Re: NASA Claims No Life On Mars and Embargos Mars Rover Data.

From: dar7yl (no_reply_at_accepted.org)
Date: 02/19/05 

Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 19:48:14 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" <cosmic@lifeform.org>
Newsgroups: alt.sci.planetary,sci.geo.geology,sci.space.policy,sci.astro
Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2005 6:58 AM
Subject: Re: NASA Claims No Life On Mars and Embargos Mars Rover Data.

> I'm not getting an error message. Just a timeout.

I guess you are not important enough to get a real error message.

> Probably they are overwhelmed by billions of viewers wanting
> to see bizarre alien landscapes in real time, rather than put
> up with the hard to use scripted and overdue imagery on the
> official NASA Mars Rover website.

So you admit that there is work necessary to maintain a web site?

>>
>> Looks like they may be falling behind in their work.
>
> Actually, no we already demonstrated that the data
> is already there, ready to go, captured and displayed
> in a highly automated manner, for instance :
>
> http://anserver1.eprsl.wustl.edu/anteam/merA/charts/A/1601/2A160117382EDRA2HPN1419N0M10.png
>
> So clearly your claim is just plain wrong.

So they are actually releasing spectroscopy then?
I guess you are annoyed that they aren't spoon-feeding
you.

>> Hasn't it occurred to you that these people
>> are very busy with the backlog of images
>> and spectroscopy, and don't have time to
>> continuously update the web, let alone respond
>> to your immature ravings?
>
> I just explained to you, the exploratorium and
> workbench are highly automated. Most of the
> hard work is done by the rover drivers, and
> one of the reasons they are not investigating
> apparent fossils is that they don't want to
> risk banging the rover, and they have already
> publicly admitted they have no intention of
> discovering life with this mission, as that will
> put all future NASA Mars missions at risk.

I think their statement was that the MER objectives
are to find evidence of past water on Mars. The
rovers are not designed to discover life (for instance,
the microscope cannot resolve bacteria).

How would the discovery of life put future missions
at risk? Except for a small minority of pseudo-religious
fanatics who believe we should be living back in the
dark ages, (and probably voted for your last president)
most people would regard the discovery of life as an
incentive to return sooner.

And yes, some science has to be sacrificed to ensure
the safety of the rovers, so they can possibly discover
more science over the next hill.

>> You should be happy that they are releasing
>> new information on a practically daily basis.
>
> They aren't, that's what I just explained to you.

You blathered, slobbered and gibbered, but
there was no information in your rantings.

>> Yes, I have noticed a dwindling of activity,
>> which I attribute, not to conspiracy, but to
>> simple burn-out after over a year of
>> (most excellent IMHO) scientific study.
>
> Only because you are a confirmed idiot.
> I've already demonstrated that you are
> not actually looking at the data anyways.

How can you demonstrate anything when you
can't even lift your carcass off your couch
except to gobble up yet another full meal deal?

regards,
    Dar7yl

Relevant Pages