Re: The Best Rover Picture to Date

From: jonathan (Write_at_Instead.com)
Date: 11/19/04 

Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 21:16:04 -0500

"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote in message
news:5f164087.0411181434.77fffc02@posting.google.com...
> "jonathan" <Write@Instead.com> wrote in message news:<419c0e6a$1_2@127.0.0.1>...

>
> Under a bit of bovver, Jon.? Lucky you. (They've given up on me...)
> Just take it as their idea of light relief. (Mob of camels...)
> Seems like your dead girlfriend attracts more attention than my pet
> rock nevertheless.

They seem to think jr high level insults have some sort of effect
of me~ sheez! The only thing that gets my attention is when
someone shows me I'm wrong.

I was very wrong about one conjecture back in February
that is still bothering me. Am still trying to figure out
what went wrong. I would like your opinion.

Back in March, before Nasa even announced Meridiani
showed signs of water, I offered the idea that the spheres
are the gemmules of the simplest marine sponge with this
post.

http://www.google.com/groups?q=+%22Meridiani+Planum+as+an+Ancient+Bacteria+Sponge+Ecosystem++++%22&hl=en&lr=&selm=wradnVSSq7Bah9fdRVn-jA%40giganews.com&rnum=1

If that was true the spheres should be associated with the
outcrops only and dissipate quickly once the rover moved
into the fields. But that didn't happen, the spheres
retained their huge volume everywhere so that idea
died a quick death.

However, The logic was fairly sound and it should have been
a correct idea. I think the problem may be due to the
following. A gemmule of a sponge is basically a reproductive
pod of the simplest two-celled metazoan, an encrusting
sponge. But wouldn't it be likely that such a pod would
take the basic form of the ...single-celled...life from
which it evolved? So a gemmule should look like
a bacterial concretion?

Compare these photos.

A gemmule
http://waynesword.palomar.edu/plfeb96.htm#gemmules

A bacterial sphere from a saline lake. Scroll down to fig 1
http://waynesword.palomar.edu/plfeb96.htm#gemmules

And a couple of sphere photos showing the off-center slash
and single indentation so many show.
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/m/029/1M130760861EFF0454P2933M2M1.HTML
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/m/028/1M130672582EFF0454P2933M2M1.HTML

I think the mistake was due to an assumption that single-celled
life couldn't produce something as large as the spheres.
That the next step, two-celled life, must be responsible.
Also the concept of bacterial concretions seems a rather
recent idea and there's little on the net about the subject.

But this post gives the most concise description I've found.
http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/mar/m03-035.shtml

To this day I feel the mistake was one of scale only.
No one here, or anywhere else, has provided a
reason, that makes sense, that I'm on the wrong
track. But I'll keep daring anyone to change my
view. We'll see.

Jonathan

s

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Best Rover Picture to Date
    ... > Seems like your dead girlfriend attracts more attention than my pet ... If that was true the spheres should be associated with the ... A gemmule of a sponge is basically a reproductive ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: The Best Rover Picture to Date
    ... > Seems like your dead girlfriend attracts more attention than my pet ... If that was true the spheres should be associated with the ... A gemmule of a sponge is basically a reproductive ...
    (sci.astro)