Re: UFOnet: Re: Lou Anne/Alien Footprints
My last comment was probably mis-leading. Yes, there is or was water on
Mars. However, because of the extremely low temperature on Mars I was under
the impression that the water could only exist as either ice or vapour.
None of those states would erode any prints.
Again, maybe I'm wrong. What do other members think?
The World Of Paranormal Investigations
----- Original Message -----
From: "Autymn D. C." <lysdexia@...>
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2000 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: UFOnet: Re: Lou Anne/Alien Footprints
> Subject: UFOnet: Re: Lou Anne/Alien Footprints
> From: Mark Roberts, mrmarkbroberts@...
> >if there were no Martian winds. Remember, as there is currently no water
> >on Mars that we know of, it would be difficult for the prints to erode.
> >Now I'm certainly not an Astronomer or
> What do you mean there's no water on Mars?? Didn't you ever follow the
> UFOnet is an open, international, free news and discussion list devoted
> UFOs, Anomalous Phenomena, Astronomy, Skywatching, SETI, the Latest on
> Aerospace Research and Space Flight, Free & New Energy, Exoscience, etc.
> To subscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
> To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail message to:
> URL: http://www.ufonet.nl/(Dutch)
> Messages to the list-owner: jkumeling@...
> Word voor fl 20,- lid van de UFOnieuwsbrief. Zes maal per jaar in de echte
brievenbus het laatste nieuws uit de ufologie, astronomie, ruimtevaart en
aanverwante onderwerpen. Kijk op www.ufonet.nl!
- Subject: UFOnet: Re: Lou Anne/Alien Footprints
From: Mark Roberts, mrmarkbroberts@...
>if there were no Martian winds. Remember, as there is currently no waterWhat do you mean there's no water on Mars?? Didn't you ever follow the
>on Mars that we know of, it would be difficult for the prints to erode.
>Now I'm certainly not an Astronomer or
- Subject: Re: UFOnet: Re: Lou Anne/Alien Footprints
From: Mark Roberts, mrmarkbroberts@...
>My last comment was probably mis-leading. Yes, there is or was water onI read somewhere that liquid water existed in crater shadows away from
>Mars. However, because of the extremely low temperature on Mars I was under
>the impression that the water could only exist as either ice or vapour.
the sun's reach. Here you go:
Subject: [cydonia] Did scientists NOT want to believe in liquid
water on Mars?
I hope it's OK to post this to the list. I assume that since the list is
closed, copyright concerns don't apply. I thought it would be of
considerable interest, to some people at least. Malin made an incredible
misstatement in the article he wrote for Science Magazine on his
of evidence of liquid water on Mars. I couldn't believe it, but I
the article and he really. Everything the author, Clark, says below is
about the facts of Malin's incorrect statement versus the Viking and
Did scientists NOT want to believe in liquid water on Mars?
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 21:36:56 GMT
From: Robert Clark <rgclark@...>
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Newsgroups: sci.astro, alt.sci.planetary, sci.physics, sci.space.policy
Dr. Ron Levin alerted me to this statement about Mars that appears in
the recent paper by Malin and Edgett suggesting possible liquid water
on Mars, "Evidence for recent Groundwater Seepage and Surface runoff
on Mars", http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/index.html :
"atmospheric pressures are at or below water's triple point vapor
pressure of 6.1 mbar."
Measurements taken by the Viking landers showed the daily pressure
never dropped lower than 6.5 mbar at either lander site during the
entire length of time measurements were taken by the landers, 2 to 4
years. And at the northern site at Utopia Planitia the pressures
frequently reached 10 mbar. The Pathfinder mission confirmed this fact:
surface pressure never dropped below the triple point of water. It is
quite likely that throughout the entire northern hemisphere the surface
pressures are routinely above the triple point of water, except
possibly on the highest peaks on Mars.
Two web sites that give the pressure readings at the Viking and
Pathfinder locations are:
Weather Reports From Mars
Mars Pathfinder Atmospheric Pressure "Movie"
This is a commonly made error and frankly I'm puzzled by it. If
someone who favored Martian life made a statement like "organic
compounds are sure to be found on Mars because they are known to occur
on meteorites that impact Mars", then he would be roundly criticized
because that completely ignores the Viking results. Yet this incorrect
statement about Martian atmospheric pressures, which has been
contradicted by both Viking and Pathfinder, is routinely made even by
scientists who study the Martian climate.
I was astonished to see this on a web page maintained by NASA
scientists who study Martian weather:
"The average atmospheric pressure on Mars is only about 6 millibars
compared to the Earth's average pressure of 1013 millibars. The average
surface temperature on Mars is about -60 deg C compared to the Earth's
15 deg C. Because the atmospheric pressure is low and the temperature
at the surface is generally below the freezing point of water, water
can only exist as ice or vapor."
Is there liquid water on Mars or below its surface?
This page strongly gives the mistaken impression that the pressure on
Mars is usually below the triple point of 6.1 mbar. It does mention
that pressures above this are possible but makes it seem like this is
an exception when actually the exact opposite is the case.
The web page also discusses models that show that even under the right
pressures and temperatures ice would turn to vapor rather than melt to
liquid water. However, such models have been criticized by Drs. Ron and
Gil Levin as making several dubious assumptions in their calculations:
Liquid water and life on Mars
So why is it that scientists familiar with the Viking and Pathfinder
atmospheric results still say that the pressure on Mars is below the
triple point of water 6.1 mbar? In my opinion it is because scientists
did not want there to be liquid water on Mars.
The conclusion in regards to the Viking missions was "no life". Then
to support that conclusion it had to be promoted the idea that liquid
water on the surface of Mars was impossible. Consider: scientists
should be interested in getting out the true facts and data collected
by their instruments. Yet they routinely ignored the (in my view) quite
important fact returned by those instruments that the pressure on Mars
was within the range to permit liquid water. Why? The only conclusion I
can draw is that the idea of liquid water on Mars was an unpalatable
idea - and the only reason I can think of for that was that this would
have allowed the possibility of life on Mars.
SKYWATCH INTERNATIONAL, INC.
(A Non-Profit Organization)
To SUBSCRIBE, send a blank message to:
Subject: [tmg_announcement] Is the Water on Mars Just A Cover Story?
From: Marshall Masters, lists@...
Is the Water on Mars Just A Cover Story?
The recent announcement of water on Mars has left many scientists
scratching their heads. Why all the recent hullaballo over something
that has been known for decades?
Have we become so uninterested in space exploration since the Apollo
program that NASA needs a scientific trick-of-hand to secure new
Or, could the water on Mars be just a cover story because they now
know that there is something on Mars, that if discovered, could shake
humanity to its core?
YOWUSA media news analyst Steve Russell has peeled back this story
one piece at a time to reveal what is arguably a well finessed cover
READ THIS YOWUSA EXCLUSIVE
- Someone wrote :
So why is it that scientists familiar with the Viking and
Pathfinder atmospheric results still say that the pressure on Mars is below the triple point of water 6.1 mbar? In my opinion it is because
scientists did not want there to be liquid water on Mars.
I say : You have the wrong opinion. Scientists have good reasons to hope that there really is liquid water on Mars. Photographical data suggest that it is so. Water makes life possible, that's correct. But water also makes it possible to get a crew to Mars and take them back to earth! It is rather easy to send an astronaut to Mars, the only difficulty is to bring him back. That requires too much energy (our spaceship could not carry such huge amounts of energy). So the basic plan is : the energy that is necessary to return must be made on Mars. This is only possible if there is water present. So the discovery of liquid water should be exciting to all of us in more than one way.
- Hi All
Wouldn't the raging dust storms that envelop Mars from time to time
cause some sand to possibly obscure true footprints?
Yes, I think so.
I am not an expert in Mars topography, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn a
few years ago.
A Good Day is When You
Wake Up Without a Chalk
Outline Around Your Body
- Subject: Re: UFOnet: Re: Lou Anne/Alien Footprints
>Wouldn't the raging dust storms that envelop Mars from time to timeThis is from an encyclopaedia article:
>cause some sand to possibly obscure true footprints?
At certain seasons, some areas on Mars are subject to winds strong enough
to move sand on the surface and to suspend dust in the atmosphere. A
major weather event occurs in the southern hemisphere between late spring
and early summer when Mars is near perihelion and the heating of southern
equatorial latitudes is most intense. Dust storms begin to form, and
some reach global proportions, obscuring the planet's surface for weeks
or even months. The dust entrained in these clouds, which is very fine
and takes a long time to settle, accounts for the reddish skies seen in
some Viking lander color photographs.
maybe, maybe not
- Excellent point, Autymn!! I would be thrilled if these were true footprints
but, this stuff is a crock
IMO. If they weren't circled in the picture, I would never have seen them.
They are really stretching their imagination here.
- that's the problem. If there is anything that no one can identify, it's alway
"oh look, aliens have come here" Well maybe its not. No evidence, no
footprints. I call them marks made by Mar's geological system. Also know as
rocks. We should start concerntrating on more likely things than aliens
visitation. I bet you can find almost identical marks here on earth, and you
looked hard evnough on the moon, they might be there too. Aliens sure like to