Re: Water on the moon or Mars, part-2

In message <4jr1r1tbh4mobhct8cupk20vj8dgthcn1l@xxxxxxx>, OM <om@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes 
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 05:33:36 GMT, "George"
<george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm aware of what NASA first thought of them.  They wewre so anxious to get
something into the press, that I think they went with the first good idea
they could come up with.  Others, and I'm not the only one, thought from
the beginning that they could have either volcanic or meteoritic origins.
Considering the abundance of impact craters in the region, I think it would
be foolish not to consider an impact origin for these spherules.


...What gets me about all the "why is Mars so fucked up?" speculation
is that nobody's looking at the big picture and seeing the obvious:
you have a really *deep* impact basin on one side of the planet,
Olympus Mons and three other supermassive volcanoes directly on the
other side of the planet, and evidence of frozen seas under layers of
dust. Looks to me that things were probably a lot wetter until
something about 1/8th the size of Mars slammed -hard- into one side,
kicking up billions of metric tons of dust and debris, transferring
enough kinetic energy to kick up those volcanoes, and probably
inducing an atmospheric shock wave that stripped a chunk of atmosphere
off. And yeah, probably split the ground where Valles Marineris
currently dominates.

Isn't there a similar postulated link between the Deccan Traps lava formation in India and an impact crater (possibly Chicxulub, possibly one in India)?
.

Quantcast