Were there puddles in Endurance Crater?

[jaxtraw]

I feel quite honoured to be one of the first people in the world to see a remnant of Mars' "petrified forest" <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" />

 

[anthmartian]

*slaps head* Now i've gone and done it! I just gave New Scientist their cover for next month! *LOL* <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em>"Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star, or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?"</em></font></p><p><font color="#33cccc"><strong>Han Solo - 1977 - A long time ago in a galaxy far far away....</strong></font></p><p><br /><br />Click Here And jump over to my site.<br /></p> </div>

 

[h2ouniverse]

Anth,<br />Btw, more seriously, what's that? A post-like stone or a flat stone?

 

[3488]

Is it a flat layered slab, seen from the edge?<br /><br />I am off to bed now.<br /><br />Good night everyone.<br /><br />Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>

 

[anthmartian]

I agree. It looks like a layered flattish slab, edge on. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em>"Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star, or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?"</em></font></p><p><font color="#33cccc"><strong>Han Solo - 1977 - A long time ago in a galaxy far far away....</strong></font></p><p><br /><br />Click Here And jump over to my site.<br /></p> </div>

 

[odysseus145]

Here is a pretty good write-up about it by Emily Lakdawalla. It would have been an incredible find if it were true. I guess even New Scientist makes mistakes. Although they should have done a bit more research. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[exoscientist]

New Scientist is written by journalists, not scientists. It should not be regarded like it's a peer-reviewed scientific journal.<br /> Also, I'm sure there will be printed in its pages numerous responses to this article demonstrating its unlikelihood.<br /><br /><br /> Bob Clark <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[exoscientist]

Anthmartian, your image you posted is too dark. That's probably because this image was composed using the near-infrared channel for the red when making the RGB composition.<br /> Even if you brighten the image the colors are off because the "blueberries" appear too red. They should be a greyish color.<br /><br /><br /> Bob Clark <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<font color="yellow">"New Scientist is written by journalists, not scientists."</font><br /><br />But it is very disappointing to see them sink to the level<br />of tabloid journalism. Real journalists would look into the<br />story of how and why such a ridiculous theory, based on<br />simple-minded arguments could be presented by scientists(???)<br />to other scientists. I hope there is a follow up story -- and <br />and some meas culpa. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[anthmartian]

exoscientist : Both red filters the Rovers use for RGB sets are from near infrared i believe. Although, one is closer to the visible spectrum than the other.<br /><br />As for too dark? I admit, my images are sometimes darker than the mainstream pictures. But, that is how i perceive Mars to look ( it is a personal choice of mine i guess, i could make them brighter with very little effort. ). many people forget how far away it is from the Sun. We have been used to unnaturally light Mars images in the past in my view.<br /><br />Which software did you use to lighten the images? I have just read your post and tried lightening to have a look at this red effect, and i am not seeing it turn red at all even increasing brightness up to +50%. If you have an LCD monitor, maybe that is effecting how the image looks. CRT is a little better in my view.<br /><br />I know the Blue Berry's show up blue in many colour images, sometimes they do in mine, but often they take on a look of being slightly dusted with the familiar Mars coloured dust. Seeing these Blue berry's in other RGB versions does allow too much blue through, it is a useful tool for enhancing certain mineral etc, many false colour views certainly look more blue than in my images.<br /><br />I have read the debate raging on another space forum, where my images have been linked too. *L* It has been fun reading it!<br /><br />The colour images i have posted are as close as i can get, going by the advice i have picked up over the years, mxed up with a bit of reading on the Martian environment. <br /><br />I term them "true" colour. I need a slap on the wrist. because nobody can say that. All i know is, mine are a lot closer to true than Levin's.<br /><br />Bottom line is, this is my best guess. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em>"Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star, or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?"</em></font></p><p><font color="#33cccc"><strong>Han Solo - 1977 - A long time ago in a galaxy far far away....</strong></font></p><p><br /><br />Click Here And jump over to my site.<br /></p> </div>

 

[anthmartian]

Here is a section from the first image posted, which has been lightened.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em>"Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star, or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?"</em></font></p><p><font color="#33cccc"><strong>Han Solo - 1977 - A long time ago in a galaxy far far away....</strong></font></p><p><br /><br />Click Here And jump over to my site.<br /></p> </div>

 

[jaxtraw]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>As for too dark? I admit, my images are sometimes darker than the mainstream pictures. But, that is how i perceive Mars to look ( it is a personal choice of mine i guess, i could make them brighter with very little effort. ). many people forget how far away it is from the Sun. We have been used to unnaturally light Mars images in the past in my view.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />That's quite an interesting problem, because brightness, like visual perception in general, is subjective. The eye has an enormous dynamic range (we can see in blazing equatorial sunlight, and still make out details in a room lit by a single small LED) and adjusts itself. So I think it must be quite difficult for anyone to decide how bright an image "should" be. Mars is at about 1.5AU, so the solar irradiance should be about 1/2.25(?).<br /><br />Lowell once calculated that the Mars surface temperature should be "as balmy as Southern England", gawd bless 'im. While that's rather wide of the mark, I'd think the brightness of the Sun might be equivalent at the very least to a dull day in this sceptred isle <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[alexblackwell]

Story retracted

 

[MeteorWayne]

Wow, they must read SDC, since it was trashed pretty quickly here <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <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>

 

[alexblackwell]

They could also have read UMSF; the story was quickly dismantled over there, too.

 

[jaxtraw]

"The reporter had tried to contact numerous outside researchers, including those on the MER rover mission, for their analysis of the claim, but his calls were not immediately returned."<br /><br />...so we went ahead and published it anyway.

 

[robnissen]

I wouldn't be too hard on the reporter, he is a reporter not a scientist. I think most reporters, if they had a "scoop" of this size, would quickly try to confirm it, but if it couldn't be confirmed immediately, they would just run with it. No reporter wants his "scoop" "scooped," while he is busy trying to get it confirmed.

 

[alexblackwell]

<i>I wouldn't be too hard on the reporter, he is a reporter not a scientist. I think most reporters, if they had a "scoop" of this size, would quickly try to confirm it, but if it couldn't be confirmed immediately, they would just run with it.</i><br /><br />Perhaps, but that still is no excuse for sloppy journalism.

 

[jaxtraw]

Well, this kind of thing bothers me somewhat. One could say a lot here, but I think it's sufficient to ask why the published the article, and the photo, without apparently even questioning the provenance of said photograph. If they didn't know where it was from, how could they know it was even a genuine Mars photograph?<br /><br />It didn't take long (seconds) for mere amateurs on the internets to note the false impression created by it obviously being false colour- and those same wily amateurs found where it came from. A reporter couldn't do this?

 

[MeteorWayne]

Many people here know far more science than most reporters. <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>

 

[jaxtraw]

Well, we expect financial journalists to understand the markets, and political journalists to understand politics- why can't they recruit science journalists with scientific understanding or even a science degree under their belt? My ex, a geophysicist who went into science publishing, can't be the only scientist to escape academia <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />If it's any consolation I guess, rubbishy science reporting in the press is nothing new, as evinced by this quote from this excellent online book about the history of the study of Mars-<br /><br />"The most important observations of the season were of bright projections into the darkness beyond the terminator line. A visitor on one of the observatory's public nights had first called the attention of Holden, Schaeberle, and Keeler to one of these projections on July 5. Keeler's drawing the next night showed two projections (fig. 10), which presented "much the same appearance as the summits of lunar mountains and craters when first visible outside the terminator of the moon."31 This plausible explanation was ignored by the press, which made something far more sensational out of them: they were nothing less than signal flashes from the Martians! Inspired by such reports, someone who was looking---perhaps too obsessively---at a canal-filled map of the planet later thought he was able to discern the Hebrew letters making up the word Shajdai, the Hebrew name for the Almighty. "This observer was not a devout believer. He was a frank agnostic, and his observation was, therefore, unbiased by any religious zeal," reported the San Francisco Chronicle:<br /><br /> There is a wide field for thought and speculation in this appearance of the name of God standing out unmistakably on the surface of a sister planet. A study of the accompanying illustrations will make it plain how clearly the word stands out. There can be no doubt

 

[robnissen]

<font color="yellow">It didn't take long (seconds) for mere amateurs on the internets to note the false impression created by it obviously being false colour- and those same wily amateurs found where it came from. A reporter couldn't do this? </font><br /><br />While I agree that this was sloppy journalism, I am somewhat surprised that people here are dumping on the reporter, rather than the "scientists" who first reported this clap-trap. Perhaps a reporter could have, and should have done what you suggested, but even more so the "scientists" who announced this alleged finding. I believe the "scientists" were actually engineers, but there is still no excuse for them not bothering to do any investigation about the photograph before they announced their "blockbuster."<br /><br />

 

[MeteorWayne]

Excellent point, Rob.<br />Sloppy science, sloppy journalism. <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>

 

[alexblackwell]

<i>While I agree that this was sloppy journalism, I am somewhat surprised that people here are dumping on the reporter, rather than the "scientists" who first reported this clap-trap.</i><br /><br />I don't think it's an either/or issue; both sides are equally at fault here. The two scientists/engineers have already ruined their reputations with this fiasco, so "dumping" on them further is probably pointless. Chandler, on the other hand, is likely to continue on unscathed to the next "scoop."

 

[3488]

Hi AlexBlackwell.<br /><br />Very true indeed. This rush to publish a sesationalist story has destroyed the careers<br />of at least three scientists, to satisfy the criteria of what is a commercial publication.<br /><br />Did those who composed the article, did any real research? <br /><br />Probably not. The area within Endurance Crater concerned, is tilted, what, <br />say 45 degrees from the horizontal (difficult to tell from the images alone).<br /><br />That alone would prevent pooling. Even under 38% gravity.<br /><br />Also did Opportunity drive through that area. Yes. The track mark are consistent<br />with prints left in a fine coherent dusty layer.<br /><br />True, this does not rule out water being there in the very distant past (more likely running downhill).<br /><br />Another thing I found very disappointing was that they used false colour images,<br />giving the impression that Mars is far more Earthlike than it really is.<br /><br />Unfortunately, this will provide extra ammo, for those who claim, that NASA is hiding<br />'the truth' & other such pseudo scientific nonsense. <br /><br />Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>