MARSIS' findings -- MaxTheKnife off-topic spinoff thread

[JonClarke]

The majority vote 1965-1971 was indeed that Mars was a moon like planet with a wisp of atmosphere. I was round back then. The impact of this of just about everything to do with space was profound - mission planning, scientific attitudes, public interest, political support science fiction were all effected.<br /><br />However 1971 and Mariner 9/Mars 2 & 3 changed everything. Mars once had liquid water, Mars still had large amounts of ice at the poles, and might still have it in the subsurface. The presence of large young volcanoes meant there might be liquid water in the subsurface. This was the dominant view of Mars until the late 90's when MOC showed that water might still flow on the surface now, not just back in the Noachian.<br /><br />The 1971 conceptual revolution was widely publised in newspapers, in National Geographic and other magazines, in TV documentaries, in popular books. It was not just in a few arcane scientific papers. Hoagland was a reputable science and space journalist at the time. He knows this and has no excuse for saying otherwise. The fact that people believe him shows a terrifying ignorance of even the the most popular level literature about Mars. There is no excuse for that level of ignorance if people say they are are interested in Mars. However people like Hoagland capitalise on such ignorance, and do very well as a result.<br /><br />Jon <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>

 

[jatslo]

I just try to look at the facts and hypothecate alternatives without delving into politics or taking sides and positions that are dealing in non-facts or perceptual processes. The main reason I think this way is because the most outlandish craziest perceptions are often true. For example, Einstein dropped out of school, was rejected by the military and viewed as realistically insane for many years.<br /><br />My point is this, although RCH’s perceptions are way out there, there may be a certain degree of accuracy, if you read between the lines. RCH is human, just like the rest of us, and this means that he is not exactly perfect, but he has some of the craziest ideas that I have ever seen, or at least presently seen. They are perceptual processes is all, right? <br /><br />I have some crazy ideas too just ask saiph. He thinks I’m not all there ;o)<br />

 

[jatslo]

Introduction (Para 1)<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Man’s fascination with Mars has led to many fanciful and romantic notions about the planet’s genesis.<br /><br /></font>hat is the truth<font color="yellow"><br /><br />Early popular (and even some scientific) speculations focused on a planet populated by exotic creatures if not warring advanced civilizations; these were based in large part on Lowell’s turn-of-the-Century model of a harsh and frigid Mars, one that was still habitable, though dying.<br /><br /></font>.G. Wells is one example.<font color="yellow"><br /><br />It was not until the 1964 Mariner 4 mission that the general public and the scientific community got their first close-up view of the real Mars -- as Mariner 4 flew by at a distance of 6,118 miles.<br /><br /></font>his is missing a in text citation.<font color="yellow"><br /><br />The 21 images telemetered back to JPL surprisingly revealed a cratered terrain more akin to the lifeless lunar surface than anything on Earth.<br /><br /></font>his is missing a in text citation or evidence.<font color="yellow"><br /><br />With these first insitu spacecraft Mars data, hopes for finding anything approaching another “Earth” elsewhere in this solar system were permanently dashed.<br /><br /></font>ermanently might be to harsh a word, but okay.<font color="yellow"><br /><br />Subsequent missions confirmed that the Martian atmosphere was much too thin and the temperatures too low to allow for the presence of surface liquid water, eliminating almost any remaining hope of finding current life.<br /><br /></font>his is missing a in text citation or evidence.<br /><br />Listen, I really do not see anything worth challenging so far; however, if I were writing a paper similar to this one, I would have lots of examples and in text citations or reference points.<br /><br />Effective marketing of something so controversial, in which this first paragra

 

[decepticon]

I fail to see why anyone would take him so seriously. I look at him as the stand up comic of the solar system.<br /><br />He makes me laugh so much. I love that about him. Let him do what he does. He's good at it. <br /><br /><br />Under all what he says, I see a personal hatred towards JPL. Like a personal vendetta.<br /><br />Did something happen in the past between him and JPL?<br /><br />Out of all of his theory's there be one or two that made me think twice.(I'll keep them to myself <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> ) I just wish he would stop with the crazy planets moving all over the place theory's.<br /><br />

 

[nexium]

None of the 50 posts seem to explain who or what MARSIS is. Please try harder to be user friendly. Neil

 

[jatslo]

This is a RCH spin off thread

 

[centsworth_II]

I'll bump the real (scientific) MARSIS thread back to the top so it's easier to find. I'm glad that all the psudo sfuff has been split off into this separate thread, but it would be better yet if it was put in the Phenomina forum where it belongs. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>