Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: CAP1 on May 17, 2010, 09:23:06 PM
-
it seems that we're warming the earth so much, that we're warming other planets too. :devil
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2007/2006GL028764.shtml
-
:noid
-
This OP took guts...
:rofl
Skuzzy might be along soon now to lock it based on some rule or another...
Every time I watch Deadliest Catch Opie Season I can't help but laugh at the AGW nonsense the public has been fed...
:bolt:
-
To borrow a phrase . . .
"It's the sun, stupid."
-
To borrow a phrase . . .
"It's the sun, stupid."
i know. that's my point. :noid :neener:
trying to have a lil fun with this.
-
This OP took guts...
:rofl
Skuzzy might be along soon now to lock it based on some rule or another...
Every time I watch Deadliest Catch Opie Season I can't help but laugh at the AGW nonsense the public has been fed...
:bolt:
i hope not.
-
:lol
-
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnndddddddddddddddddd dddddd IN! :bolt:
-
Here's more great material for you: http://www.trutv.com/shows/conspiracy_theory/mysterious_ways.html (http://www.trutv.com/shows/conspiracy_theory/mysterious_ways.html)
-
it seems that we're warming the earth so much, that we're warming other planets too. :devil
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2007/2006GL028764.shtml
Damn the Martians irresponsibility, how many times have they been told to switch to hybrid saucers.? :D
-
In Feynmans book "Surely your joking Mr Feynman" he talks about 'fools' that give talks at conferences. They talk and talk but they dont say anything and they never ask questions and they cant answer any either or if they do its the same thing over and over again. As Feynman says these fools are worse than your normal every day variety of fool because the normal sort know how foolish they are and so they ask questions that mean something. But the over bloated sort wont accept that they are fools and so they walk around with their noses held high and pretend they dont need to ask any questions because they discovered everything of any importance themselves.
Of course I had to think of Gore when I read that. :D
-
Don't worry, if Al Gore has his way, we will be paying taxes to avert the disaster that will destroy all the homes of those martians and we will be taxed to support Martian Credits. :mad:
-
Don't worry, if Al Gore has his way, we will be paying taxes to avert the disaster that will destroy all the homes of those martians and we will be taxed to support Martian Credits. :mad:
yea, but what about the plutonian whales? there's been reports of whales falling off of pluto, so far that they've been hitting other planets, causing ecological disasters there as well.
all because the earth is getting so hot. :noid :D
-
I have never understood the desire to go to Mars even though I like the idea of sending robots to explore the planet. You see the chemistry of the planet there is such that any organic material is instantly consumed by the caustic environment. There isnt really another planet in our system that is as friendly to life as the one we are on. Our scientists also believe that the only way we can begin to understand events from our environmental past (read the last ice age) then we most certainly will have to study the polar regions of at least one other planet in the same system because there is not enough local evidence to tell us everything. So unless Al Gore is an outstanding example of true genius then he really is full of hot air.
I accept that. :D
-
:rofl
-
There isnt really another planet in our system that is as friendly to life as the one we are on.
I don't know which planet you are on, but mine is not friendly at all. At least on mars people are not trying to kill me.
-
I don't know which planet you are on, but mine is not friendly at all. At least on mars people are not trying to kill me.
iiiiii dunno about that. from everything i've seen, the martian natives seem pretty unfriendly to us earthicans. :D
-
I don't know which planet you are on, but mine is not friendly at all. At least on mars people are not trying to kill me.
Only because there is nothing organic there at all. Take off a spacesuit on Mars and its instant combustion. It turns out NASA and JPL didnt have to worry about their vehicles contaminating the environment of Mars because Mars is capable of sterilizing anything that comes into contact with it... at least on the surface. I doubt there is life there at all but if there is it is very deep within the crust and I doubt even that is possible.
-
There is a combustion problem on mars? Funny and here I thought that if you were to remove any protective gear there you would suffocate, freeze, and die from extreme low pressure related injuries. Turns out that you will just burst into flames. :huh
-
There is a combustion problem on mars? Funny and here I thought that if you were to remove any protective gear there you would suffocate, freeze, and die from extreme low pressure related injuries. Turns out that you will just burst into flames. :huh
that's from the martian death ray.
-
(http://i44.tinypic.com/9gisf4.jpg)
-
:rofl oh god
-
There is a combustion problem on mars? Funny and here I thought that if you were to remove any protective gear there you would suffocate, freeze, and die from extreme low pressure related injuries. Turns out that you will just burst into flames. :huh
You mean you didnt learn that in school? Any organic material or their chemical traces are not chemically stable on Mars. And NO its not like you would think of 'burning' here on Earth but yes it is combustion. This was revealed in 1969 with the chemical 'lab tests' of Viking when the experiment lander type probes attempted to culture the Martian soil.
FAIL. The dreams and visions of Carl Sagan ended right then and there but he still pushed for further missions in a vain attempt to establish any evidence. Probably there has not been life on Mars ever but certainly for 500 billion years at least.
You can read about the results of all the missions in the books and journals of Bruce Murray of both JPL and NASA.
-
Only because there is nothing organic there at all. Take off a spacesuit on Mars and its instant combustion. It turns out NASA and JPL didnt have to worry about their vehicles contaminating the environment of Mars because Mars is capable of sterilizing anything that comes into contact with it... at least on the surface. I doubt there is life there at all but if there is it is very deep within the crust and I doubt even that is possible.
Richard C. Hoagland disagrees with you.
(http://www.usac.it/I%20MISTERI%20DI%20MARTE/Image1.jpg)
-
Probably there has not been life on Mars ever but certainly for 500 billion years at least.
OK I disagree here. The Martian rovers proved that the surface of Mars was once covered with great oceans. It's pretty basic, where there is water there is life. I'd bet that at one point Mars was teeming with little microbial ocean life forms.
-
Taken from the Merriam-Webster site.
Combustion
Main Entry: com·bus·tion
Pronunciation: \kəm-ˈbəs-chən\
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1 : an act or instance of burning
2 : a usually rapid chemical process (as oxidation) that produces heat and usually light; also : a slower oxidation (as in the body)
3 : violent agitation : tumult
Taken fromhttp://www.jpl.nasa.gov/jplhistory/voyage/index.php (http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/jplhistory/voyage/index.php)
"The nuclear-powered landers carried instruments for meteorology, seismology, magnetic studies and imaging. They also carried a set of biological experiments intended to detect life. The life detection experiments were the most popular aspect of the Vikings and the most controversial. The results were ambiguous. JPL's director, Bruce Murray, believed that the experiments had shown the surface was so oxidizing that it was self-sterilizing, meaning nothing could grow there. A minority of Murray's colleagues disagreed. No further life-oriented experiments have reached Mars as of 2006, so this controversy is unresolved."
Also the Viking probes weren't launched until 1975.
-
Probably there has not been life on Mars ever but certainly for 500 billion years at least.
And here I thought our solar system was only 4.5 billion years old and the universe only about 17. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
-
Only because there is nothing organic there at all. Take off a spacesuit on Mars and its instant combustion. It turns out NASA and JPL didnt have to worry about their vehicles contaminating the environment of Mars because Mars is capable of sterilizing anything that comes into contact with it... at least on the surface. I doubt there is life there at all but if there is it is very deep within the crust and I doubt even that is possible.
I believe it is. Many caves on Earth have microbial forms of life. It is thought that this is where life held on during rough times in our planets history (well, in the sea too, but that's neither here nor there). There is obviously evidence of water erosion on the surface of Mars, I don't think its much of a stretch to suggest that there are caves, and there may well be life there holding out, waiting for better surface conditions, just like what happened here on Earth.
Mars' core may be dead, but it takes a long time for something as big as a planet to completely cool down. There may still be liquid water under there. We just gotta go there and dig.
And don't forget that there are forms of life that can remain dormant, not dead, for eons. Bring it into a friendly environment and it wakes back up.
As you can see I'm pretty optimistic when it comes to this subject. :aok
-
Okay sorry I was speaking about Mariners 6 and 7 and subsequent visits by Viking.
No there has never been water on the surface of Mars. I dont know where you got that except in fanciful pre-mission predictments.
From "Journey into Space" by Bruce Murray Chapter 3 Pg 73:
Vikings GCMS results proved those speculations (superoxidized materials might be accumulating everywhere at the top of the soil) insightful. Whenever organic material is delivered to the soil of Mars - for example by the impact of an organic-rich meteorite - it is rapidly burned (that is oxidized) by the reactive Martian soil. Thus it is converted to carbon dioxide gas and then blends indistinguishably into the regular atmosphere of Mars. The mineral grains or vapors responsible for this process are then quickly recharged back to their superoxidized state by more ultraviolet radiation.
Mars atmosphere is therefore self-sterilizing to a degree totally unexpected before Viking. For this reason the absence of organic compounds in the Viking tests is a strong indication of the absence of life over all of that desolate planets surface. Organic material - that is carbon based compounds - simply cannot survive in the Martian soil. Neither microbes nor their organic chemical traces are chemically stable there. Viking gave us more definitive answers than anyone had anticipated. Mars very probably has been lifeless for at least the last several billion years.
E25280 - according to what I have read a few billion years would just get us to the point where stars can begin to form... but who is counting? 200 billion or 3 billion is all the same when you live only about 100 years.
-
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Okay sorry I was speaking about Mariners 6 and 7 and subsequent visits by Viking.
No there has never been water on the surface of Mars. I dont know where you got that except in fanciful pre-mission predictments.
I got it from the data collected by the Martian rovers Spirit and Opportunity. How long ago where Mariner and Viking? How good where their instruments?
C'mon man get with the 21st century. Your quoting out of a book, which is one mans opinion, regarding data from missions that are 30-35 yrs old.
Do me a favor, go to http://scholar.google.com (http://scholar.google.com) and do a search for "water on Mars" or "Chondrules on Mars" or similar searches and you will find dozens and dozens of recent peer-reviewed papers based on the rover data. There is overwhelming agreement that there was once vast oceans on the surface of Mars.
-
Oceans of what?
Anyway, the 21'st century seems so far to be inable to send a man to the moon :bolt:
-
Oceans of what?
Anyway, the 21'st century seems so far to be inable to send a man to the moon :bolt:
Wait till the Chinese send a few men into space. Suddenly NASA will be flooded in cash to beat them on a second race to the moon/mars.
-
E25280 - according to what I have read a few billion years would just get us to the point where stars can begin to form... but who is counting? 200 billion or 3 billion is all the same when you live only about 100 years.
We see galaxies forming stars about 1 billion years after the big bang. 3 billion years after the bang is the peak of the star formation rate in the universe. It also seems like all galaxies started roughly at the same time but the more massive ones built their stars faster.
-
We see galaxies forming stars about 1 billion years after the big bang. 3 billion years after the bang is the peak of the star formation rate in the universe. It also seems like all galaxies started roughly at the same time but the more massive ones built their stars faster.
yea, but if we don't stop global warming, this galaxy is all going to be destroyed....all because of us.
-
Okay sorry I was speaking about Mariners 6 and 7 and subsequent visits by Viking.
The Mariners to Mars took pictures if the surface, found that the pressure was 1% that of Earth's, and that the temperature was far below the freezing point of water. They didn't land to take any samples. The Viking project was the pretty much the only successful probes to reach the Mars surface and carry out their mission, at the time. The Russian beat the US on getting projects to Mars but the lander portions either missed, crashed, or failed shortly after landing. Most didn't even take any pictures. None worked long enough to run any on board experiments or use the rovers that were on 2 of them. As I and others have stated the thought of the surface of Mars being self-sterilizing due to the presence of oxidizing compounds, is Murray's opinion.
-
Oceans of what?
H2o, there is a ton of geological data collected by the rovers which backs this up, also many scientist now believe that there is frozen water under the Martian poles right now.
Anyway, the 21'st century seems so far to be inable to send a man to the moon :bolt:
It's not that we're unable, it's that we lack the motivation / commitment to do so.
-
it seems that we're warming the earth so much, that we're warming other planets too. :devil
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2007/2006GL028764.shtml
It's hilarious, the flip flop. The same guy who challenges the data collection on earth, through direct observation from weather stations, now posts something to support his opinion, using indirect temperature observations on a planet currently 135 million miles away.
:lol
-
I got it from the data collected by the Martian rovers Spirit and Opportunity. How long ago where Mariner and Viking? How good where their instruments?
C'mon man get with the 21st century. Your quoting out of a book, which is one mans opinion, regarding data from missions that are 30-35 yrs old.
Do me a favor, go to http://scholar.google.com (http://scholar.google.com) and do a search for "water on Mars" or "Chondrules on Mars" or similar searches and you will find dozens and dozens of recent peer-reviewed papers based on the rover data. There is overwhelming agreement that there was once vast oceans on the surface of Mars.
Everyone of those papers are based on evidence that has been REFUTED by experiments performed on the surface of Mars and are even more outdated than actual water on Mars. This is the concept of Percival Lowell for crying out load. Its dead.
Sorry but you cannot say that the 'opinion' of the man actually involved in the projects exploring the surface are overwritten by the 'opinions' of what amounts to 'sci-fi' writers attempting to resurrect their own laboratories long since outdated by the missions themselves.
Mars is dead and we have almost no reason to go there let alone send men there.
-
Not to mention that we still have trouble calibrating the data from our own planet.....
-
It's hilarious, the flip flop. The same guy who challenges the data collection on earth, through direct observation from weather stations, now posts something to support his opinion, using indirect temperature observations on a planet currently 135 million miles away.
He is not disputing the data about earth getting warmer (even acknowledges it), only the "man made" and CO2 interpretations, at least in the national geographic link. But it is true that his own interpretations are based on weak arguments.
Mars is dead and we have almost no reason to go there let alone send men there.
There was no real reason to go to the moon either. The "man on mars" is just a mile stone in a much larger and ambitious plan to be able to exploit space for our needs. If we decide we need to mine in space or build telescopes on the moon or blow up an incoming asteroid the current technological leap is too great. A space program is intended to gradually advance such technologies and/or at least preserve current practical know-how. There is also a huge amount of side benefits from these technologies spreading to other, unexpected earthly technologies. Continuation is critical - soon all the original people who worked on the space program will be retired old seniles and young engineers will have to re-invent everything and go through the same mistakes the elders did.
Man on mars is something easier to sell to the public. A clear short term goal is a good way to advance a very long term project. The real thing is manned space flight regardless of the immediate destination. Sometimes a very broad vision, beyond next year's budget and share holders whines is required and the private market is not likely to be able to make such big leaps on its own.
-
I'd vote for "RETURN TO THE MOON" for the beginning. Mars is a massively bigger project, and the word is that we cannot afford the moon anyway.....
-
Taken from the Merriam-Webster site.
Combustion
Main Entry: com·bus·tion
Pronunciation: \kəm-ˈbəs-chən\
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1 : an act or instance of burning
2 : a usually rapid chemical process (as oxidation) that produces heat and usually light; also : a slower oxidation (as in the body)
3 : violent agitation : tumult
Taken fromhttp://www.jpl.nasa.gov/jplhistory/voyage/index.php (http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/jplhistory/voyage/index.php)
"The nuclear-powered landers carried instruments for meteorology, seismology, magnetic studies and imaging. They also carried a set of biological experiments intended to detect life. The life detection experiments were the most popular aspect of the Vikings and the most controversial. The results were ambiguous. JPL's director, Bruce Murray, believed that the experiments had shown the surface was so oxidizing that it was self-sterilizing, meaning nothing could grow there. A minority of Murray's colleagues disagreed. No further life-oriented experiments have reached Mars as of 2006, so this controversy is unresolved."
Also the Viking probes weren't launched until 1975.
WHAT ARE WE BURNING?!?!?!?!? :x :x :x :x :x
-
It's hilarious, the flip flop. The same guy who challenges the data collection on earth, through direct observation from weather stations, now posts something to support his opinion, using indirect temperature observations on a planet currently 135 million miles away.
:lol
Please Moray, don't jump to conclusions. He may be using the well accepted heating-a/c usage and billing method. There is a rumour that Singer, Ball, et al are proposing that HACUB be made an interplanetary standard.
-
Everyone of those papers are based on evidence that has been REFUTED by experiments performed on the surface of Mars and are even more outdated than actual water on Mars. This is the concept of Percival Lowell for crying out load. Its dead.
Sorry but you cannot say that the 'opinion' of the man actually involved in the projects exploring the surface are overwritten by the 'opinions' of what amounts to 'sci-fi' writers attempting to resurrect their own laboratories long since outdated by the missions themselves.
Mars is dead and we have almost no reason to go there let alone send men there.
:rofl :rofl :rofl
You're crackin' me up man, you're still talking about experiments done 30+ yrs ago. I'm talking about a mission and data collected 3-6 yrs ago. I suppose you'll tell me we never went to the moon in '69 either.
You go call up JPL and tell Steve Squyres and the other scientists who ran the rover missions, that they are what was it " 'sci-fi' writers attempting to resurrect their own laboratories long since outdated by the missions themselves" OK. I'm sure they'll be pleased to know that they are all wrong and the data collected and experiments conducted on their mission between 2-6 yrs ago, are superseded by ones done over 30yrs ago.
Did you pay attention to nothing that Spirit and Opportunity did? NASA's announcement that they had almost unquestionably proven Mars once had liquid water was big news, 4-5 yrs ago. Where you under a rock then?
If there was never liquid water on Mars then explain how these concretions, (photographed and analyzed by Spirit) formed.
(http://astrobio.net/albums/opp/agn.jpg)
And frozen water on Mars is now a FACT confirmed by NASA's Phoenix Mars lander in 2008. Read about it here:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/phoenix/news/phoenix-20080620.html
Pictures of ice receding through sublimation on Mars
(http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/253233main_sol_020_024_change_dodo_v3_516-387.jpg)
notice the little ice chunks in the lower left corner of the trench disappearing.
JPL and NASA are right, you are wrong. There is water on Mars. Sorry.
EDIT: I wrote chondrules in my previous post, I meant concretions. I got my little bb like spheres mixed up.
-
Chalenge will never admit being wrong about anything. The best you will get out of him is no more replies.
-
^ Oh noes - SCIENCE. Of course, they could be faking it. After all, the "scientists" have a vested interest in "proving" that Mars has value. All that grant money from further research will make them all uber-rich.
What was that about Feynman?
-
I have a house full of scientists right now (well 5...). They are a group of geologists and volcanologists that are doing research and sample-taking on the volcano of the erupting EYJAFJALLAJÖKULL, but have been in many corners of the world. They are not rich, and they are doing very long hours on a very dirty job, staying in the cheapest available accommodation. They leave early, come in late, and after their 12 hours they carry on with weighting, analyzing and computing.
The data they yeald will never be 100% accurate for this whole incident. But what I see is people doing a hard work with a lot of sacrifice behind it, - I guess somewhat similar to what Moray does in his field.
But....ignorance is a bliss, and tax money is best spent on land defence, where no science also is needed.
:neener: :bolt:
-
I have a house full of scientists right now (well 5...). They are a group of geologists and volcanologists that are doing research and sample-taking on the volcano of the erupting EYJAFJALLAJÖKULL, but have been in many corners of the world. They are not rich, and they are doing very long hours on a very dirty job, staying in the cheapest available accommodation. They leave early, come in late, and after their 12 hours they carry on with weighting, analyzing and computing.
The data they yeald will never be 100% accurate for this whole incident. But what I see is people doing a hard work with a lot of sacrifice behind it, - I guess somewhat similar to what Moray does in his field.
But....ignorance is a bliss, and tax money is best spent on land defence, where no science also is needed.
:neener: :bolt:
This will simply turn into a "burn Moray thread". The popular view of scientific work is of lazy intelligencia smoking pipes around a coffee table.
There are very few on these boards that could keep up with the amount of work that really happens in science. But, there are plenty here who will tell you how worthless it is.
-
Please Moray, don't jump to conclusions. He may be using the well accepted heating-a/c usage and billing method. There is a rumour that Singer, Ball, et al are proposing that HACUB be made an interplanetary standard.
God, how did I miss this gem. Nice pick up, AKH.
The heating: A/C argument from the last thread 100 page thread.... that's a classic. Absolutely pointless triviality to that "data set", with no correlative power in the least to the hypothesis..... but why make sense? LMAO.
Can't believe I didn't think of this one first... bravo.