Hyp 3: Mars may have had a remarkably lower incidence of asteroid/meteor bombardment than did Earth (perhaps 75% fewer hits) due to arguments about the 'target size' of Mars vs Earth. And thus Mars may have had 25% of the mass extinctions that Earth had - forming another basis of an early and more rapid life evolution process. True/False? I think Mars received a proportionate number of asteroid strikes as Earth. While the target size argument is good, Mars is closer to the source of many of the bombarding objects - the Belt. And that early Solar environment was a pretty active one. But again, for the sake of argument, ok. Hyp 4: The Differential Gravity between Mars and Earth (Mars has 40% of Earth gravity) may argue that evolution might occur on Mars at a more rapid rate than on Earth. Or a life evolution process which required, say, 3.o billion years on Earth, might be truncated on Mars into 2.o billion years. True/False? This is the only one I'm very much not certain of. Because as near as any indication I've ever read in the annals of Evolutionary Biology suggest that it's the amount of Oxygen available that's significant. But still, ok again. Hyp 5: Earth and Mars may have had primordinal atmospheres of hydrogen (argued in a recent journal Nature article) which then fit into a 'methane era mod <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

yevaud · May 23, 2005

Hey, they could be posting: Aflak Aflak Aflak Aflak Aflak Aflak <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

maxtheknife · May 23, 2005

Ahhh, just when I thought you guys were going to miss your daily "RCH Bashing" quota.....Steve comes through for you... <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> Funny, Steve....in a much earlier post I went through Plait's refutation of the Cydonia geometry point by point. You didn't comment. Where did I go wrong, praytell? Please be specific..... In regards to the legitamacy of Plaits "refutation"/debunking: This was taken from his 'city slicker' link. http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/hoagland/city.html Plait says..."First off, his claims of measurement accuracy are too high, given that he measured these angles off a photograph. This throws off his amazing relationships. He claims one angle is exactly 120 degrees, but if his ruler is off by a tiny bit, then his angle might be 119 or 121 degrees. This in turn completely negates all the fancy math he then does before he even turns on his calculator." Then please "Dr." Plait, reproduce the results for yourself and show us why and where Hoagland is wrong. Hoagland did his measurements on an orthorectified image. Ever hear of tolerance or margin of error? I'll take his work and conclusions over your lack of work and classic 'debunking' any day. More from Plait...."Second, by picking and choosing which features to use (he uses a hill in one spot, but not another very similar hill next to it) he ups the odds of finding what he wants. A suspicious person might assume he initially drew lines from all the available features, and only kept the ones he liked. That makes the mathematical relationship seem a lot stronger than it really is." Show me......which mound does or doesn't Hoagland use? I notice a glaring lack of refrences here. It's interesting to note that the only pics on Plait's front page are the '76 viking image of ONLY the face and the worst version imo, of the g

mental_avenger · May 23, 2005

This is classic. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Steve says: “you squeal”. lan says: “You squeal too.” Dictionary says: “Tu Quoque : a retort charging an adversary with being or doing what he criticizes in others.” lan says: I didn’t use Tu Quoque Dictionary says: denial: “a (1) : refusal to admit the truth or reality (as of a statement or charge) b. Psychology An unconscious defense mechanism characterized by refusal to acknowledge painful realities, thoughts, or feelings.” Regarding your never admitting when you were wrong, I was merely pointing out some history for those newer members who may be confused as to why you are still in denial about using Tu Quoque. No it's not. The people who use "classic Tu Quoque" around here………yadda, yadda, yadda…… lan uses yet another Tu Quoque. I wonder if there is a name for using Tu Quoque as a defense to a Tu Quoque claim. I think I’ll send this one to Stephen Downes. He may include it in his list. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space. </div>

telfrow · May 23, 2005

Rest assured, I'll never be as old as you, Telfrow....no matter how many times I go around the Sun. [sigh] Another zinger. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

telfrow · May 23, 2005

I was cautious.... look at Telfrow's blow up of the eye.... I did pretty good, eh? Stayed on the line and everything.... You think so Max? Let's take a look... Here's a crop of your drawing, with reference points for comparrison. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

telfrow · May 23, 2005

And here's the crop of the eye from E03-00824 with the reference points from your drawing added in their approximate locations. Where’s the line from Point A to Point B? Where’s the line from Point B to Point C? The line from Point C to Point E is present. The line you drew at Point D roughly follows the leading edge of the feature. Where’s the line from Point E to Point A? Where’s the line from Point A to Point F? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

telfrow · May 23, 2005

Lastly, here's a crop of the bottom portion of the eye. Note the structure. It appears to be what Jon suggested it was: a mass wasting field. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

mental_avenger · May 23, 2005

Fine, MA...I answered your question...now mine...what would it take to convince you? Fair enough, except for one small detail. Assuming you are still referring to the Assumption of Mediocrity; I cannot provide a meaningful answer to your question the way it is written, because it employs the Logical Fallacy of False Dilemma. Your question is loaded. Now, if you want to ask an open question, one that takes into account the overall experience, attitude, and beliefs of the person you wish to answer, you will probably get a lot better response. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space. </div>

mental_avenger · May 23, 2005

Most of these questions cannot be accurately answered with true or false. <ul type="square">Hyp 1: Mars has carried significant volumes of Liquid Water in the past which is a potential basis of a life evolution process. True/False? </ul> Not enough information. It depends on how much water was available, and exactly when it was available. It also depends on the purity and/or salinity of the water. <ul type="square">Hyp 2: Such Water on Mars in the past may have constituted large-scale oceans and seas forming an even larger basis of a life evolution process. At one point, a global ocean may have covered Mars expect for Olympus Mons and other high points. True/False? </ul> True, that is “possible”. <ul type="square">Hyp 3: Mars may have had a remarkably lower incidence of Asteroid/meteor Bombardment than did Earth (perhaps 75% fewer hits) due to arguments about the 'target size' of Mars vs Earth. And thus Mars may have had 25% of the mass extinctions that Earth had - forming another basis of an early and more rapid life evolution process. True/False? </ul> True, that is “possible”. But it is also possible that it got as many hits per surface area as Earth did. Also, evolutionarily speaking, advancements of some of the higher species may have actually been aided by mass extinctions. That would make fewer bombardments less favorable to advanced life, or possibly even lower life forms. <ul type="square">Hyp 4: The Differential Gravity between Mars and Earth (Mars has 40% of Earth gravity) may argue that evolution might occur on Mars at a more rapid rate than on Earth. Or a life evolution process which required, say, 3.o billion years on Earth, might be truncated on Mars into 2.o billion years. True/False? </ul> Not enough information. While that may be “possible”, I have never seen any evidence to support that conjecture. <ul type="square">Hyp 5: Earth and Mars may have had primordinal Atmospheres of Hydrogen (argued in a recent</ul> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space. </div>

JonClarke · May 23, 2005

cs, you are going to make me do something I really don't like doing and that is talking about my own expertise in a subject. I would much rather let my words speak for themselves and brought up to believe that you should not blow your own trumpet. However, you have greatly restircted by options in this area, s, since you wrote: "That sounds pretty good to me for someone who isn't a planetary scientist." I should point out that I have spent 25 years studying and working as a geologist in government, academe, and industry, on five continents, and in three oceans. I have a PhD and contributed to more than relevant 90 publications, nearly half of which are peer reviewed. Since earth is a planet, that make me a planetary scientist. And in the past 4 years I have contributed to a dozen publications related to Mars including interpretations of rover images, regolith mapping methodologies, and terrestrial analogues. So yes, I think this makes me much more competent to opine on Cydnonia then someone like Carlotto whose ignorance of geology, whether terrestrial or Martian, is truly painful. I won't be saying this again, I would prefer to go on with the discussion. In that vein I note that you also wrote: "And which of these papers concern the Mars Face landform? From what I've seen of their writings in the popular media, the revered experts, while absolutely certain that the Face is totally the product of nature, can't even decide what sort of natural structure the Face is. Was it formed by erosion, or by volcanism?" What you also must realise is that planetary scientists see nothing remarkable in this mesa at all. They all would have looked at the images of the meas, some have even written papers on them. But they see no reason to focus obsessively on one feature. Instead they look at the real questions posed by the area: is there evidence of an ancient shoreline? What do the polygons tell us about the composition of <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

maxtheknife · May 23, 2005

Ok, MA.... How would you phrase the question in light of the data that has been presented? Please answer after you've rephrased.....

JonClarke · May 23, 2005

cs, you wrote: "It's kind of ironic that "professional" geology involves drawing lines on pictures that don't seem to correspond to anything in the image, at least to non-geologists. You learn something every day." You have had my interpretations for days now. I think it is a pity you have decided to respond indirectly rather than directly. Why don't you specify which features you don't see corresponding to real features? Which features have I missed? Why don't you try and do better? Deal with the data, rather than arm waving about it. I will note, however, that many of the lines I drew correspond closely to Max's interpretation so even though we disagree about everything else, at least we are seeing very similar things. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

Leovinus · May 23, 2005

I took your picture and traced every line I could find -- not just one that would make a recognizable picture. The result is unrecognizeable. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

maxtheknife · May 23, 2005

It appears to be what Jon suggested it was: a mass wasting field. Right....after how many years? Telfrow, how old might the FOM be? How was the age of the FOM estimated? Lastly,,,, What would you propose the optimum viewing distance would be for such a massive sculpture?

Leovinus · May 23, 2005

To correctly answer your question, one would have to have a sculpture to begin with. This thing is just a mountain. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

JonClarke · May 23, 2005

Colin It is possible that there may have once been mud volcanoes on Mars. Prroving their existance is going to be difficult. When they become extinct they just look like piles of mud. Olympus Mons is too big to have been a mud volcano. An edifice that size must tap into a mantle source of magma. Mud volcanoes are by contrast cute little features. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

maxtheknife · May 23, 2005

~~~APPLAUSE!!!!~~~~ Leovinus....that was hands down the best effort yet.... You have definitely earned my respect! That obviously took time and effort. Now take into consideration my last post! <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> edit... you even outlined the bottom portion of the eye! WOW, seriously,,,, you did good!

yevaud · May 23, 2005

During brief periods of warming, there could be outgassing and outflow all over the surface also, yes? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

A CIVILIZATION on MARS? 1B/200M Years Ago? (Pt. 2)

yevaud

Guest

thechemist

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

yevaud

Guest

thechemist

Guest

thechemist

Guest

yevaud

Guest

yevaud

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

mental_avenger

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

mental_avenger

Guest

mental_avenger

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

Leovinus

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

Leovinus

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

yevaud

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page