Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
More Water Found On Mars!
#21
Armadillo Wrote:Besides, if Mars once had life it might have oil.

Whoa!

*makes note to invest in pipeline manufacturing*
I know you think you understand what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!
Reply
#22
JohnWho Wrote:
Armadillo Wrote:Besides, if Mars once had life it might have oil.

Whoa!

*makes note to invest in pipeline manufacturing*
---------------------------------
Yes.

And if it did not have life, it might still have oil if you believe in the abiotic oil theory like John L. et al.

/track_snake
Reply
#23
And there's even more to this. I wonder what other incentive will be needed to cause us to want to go there and actually check it out, with boots on the ground?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Have a Gneiss Day!
Reply
#24
Maybe a comet hit, and for a brief bit, deposited significant water on Mars. Big canyons don't form with dribbles of water flowing for a "long time".

In the original picture, perhaps the black splotch was an oil spill. More good news.

I suppose the theory is that much of the old water on Mars sunk into the soil and is now there for recovery by aspiring astronauts. That assumes there is soil of some depth on Mars, otherwise there won't be much water.

What would a pint of Mars water fetch on earth? You can state your answer in US dollars or euros, or even Zimbabwe dollars
Jefferson: I place economy among the first and important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our choice between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.
Reply
#25
Armadillo Wrote:Awesome photos.
When is humanity going to stop messing around in orbit and send people there.
To do what? Burn your taxdollars without any benefits for you? There's been water on Mars, what great news of far reaching consequences for mankind! One could assume there's water everywhere, since it traditionally contains the elements H and O.
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply
#26
quadrat Wrote:
Armadillo Wrote:Awesome photos.
When is humanity going to stop messing around in orbit and send people there.
To do what? Burn your taxdollars without any benefits for you? There's been water on Mars, what great news of far reaching consequences for mankind! One could assume there's water everywhere, since it traditionally contains the elements H and O.

One of the main benefits of space exploration and colonization is the survival of humankind. It only takes one asteroid to wipe out our civilization on Earth.
It makes sense, if we value our species, to create self sustaining outposts on other planets and ultimately other star systems.
Different eyes see different things. Different hearts beat on different strings.
But there are times for you and me when all such things agree.
-Geddy Lee, Rush.
Reply
#27
Are you a Steven Hawking fan? He advocates the same thing.
Jefferson: I place economy among the first and important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our choice between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.
Reply
#28
Alost every SF author I've ever read has made that point.
Reply
#29
Armadillo Wrote:
quadrat Wrote:
Armadillo Wrote:Awesome photos.
When is humanity going to stop messing around in orbit and send people there.
To do what? Burn your taxdollars without any benefits for you? There's been water on Mars, what great news of far reaching consequences for mankind! One could assume there's water everywhere, since it traditionally contains the elements H and O.

One of the main benefits of space exploration and colonization is the survival of humankind. It only takes one asteroid to wipe out our civilization on Earth.
It makes sense, if we value our species, to create self sustaining outposts on other planets and ultimately other star systems.
You sure humans could survive on a distant planet? If it can carry life, it carries life. Their microorganisms would probably wipe out humans without adapted immune system within hours. Big asteroids come down every 100 million years or so, you can neglect the risk within the next 100 years, and if humans go on and destroy the environment for the sake of profits for a few, there is no need for an asteroid to do the job. So, if the survival of the species is on stake, is it not better to preserve the planet we have? And develope some big nuke to shoot such a bloody thing down if it dares to approach.

John,
if you want to know how water could come to alien worlds, your abiotic oil theory isn't so bad if you take water instead.
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply
#30
Whoa! This thread is old, it has StereoMike and Ghoullio's posts on it!

Oh yea, cool thread I guess. Just old...
Reply
#31
WmLambert Wrote:Alost every SF author I've ever read has made that point.

Even SF author's such as myself, who has never written anything, have made that point.

The key to mankind's survival is to get away from mankind.
I know you think you understand what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!
Reply
#32
Gunnen4u Wrote:Whoa! This thread is old, it has StereoMike and Ghoullio's posts on it!

Oh yea, cool thread I guess. Just old...

I always try to go back and add to existing threads, when possible. Hey, I can't expect others to do the same thing, if I won't set the example, right? Besides, it just makes sense, because all the 'like' information is all in one thread. Wink1
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Have a Gneiss Day!
Reply
#33
quadrat Wrote:You sure humans could survive on a distant planet? If it can carry life, it carries life. Their microorganisms would probably wipe out humans without adapted immune system within hours.
Alien microbes are probably based on such different biology than ours that they would not effect us.

Quote:Big asteroids come down every 100 million years or so, you can neglect the risk within the next 100 years, and if humans go on and destroy the environment for the sake of profits for a few, there is no need for an asteroid to do the job. So, if the survival of the species is on stake, is it not better to preserve the planet we have? And develope some big nuke to shoot such a bloody thing down if it dares to approach.
Yes we can nuke an asteroid if we find it soon enough. If it comes from the direction of the Sun we would never see it coming.
There are other risks as well that we can do nothing about, except get out of the way. A near by super nova (within 100 light years) or x-ray burst would distroy life on Earth. A CME from the Sun toward the Earth would distroy our civilaztion.
A brown dwarf star or rogue planet can pass through our solar system and disrupt the orbits.
There is a nebula heading toward our solar system. This nebula may contain stellar cores which will disrupt our orbits.
Different eyes see different things. Different hearts beat on different strings.
But there are times for you and me when all such things agree.
-Geddy Lee, Rush.
Reply
#34
Armadillo Wrote:There is a nebula heading toward our solar system. This nebula may contain stellar cores which will disrupt our orbits.

Shh...

do not tell Al Gore!
I know you think you understand what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!
Reply
#35
track_snake Wrote:
JohnWho Wrote:
Armadillo Wrote:Besides, if Mars once had life it might have oil.

Whoa!

*makes note to invest in pipeline manufacturing*
---------------------------------
Yes.

And if it did not have life, it might still have oil if you believe in the abiotic oil theory like John L. et al.

/track_snake

You sure you are neutral on this? Wink1

Oil is NOT a fossil fuel and AGW is non-science

By Online Monday, July 14, 2008


by Peter J. Morgan

EXCERPT:

We all grew up believing that oil is a fossil fuel, and just about every day this ‘fact’ is mentioned in newspapers and on TV. However, let us not forget what Lenin said – “A lie told often enough becomes truth.” It was in 1757 that the great Russian scholar Mikhailo V. Lomonosov enunciated the hypothesis that oil might originate from biological detritus. The scientists who first rejected Lomonsov’s hypothesis, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, were the famous German naturalist and geologist Alexander von Humboldt and the French chemist and thermodynamicist Louis Joseph Gay-Lussac, who together enunciated the proposition that oil is a primordial material erupted from great depth, and is unconnected with any biological matter near the surface of the Earth.

With the development of chemistry during the nineteenth century, and following particularly the enunciation of the second law of thermodynamics by Clausius in 1850, Lomonosov’s biological hypothesis came inevitably under attack. In science, a hypothesis is merely somebody’s attempt to explain something. It is merely that – an attempt. In the scientific method, a hypothesis is also an open invitation for somebody else to discredit it by using physical evidence to demonstrate that the hypothesis is flawed, or incorrect – that is how scientific knowledge is advanced. Einstein is reputed to have remarked that just one fact was all that was needed to invalidate his theory of relativity.

The great French chemist Marcellin Berthelot particularly scorned the hypothesis of a biological origin for petroleum. Berthelot first carried out experiments involving, among others, a series of what are now referred to as Kolbe reactions and demonstrated the generation of petroleum by dissolving steel in strong acid. He produced the suite of n-alkanes and made it plain that such were generated in total absence of any “biological” molecule or process. Berthelot’s investigations were later extended and refined by other scientists, including Biasson and Sokolov, all of whom observed similar phenomena and likewise concluded that petroleum was unconnected to biological matter.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3952

:lol:
Reply
#36
JohnWho Wrote:
Armadillo Wrote:There is a nebula heading toward our solar system. This nebula may contain stellar cores which will disrupt our orbits.

Shh...

do not tell Al Gore!

Why not?

He would not know what a nebula is anyway since he too busily proposes nebulus crap here on old mother earth.

8)
Reply
#37
sunsettommy Wrote:Why not?

He would not know what a nebula is anyway since he too busily proposes nebulus crap here on old mother earth.

8)

There is a difference between a gas cloud and a wind bag.
As Gary Lloyd said, "When the government’s boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence."
Reply
#38
Here is where I think that both sides go off and create a wrong impression. One side states that the fossil fuel theory is a myth, and the other states that it is not. One is either all wrong or all right. I personally don't buy it.

In my opinion, fossil fuels exist as well as abiotic fuels. To my thinking clearly coal and peat are from fossils mostly. Perhaps oil as well. But the truth is that there is just too much oil in the ground to have been caused by decaying flora and fauna from the last several hundred million years. It's just not possible.

When all is said and done, naturally there will be a whole lot more said than done. But in the end, it will not matter which side is correct. All that hydrocarbon in the earth is either there, or it isn't. I say that it is! And frankly, I don't care if Pepe is right, or Tommy. I don't really care. I just view this thing Holistically. And I say that there is a whole lot more oil, down there, than many would believe. All that we have to do is just go and get it.

That is all!!
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Have a Gneiss Day!
Reply
#39
sunsettommy Wrote:
JohnWho Wrote:
Armadillo Wrote:There is a nebula heading toward our solar system. This nebula may contain stellar cores which will disrupt our orbits.

Shh...

do not tell Al Gore!

Why not?

He would not know what a nebula is anyway since he too busily proposes nebulus crap here on old mother earth.

8)

I am curious, which nebula are you all referring? Is there really one headed out way, and if so, do you have a link? And is it related to this story? Inquiring minds, ie my own, would like to know.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Have a Gneiss Day!
Reply
#40
scpg02 Wrote:
sunsettommy Wrote:Why not?

He would not know what a nebula is anyway since he too busily proposes nebulus crap here on old mother earth.

8)

There is a difference between a gas cloud and a wind bag.

What about a pompous gasbag?

:lol:
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)