Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2012 14:45:10 GMT 1
Hello meldrew, That was very informative and demonstrates very well the beast that constantly raises it's ugly head. That being the mix of wild conjecture that attempts to connect dots that don't exist. Leaps of reason that are so flawed in their construction they becomes almost too big to unravel. In researching climate change over the history of Earth coupled with these latest statements from the Nasa folks one thig is becoming abundantly clear. BOTH planets, Earth And Mars have had histories of warm periods that nearly coincide and both planets have been in the process cooling down. I know in the case of Earth many may argue this point because of the global warming issues but those issues are cyclical whereas in the past they were a constant; The earth was ALWAYS warm. In the last 3 million yers and especially in the last 1 million our planet has seen a downward trend in it's overall temperature to the point where it now only gets out of it's nearly chronic Ice Age only in once every 100,000 years or so! This is a link to what are termed Milankovitch cycles and clarifies more the point I am making. It's an eye-opening read: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles"Milankovitch believed that decreased summer insolation in northern high latitudes was the dominant factor leading to glaciation, which led him to (incorrectly) deduce an approximate 41ka period for ice ages.[16] Subsequent research has shown that the 100ka eccentricity cycle is more important, resulting in 100,000-year ice age cycles of the Quaternary glaciation over the last few million years." edit: spelling
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2012 16:14:31 GMT 1
Hello meldrew, I've posted this before I think and I apologize if it seems as though I'm hijacking the thread as that is not my intention at all. I just thought if I was going to make a statement WRT the Milankovitch Cycles that I ought to back it up with some scientific evidence. It's from a book written by Richard A. Muller, a proffessor of physics at at UC Berkeley, California and faculty senior scientist ant the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory: edited: for my lousy spelling.
|
|
|
Post by dbh on Nov 30, 2012 20:59:30 GMT 1
Maybe it is just me.... but something does not sit right with with regards to the back peddling by NASA. Why does it feel like they really have something to share but " the unknown" stepped in and said.... nope....not yet?
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Nov 30, 2012 21:28:30 GMT 1
in the post it implys that nasa never released an official statement, they only do this at press conferences, so its just over enthusiastic reporting, which to be honest we should have picked up on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2012 21:36:40 GMT 1
Hello dbh,
What doesn't sit right is something so obvious that it's virtually hiding right before everyone's eyes. NASA just quite simply refuses to say it. The issue is one of water. Everyone talks about water flow on ancient Mars. Everyone talks about the tenacity of life and how complex organisms can live in extremely hostile environments. The point is it is blatanly obvious that NASA and whoever is calling the shots will not publicly state that at one time Mars was NOT a hostile environment and that life would have had a fairly easy time of it there. This is what I've been subtly getting around to in my recent postings. Sure the Sun was dimmer back then a couple of billion years ago but it didn't matter here as the Earth was a warmer planet just on it's own from the internal temperatures and relatively fresh geologic activities as a result of it's formation.
Mars evidently was not that different and the fact that it was smaller and further away simply hastened the timeframe in which it supported life. It started out hot, cooled to a state where water and an atmosphere evolved and, because of it's place in the Solar System, it continued in it temperature decline toward it's present state. I think the statement by NASA confirmed this aspect of Mars history with the recent discovery.
edit, grammar, spelling- From now on I'll make every attempt to omit editing altogether. I's a real pain.
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Nov 30, 2012 22:13:02 GMT 1
My intel says it is some form of artefact that has been found. However my sources are shaky at the best of times but you never know..If they have found something then it will have to pass a lot of tests before we find out, if we ever do. NASA only tells you if they have to
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 1, 2012 15:03:37 GMT 1
My intel says it is some form of artefact that has been found. Who has told you this baz ?
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Dec 1, 2012 19:33:16 GMT 1
Not a hope of getting my sources mate, they have taken a long time to acquire. The artefact is believed to be a fossil (poss marine)
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 1, 2012 19:48:15 GMT 1
Not a hope of getting my sources mate, they have taken a long time to acquire. The artefact is believed to be a fossil (poss marine) Thats what I thought you would say Ive been around for a long time in the UFO community and one thing I have learned is someone that is hiding a source is usually invovlved in some kind of deception. Just to lay out some rules of this forum one is if you are quoting another source or discussing information from another source then you have to name the source, Ive noticed many times now that you imply other sources but do not name them this is a requirement here! Baz your not doing yourself or anyone else any favours by hiding your source. Your just adding to the crap that we have to face every day in this subject.
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Dec 1, 2012 20:06:55 GMT 1
Mate! I am up to other stuff (away from this forum) regarding UFO's and time has taught me that if you have a source of information that is reasonably good you must protect it (not the stuff you find on the net) You can delete my stuff if you don't like it, or it doesn't follow the forum rules, but as you know I will help out and pass on any knowledge I know. But, I don't know what info I am being fed and have to go with the flow, but I trust my info!
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 1, 2012 20:19:01 GMT 1
But, I don't know what info I am being fed and have to go with the flow, but I trust my info! Exactly!!! that is why we need your source, so that we can check up on them, as I said Ive been around for a while and I know deception when I see it, and you are being fed it big time! Most people on here go out their way to provide information and sources so that others can do the research also, withholding sources does not help anyone else in their research, and since this is a research forum your not helping by withholding your source are you ?
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Dec 1, 2012 20:58:44 GMT 1
Most of the information on your site is a comment or post from the net, plus added information from your members,(witch is great) But If you want to build a greater site you it would be nice to allow members and guests to pass on information that is not available on the internet. I have no wish to deceive you, But I have been looking into this stuff for over 40 years and have made some great friends and contacts which I do not want to compromise by allowing their comments, names or locations to be revealed Why not leave it to your members to make their own mind up If they all think I am talking bo_--_ks then they can tell me
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2012 21:59:12 GMT 1
Hello bazmatic,
Would your sources, who seem to be well placed according to you, Have knowledge of when the next deployment of a Black Triangle is going to take place and from where will that deployment be issued? PM me if you like. This can be for the UK or the US. My research is about being able to determine just that by historically putting a schedule together. It's all stuff gleaned from public databases but it's all being looked at from a much different angle so it's probably not that much of a secret anyway. It's just had a built in functional chaos that is projected to the public. The apparent chaos doesn't really exist- it just looks that way.
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Dec 2, 2012 10:52:10 GMT 1
bickering about source's on a Mars lander thread eh, this could be done else where, baz if you do not want to say where your getting your info from then it will be treated as waffle, judge it says on the forum header, " a place to discuss the UFO phenomenon", so I say this, if its a post that has relevant info a source should be provided, if the post is a result of a discussion between contacts this should be stated also, so a post of that nature should read, "I was having a conversation with a bloke and this topic came up" this would make it clear to all where the info comes from, if on the other hand the info comes from the net or a book the source should be stated, with a url link. can I have my thread back and why am I doing the moderators job ?
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 2, 2012 13:42:08 GMT 1
bickering about source's on a Mars lander thread eh, this could be done else where, baz if you do not want to say where your getting your info from then it will be treated as waffle, judge it says on the forum header, " a place to discuss the UFO phenomenon", so I say this, if its a post that has relevant info a source should be provided, if the post is a result of a discussion between contacts this should be stated also, so a post of that nature should read, "I was having a conversation with a bloke and this topic came up" this would make it clear to all where the info comes from, if on the other hand the info comes from the net or a book the source should be stated, with a url link. can I have my thread back and why am I doing the moderators job ? There is a perfectly good reason why I asked for a source, which relates to this thread. Quote: My intel says it is some form of artefact that has been found. |
I agree with you if it is just hearsay then it should be stated as that. Back on topic and back to baz's quote, we will find out how credible your source is tomorrow Dec 3 when NASA has the press conference.
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Dec 2, 2012 14:22:30 GMT 1
Sorry chaps, I will try to validate my claims if I can, if I can't then I will not post them here. I receive text, scype. and good old fashioned post and this is an old network of friends who don't really trust the internet (do you blame them) I can't say any better than that And no, I don't know when the next fleet of 'black delta' will be up
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Dec 2, 2012 15:02:28 GMT 1
Sorry chaps, I will try to validate my claims if I can, if I can't then I will not post them here. I receive text, scype. and good old fashioned post and this is an old network of friends who don't really trust the internet (do you blame them) I can't say any better than that And no, I don't know when the next fleet of 'black delta' will be up baz you can always post waffle on the on topic discussion thread, I want to hear this sort of thing so don't keep it to yourself, aslong as we know its waffle, I like a waffle lol.
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 3, 2012 12:54:49 GMT 1
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Dec 3, 2012 18:38:40 GMT 1
Source bit.ly/Ubu5pwThe next news conference about the NASA Mars rover Curiosity will be held in San Francisco at the Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU). Rumors and speculation that there are major new findings from the mission at this early stage are incorrect. The news conference will be an update about first use of the rover's full array of analytical instruments to investigate a drift of sandy soil. One class of substances Curiosity is checking for is organic compounds -- carbon-containing chemicals that can be ingredients for life. At this point in the mission, the instruments on the rover have not detected any definitive evidence of Martian organics. The Mars Science Laboratory Project and its Curiosity rover are less than four months into a two-year prime mission to investigate whether conditions in Mars' Gale Crater may have been favorable for microbial life. Curiosity is exceeding all expectations for a new mission with all of the instruments and measurement systems performing well. This is spectacular for such a complex system, and one that is operated so far away on Mars by people here on planet Earth. The mission already has found an ancient riverbed on the Red Planet, and there is every expectation for remarkable discoveries still to come Added bold by me
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Dec 3, 2012 19:10:11 GMT 1
Source www.npr.org/2012/12/02/166331531/signs-of-life-on-mars-not-exactlyDec 2nd 2012 The director of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory said last week that preliminary data showed the possibility that the agency's Mars Science Laboratory – the six-wheeled rover that landed on Mars in August — had found signs of carbon-containing molecules. According to a JPL news release, however, there will be no major announcements Monday, when scientists take part in a news conference at the annual meeting of American Geophysical Union. The science team is continuing to try and verify what the rover has found. So why are the scientists being so careful with their findings and why are these carbon-containing molecules of such great interest? "It's a substance that's consistent with biological materials," says John Grotzinger of the California Institute of Technology, the chief scientist on the rover team. Now don't start thinking that because some carbon-containing compounds are associated with biological materials he's talking about life on Mars. Grotzinger says it doesn't have to be biological materials; there are plenty of carbon-containing compounds that have nothing to do with life. But finding certain of these carbon molecules would be exciting because of what it might say about the Martian environment where the rover is sitting at the bottom of Gale crater. If one kind of carbon can survive there, it might just be a place where carbon molecules that are related to living organisms could also survive as a kind of chemical fossil."There wouldn't be a field of paleontology unless you found the hot spots where things get preserved," Grotzinger says. Grotzinger says the rover is looking for those hot spots; places where carbon-containing chemicals consistent with life might have been preserved and still exist. "[But] even if they have nothing to do with life, at least it tells us that this is the kind of environment that might have been favorable for preservation of something that could be a biological material," he says. Even the possibility of finding carbon compounds on Mars causes excitement, which certainly is not true for every planet. In the current issue of the journal Science, researchers reported they were virtually certain that had found large deposits of organic compounds on the planet Mercury, and that wasn't front page news. "I can tell you anytime when you find anything with Mars, it's a frenzy," says Maria Zuber of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, one of the Mercury researchers who also works on Mars. Mars just seems to have that effect on people. Highlight bold by me
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 4, 2012 12:28:16 GMT 1
Mars Rover Discoveries Unveiled at NASA Press Conference Rumors of the potential for "historical news" from the recent Curiosity Rover project have been swirling but no definitive evidence of organic compounds were found according to information released during a NASA press conference today. Calling the Curiosity Rover a "CSI laboratory on wheels," NASA scientist Michael Meyers led a press conference today reporting recent discoveries found by scientists/geologists working on the Curiosity Mars Rover project. Rumors that a big discovery was going to be unveiled started a couple weeks ago when chief Curiosity scientist John Grotzinger was quoted by NPR as saying it would be something "for the history books." At today's press conference, however, Grotzinger said organic compound discoveries could not be definitively attributed to Mars and added, "Curiosity is middle name is patience." “I've learned you to be careful of what you say and even more careful about how you say it,” Grotzinger said. "I think our enthusiasm was misunderstood." He said the next step for the Rover will be to start drilling on the surface of Mars "sometime before the holidays." Wheeler said the bigger discovery made was the ancient riverbed found by Rover. NASA has been downplaying Grotzinger's statement and said today that "there is more work to do." It released the following statement today before the news conference at noon: Rumors and speculation that there are major new findings from the mission at this early stage are incorrect. The news conference will be an update about first use of the rover's full array of analytical instruments to investigate a drift of sandy soil. One class of substances Curiosity is checking for is organic compounds -- carbon-containing chemicals that can be ingredients for life. At this point in the mission, the instruments on the rover have not detected any definitive evidence of Martian organics. The Mars Science Laboratory Project and its Curiosity rover are less than four months into a two-year prime mission to investigate whether conditions in Mars' Gale Crater may have been favorable for microbial life. Curiosity is exceeding all expectations for a new mission with all of the instruments and measurement systems performing well. This is spectacular for such a complex system, and one that is operated so far away on Mars by people here on planet Earth. The mission already has found an ancient riverbed on the Red Planet, and there is every expectation for remarkable discoveries still to come. For more information about NASA's Curiosity mission, visit: mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mslWatch the press conference www.ustream.tv/nasajpl
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 4, 2012 12:32:04 GMT 1
It turns out that your source was talking utter rubbish baz just as I thought.
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Dec 4, 2012 15:05:58 GMT 1
What I said about the artifact found on mars ''The artefact is believed to be a fossil (poss marine)'' What they said ''The mission already has found an ancient riverbed'' Source bit.ly/Ubu5pwAnd then they said''it might just be a place where carbon molecules that are related to living organisms could also survive as a kind of chemical fossil. Source; www.npr.org/2012/12/02/166331531/signs-of-life-on-mars-not-exactlyWhat you said''It turns out that your source was talking utter rubbish baz just as I thought.'' My first post was made on Nov 30th the press conference was on Dec 3rd Enough said
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 4, 2012 15:32:26 GMT 1
What I said about the artifact found on mars ''The artefact is believed to be a fossil (poss marine)'' What they said ''The mission already has found an ancient riverbed'' Source bit.ly/Ubu5pwAnd then they said''it might just be a place where carbon molecules that are related to living organisms could also survive as a kind of chemical fossil. Source; www.npr.org/2012/12/02/166331531/signs-of-life-on-mars-not-exactlyWhat you said''It turns out that your source was talking utter rubbish baz just as I thought.'' My first post was made on Nov 30th the press conference was on Dec 3rd Enough said There is no artifact or fossil found ??
|
|
|
Post by dbh on Dec 4, 2012 15:52:36 GMT 1
If you read carefully... you see this statement...
At today's press conference, however, Grotzinger said organic compound discoveries could not be definitively attributed to Mars and added, "Curiosity is middle name is patience."
To me, this implies that they did discover something and are not yet ready to make it public. Even in this statement they are hinting at the fact that whatever they found may not have originated from Mars (spin control?)
Then the rest of the article is all about spinning the topic away from the alleged discovery to talk about an ancient riverbed.
Wheeler said the bigger discovery made was the ancient riverbed found by Rover.
Not being privy to classified information it is imposable to know the truth at this point.
Just because it has not been formally disclosed does not mean the statement made on NPR about a "finding for the history books" is not about some discovery of molecular life. Conversely, till we have formal disclosure of any kind of discovery, we still have to believe that nothing was ever found.
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Dec 4, 2012 20:39:43 GMT 1
this isn't the first time nasa have put their foot in it with dodgy announcements, thats where the problem is here, dodgy sites turning a dodgy statement into something for headline click throughs and more advertising revenue, even though nasa has admitted to a dodgy off the record comment its been blown out of all proportion by tabloid sites who have ignored nasa's retraction and carried on this sillyness.
|
|
|
Post by dbh on Dec 5, 2012 1:28:40 GMT 1
source - space.com
NASA's Mars rover Curiosity has discovered complex chemistry on the Red Planet, as well as hints of long-sought organic compounds that could aid primitive life, scientists announced today (Dec. 3). The Curiosity rover found evidence of chlorine, sulfur and water in Mars dirt studied by its on board laboratory, as well as organic compounds (chemicals containing carbon) inside its Sample Analysis at Mars instrument. However, the science team can't yet be sure whether these compounds truly come from Mars, or arise from contamination transported to the Red Planet inboard Curiosity. repeat of one line of the above statement....
However, the science team can't yet be sure whether these compounds truly come from Mars, or arise from contamination transported to the Red Planet inboard Curiosity.
warning.... rant ahead...
if they expect us to believe that the rover, transported this material here from earth and it did not originate from mars then would not every single test from this point forward also be flawed? I am telling you... and this is only my gut speaking... but they are feeding us BS... ans we have no other recourse but to believe....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2012 3:47:06 GMT 1
Hello dbh,
"....However, the science team can't yet be sure whether these compounds truly come from Mars...".
Does that mean they expect to be able to discern the difference at some point? Other than that it's sounds like a convenient loophole or, at it's worst, a set up. Curiosity is in an ancient riverbed. Water was present. That says to me life was too but science does not and cannot jump to conclusions it the evidence is refutable. They will assume nothing. Without that kind of integrity the scientific method would be a subjective nightmare and would have fallen on it's face centuries ago.
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Dec 5, 2012 9:01:50 GMT 1
The Big Curiosity Rover Discovery Is a Big Misunderstanding When Curiosity chief scientist John Grotzinger sat down with NPR on Nov. 13, it was to discuss the rover’s mission on Mars. But when the interview aired last week, it was just one quote on soil samples that made headlines: “This data is gonna be one for the history books.” It didn’t take long for Twitter, Facebook and even other news organizations to pick up the quote. Similar to a childhood game of “Telephone,” that statement ballooned into one of the week’s biggest stories: After just a few months on Mars, the Curiosity rover had made, in the NPR reporter’s words, an “earth-shaking” discovery. One so big that NASA had to quadruple-check the results. That rumor, however, isn’t exactly accurate.The quote heard around the world came shortly after Grotzinger explained that NASA had just received the initial data from Curiosity’s first soil experiment using a new Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM) instrument, which is capable of identifying organic compounds. Naturally, the public assumed that this meant Curiosity had discovered a complex organic molecule. But while NASA does have the latest soil samples, the mission team tells Mashable that researchers haven’t determined that particular groundbreaking discovery. In fact, the rover drove away from the location just five days later, taking more samples along the way. What Grotzinger was actually trying to convey is that Curiosity’s data over her entire two-year mission will further our knowledge of Mars more than ever before, making it a historical mission. This is entirely factual. In her short time on the Red Planet, Curiosity has already made significant discoveries — like finding an ancient streambed where water once flowed. More recently, she determined that astronauts could survive Mars radiation levels. As for Grotzinger’s comment about checking and re-checking the data before releasing it to the public, that’s just standard scientific procedure. This is especially true when it’s the first set of data from a new instrument. NASA Social Media Manager Veronica McGregor, who is part of the three-woman team that manages Curiosity’s social media, says the rover’s Nov. 21 tweet was an effort to clear up the misunderstanding:What did I discover on Mars? That rumors spread fast online. My team considers this whole mission “one for the history books” — Curiosity Rover (@marscuriosity) November 21, 2012 “It’s always difficult to quell rumors like this one,” McGregor says. “But at the same time it’s great to see so many people are excited and interested in what the rover might find.” No one is saying there isn’t a major discovery in Curiosity’s future. It just hasn’t happened yet. If and when that does happen, it’s important to note that NASA wouldn’t announce a major discovery on a news network. In fact, the agency only makes major announcements via press conferences at its headquarters.According to McGregor, the agency does have a press conference slated for Dec. 3 at the American Geophysical Union (AGU) meeting, but it has been on the books since Curiosity actually landed on Mars and does not coincide with a major announcement. “Curiosity’s mission is producing an unprecedented volume of valuable science data,” Grotzinger tells Mashable. “Much of this will help us better glimpse the very ancient environments of Mars, that are regarded to have been the most habitable in the planet’s history. We have only just started on this journey back in time.” NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory will display Curiosity’s latest progress and observations at the AGU conference in San Francisco. mashable.com/2012/11/27/curiosity-rover-discovery-npr/I am not seeing any conspiracy here, just another nasa cock up. the UFO blogger is trying to start a conspiracy Mars UFO : NASA Spirit Rover Spotted UFO On Marswww.ufo-blogger.com/2012/12/mars-ufo-nasa-spirit-rover-spotted-ufo.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ufo_blogger+%28UFO-Blogger+Uncover+The+UFO+Truth%29past posts by the blogger include NASA Mars Opportunity Spotted Wood On Mars NASA Mars Curiosity Photographed UFOs NASA Curiosity Photographed Fossil Finger On Mars NASA Curiosity Photographed Seedpod On Mars does anyone else see where we are going here edited to add the Blogger stuff
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 5, 2012 15:51:05 GMT 1
|
|