Mars the anomalies The moon too., part II

[yevaud]

Hey...I don't sit here 24/7, you know.<br /><br />No...Atmospheric Physics. Specifically. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[dfrank]

you are a ***<i>Ad Hominem Deleted</i>*** like the rest. Dont mess with me.<br /><br />Dfrank

 

[dfrank]

you are a ***<i>Ad Hominem Deleted</i>*** like the rest. Dont mess with me.<br /><br />Dfrank

 

[dfrank]

Yevaud,<br /><br />I grow weary of BS. If you want to talk to me, just ask a question. You may wonder who you are. I know who I am<br /><br />Dfrank<br />

 

[dfrank]

Yevaud,<br /><br />Do you speak English?<br /><br />Dfrank<br />

 

[dfrank]

hello,<br /><br />Anybody there? Just sitting here waiting.<br /><br />Dfrank<br /><br />

 

[dfrank]

I guess not. We just want to act like we know something, LOL<br /><br />Dfrank

 

[a_lost_packet_]

dfrank,<br /><br />A lot of people are asking you questions. Yet, you continue giving the same responses. I will summarize them for you:<br /><br />_______________________________________________________________________________<br />You're an atmospheric scientist.<br /><br />You work(ed) for NOAA.<br /><br />You were present during the famous Viking mission in, what I like to call, a "rat-rig." (Com truck)<br /><br />You watched them turn the TV tint dial yielding a red sky from what you claim is the "real" blue one.<br /><br />You are 97 years young.<br /><br />Your a meteorologist. (Practicing?)<br />________________________________________________________________________________<br /><br />There that is done. Now that we have that behind us and it is here, preserved for posterity in one post so you do not have to remind anyone, we can move forward.<br /><br />Would you explain the conditions necessary for an atmosphere to appear "blue" to human eyes? Would you please explain how those same atmospheric conditions existed on Mars at the time of the Viking missions? <br /><br />(This should include the components of Rayleigh scattering and atmospheric effects.)<br /><br />Because of your contention with previously offered material and evidence counter to your claim, I am completely omitting them for the present in order for you to be able to "have your say." However, if you are unwilling or unable to answer this question then I propose that you have no other choice but to draw on the direct evidence listed in this thread and the previous one which offers effective counters for your claim. None of the previous evidence offered against your assumption has been rebutted and, one can assume, it stands on its own merit. Either provide the <b>mechanism</b> for your claim or concede your assumption is not credible.<br /><br />Please, answer the two questions above. Thank you. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

Let me also ask that such an explanation be specific to the local conditions at the time of the disputed picture(s). We all know why Earth's sky is blue and we also know that it's not always blue every place and every time you look. Put some pollution in the air and I can see some nice red sky at sunset. So what were the Mar's local conditions at the time of the picture(s). <br /><br /><br />Expecting pictures of the Martian sky to be blue during a Martian duststorm is a nonstarter. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>

 

[bobw]

You and a_l_p just need to hang out more at AlienzPwnMarz.com and get with the program because it is WAY too complicated to explain to total n00bz like you two. <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> <br /><br />I am sure of the above because I am old too. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[dfrank]

A lost packet,<br /><br />You seem to be traveling down that same road.<br /><br />You're an atmospheric scientist? I say :YES<br />You work(ed) for NOAA? YES, Still do<br />You were present during the famous Viking mission in, what I like to call, a "rat-rig." (Com truck), Don’t know what that means? If it means they was looking at me for comm. Data, then I guess yes.<br />You watched them turn the TV tint dial yielding a red sky from what you claim is the "real" blue one. I would say the sky was blue the guy turned the knob and it was pink.<br />You are 97 years young, yea that sucks. Not much time left. I had fun.<br />Your a meteorologist. (Practicing?) Don’t know about practicing. I will say I am the best there has been and IMHO the best there will ever be.<br /><br />Would you explain the conditions necessary for an atmosphere to appear "blue" to human eyes? That would be Raleigh scattering sorry<br /><br />would you please explain how those same atmospheric conditions existed on Mars at the time of the Viking missions? It is just physics. If you look at the images from MRO looking at Jupiter the edges were blue. Someone will find that, thank god.<br /><br />Hope you like that stuff from the old Man, I think when your time gets close you just want to purge.<br /><br />Dfrank<br /><br />

 

[SpaceKiwi]

Dfrank,<br /><br />I've taken the opportunity to review the contents of this thread from Page 1, as an impartial and non-participating observer.<br /><br />As far as I am concerned, your charge that NASA and affiliated parties have deliberately conspired to alter imagery coming down from Mars simply holds no water. Moreover, several participants in this thread have gone to patient and persistant lengths to explain to you both the process of image processing, along with advances in technology which make the resultant imaging more accurate than ever before.<br /><br />The unsubstantiated claims you've made in rebuttal in no way satisfy the requirements and standards of debate here at Uplink. It is my friendly suggestion that you either make good on your statements, with verifiable documented proof, or you acknowledge that the overwhelming evidence does not favour your position.<br /><br />Every member of Uplink is held to the same rigorous standard when it comes to scientific discussion here. It is your responsibility to meet these standards if you wish to enter the debate, and age does not form one of the criteria for rules governing this. The ball is in your court, Sir. Again, I suggest you avail yourself of this window of opportunity so that you may continue to be a contributor to this Forum.<br /><br /><br /><br />SpaceKiwi<br />Mission Control Team <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><font size="2" color="#ff0000">Who is this superhero?  Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!</font></em></p><p><em><font size="2">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</font></em></p><p><font size="5">Bring Back The Black!</font></p> </div>

 

[pierround]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><br />Close up of what looked like the hole. <br /><br />http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=42.972502,-122.000427&spn=0.286369,0.617981&t=k&z=10&om=0 <br /><br /><br />Close up of the crater and it might actually be a real crater? <br />Notice that if it is, it is old. <br /><br />It is called Crater Lake, it really is a crater, formed by the collapse of Mt Mazama during an eruption ~5700 BP <br /><br />And where do we build? <br />On the crater. <br /><br />And your point? <br /><br />Closer look at the edge of the crater. <br />http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=43.313188,-121.666718&spn=0.142389,0.30899&t=k&z=11&om=0 <br /><br />This isn’t Crater lake, but another, much larger caldera <br /><br />Even closer. <br />http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=43.31094,-121.711693&spn=0.071197,0.154495&t=k&z=12&om=0 <br /><br />OK <br /><br />Closer look at the hole. Which is a lake. <br />http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=42.937826,-122.136211&spn=0.035817,0.077248&t=k&z=13&om=0 <br /><br />Crater lake again. What’s your point? <br /><br />We look for patterns, Trinity River at Junction City. <br />Sand dunes? <br /><br />http://maps.google.com/</p></blockquote>

 

[pierround]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p> Jon asks and I missed it,<br />How do you know the size of the boulders? Is this an area you know personally? <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Yes I do and many more areas. It is a remarkable sight to see when you are on the ground and looking at them.<br /><br />and this,<br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><br />Who has said these are sand dunes? <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />I did and they do look like it even at the last zoom setting.<br />What I do when looking is to use what I know, and compare with what is unknown, alien environment.<br />At the very least if I hadn’t told you what these were what would you have thought?<br />Be honest.<br /><br />The white spot posted earlier? <br />Could be a chunk of water ice reflecting the light?<br />Or a glitch it’s very small.<br />There should be bigger signs.<br />Let me see if I can find another shot using, the Hirise imager.<br />Thanks for the link.<br />

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<font color="orange">a_lost_packet_ - Would you explain the conditions necessary for an atmosphere to appear "blue" to human eyes?</font><br /><br /><font color="yellow">dfrank - That would be Raleigh scattering sorry </font><br /><br />Yes. But what are the specific conditions of the atmosphere necessary to produce Raleigh scattering? Specifically.<br /><br /><font color="orange">a_lost_packet_ - Would you please explain how those same atmospheric conditions existed on Mars at the time of the Viking missions? </font><br /><br /><font color="yellow">dfrank - It is just physics. If you look at the images from MRO looking at Jupiter the edges were blue. Someone will find that, thank god. </font><br /><br />Exactly. It is just physics. That is what we are, after all, pursuing in this case. We're pursuing an alternate track of "blue sky Mars" than what has been taken before. You do not agree with the evidence presented against your assumption thus far. However, in order to do it justice, you must rebut it, not just deny it. So far, that has not been done. Therefore, we are pursuing a different line of thought: Physics. Specifically, the physics of Rayleigh scattering. This lies directly within your field of expertise. I have provided these questions specifically for that reason. It allows you to deal with information you are intimately familiar with.<br /><br />These are two simple questions with somewhat complex answers. The questions themselves are constructed the way they are for demonstrative purposes. Your answer to them will provide a foundation for further discussion. Or not. The choice is yours. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[dfrank]

a_lost_packet_<br /><br />I could tell you that the curvature and refraction in relation to the aerosols in the visible light spectrum will produce a blue hue in the atmosphere. You get a lot of that on this forum I bet.<br /><br />It is a lot simpler to say look at HST images. Look at the latest MRO from Mars images looking at Jupiter. You will see the blue. Never just listen to words. See for yourself. Men will tell you what they want you to hear.<br /><br />Remember words are weak, look and see.<br /><br />Dfrank<br />

 

[pierround]

Juncture of Valleys with Lineated Fill<br />http://marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov/HiRISE/hirise_images/PSP/orb_001400/PSP_001438_2160/<br /><br />I get nothing Uhmm, This is the picture that I posted from the Odyssey files.<br />It had several interesting sites on that one shot but here with the newer set nothing?I'll find the old link.<br /><br />Here it is,<br /><br />http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA09508.jpg<br />Now I believe on the end of the original thread that <b> I </b> started the cropped thumbnails are near the last pages of what was intersting about this.<br /><br />And unless I missed it, I checked four times nothing on the fractured area with the tailing piles, as I will call them at Lucus Planum on the Hirise site.<br />Which is this link.<br />http://marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov/HiRISE/hirise_images/<br /><br /><br />This is the Odyssey link.<br />http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA09043.jpg<br /><br />

 

[pierround]

Link to my old thread with all the goodies, crops of what's in the slide area.<br /> http://uplink.space.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=phenomena&Number=739016&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=21&vc=1

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<font color="yellow">dfrank - I could tell you that the curvature and refraction in relation to the aerosols in the visible light spectrum will produce a blue hue in the atmosphere. You get a lot of that on this forum I bet. </font><br /><br />That would not be a correct answer. That is not Rayleigh scattering. Your answer is the "pop culture" explanation of Rayleigh scattering and of "blue skies" in general.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">It is a lot simpler to say look at HST images. Look at the latest MRO from Mars images looking at Jupiter. You will see the blue. Never just listen to words. See for yourself. Men will tell you what they want you to hear.</font><br /><br />I have looked at the evidence. I have looked at what has been presented in this thread. Your assumption rests on more than just shaky ground. It has no credible foundation whatsoever in my opinion. You have refused to answer questions, refused to rebut salient evidence and arguments and have failed to demonstrate an understanding of atmospheric effects as they may relate to Mars. This is my opinion but one that I believe is fundamentally reinforced by the evidence within these two threads.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Remember words are weak, look and see. </font><br /><br />I have read the words. The weakness that I see does not rest on the shoulders of your detractors.<br /> <br />The Answer: You did not pass. You failed to answer the question correctly. Rayleigh Scattering on Earth does not primarily involve "aerosols" or any other suspended particulates. It involves gases. Airborne particulates and aerosols reflect light. Depending upon the atmospheric gases, this can result in many different effects. However, gases are the primary force in Rayleigh Scattering. Gas molecules absorb and radiate the light, resulting in an absorption and radiation of blue light on Earth. In order for this to occur, the absorber must be significantly smaller than the wave <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

<i>This is from volcanic origin and the one next to it east might be an old very old impact crater there's a difference Jon.</i><br />Why do you think the large crater to the east is impact? As you say, there is a difference, and the differences allow us to distinguish between the two.<br /><i>I know my geology, but only because I mine.</i><br />Cool! I have spent some time in and round mines myself. What do you mine? Do you have your own workings, or do you work for a company?<br /><br /><i>My point being is, that around all these old structures major fractures have occurred, the crater that's dry to the east north east of the wet one is where if you took the time to zoom farther in is where we build now, why?<br />With out access to water cause by the fracturing, you couldn't build there, it allows for easy access to water and creates streams and lakes.</i> <br />Rocks everywhere are fractured and these are often preferentially eroded to form valleys. These control drainage and assist in route planning. But I don’t see how this is germane, sorry.<br /><i>That's no volcanic calderas in my opinion. <br />That looks more like a strike.</i><br /><br />Why? Can you list the criteria you use to differentiate an impact from a caldera? No impact crater has been reported in the area, and it’s a well studied region. Since you seem to know the area can you look at a geology map? It might have more information about the feature.<br /> <br /><i>What went on in this area to bring people to such a remote spot in the wilderness are metals Jon. <br />Silver and Gold which any advanced civilizations would need to get were we are at today electronics.</i><br /><br />OK. Although of course in the Pacific NW of the US trapping and forestry were also major reasons for development.<br /><br /><i>Now the link at Coffee creek and trinity lake where the tailings are at the edge of the lake if you bothered to look in the lake where the digging occurred it cut channels, but not much compared to</i> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>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</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[billslugg]

<font color="yellow">By all means. But come up with rigorous criteria for distinguishing artificial from natural features first. </font>This is going to be tough, but I'll give it a shot.<br /><br />We should recognize that quantum mechanics posits that any collection and arrangement of particles has some finite probability of occurring by chance. (Monkeys at typewriters.)<br /><br />1) Any feature which could not have been created by natural processes, within the age of the universe.<br />An example would be a Chevy on Mars.<br /><br />2) A feature that could be natural, but can be shown to exploit intelligent purpose.<br />Example would be the Nazca lines, or a group of rocks displaying Pythagorean theorum. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[lsbd]

<font color="yellow">Pretty outrageous claim. <br /><br />Well, you made it. <br /><br />What evidence can you provide that you are <br />"the best meteorologist this world has ever known" </font><br /><br />He told you once, you son of a gun, he's the best that's ever been.<br /><br />then he played "fire on the mountain run boys run"<br />"the devils in the house with the risin' sun"

 

[MeteorWayne]

"I grow weary of BS."<br /><br />So do we!! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

And I'll bet he's a great fiddle player too! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

.... just so long as he doesn't ask me to squeal like a pig .... <img src="/images/icons/shocked.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>