Meridiani Is A Seabed (APOD 05 Jun 2006)

eyecapitain1 · Post by **eyecapitain1** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:37 am

I can't understand how you can ask questions,recieve an adroit and susinct reply,then blow it off by making jokes that only reflect your inabillity to process the information.
Everyone WANTS to be a comedian,but FEW actualy have the tallent.I would suggest you occupy the later descriptive since the jokes were niether funny nor APROPRIATE.
It would have served you better to post a sincere and prompt "thankyou" to Sir Charles for digging up and coralating all of these FACTS in a manner we can all easily understand. BTW:IE:Fully referenced FACTS.
Thanks again Sir Charles for clearing the waters of this muddy pond so we can all understand our universe a bit better than yesterday.

Happy Reentries!

harry · Post by **harry** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 10:43 am

Hello Aichip

I would be interested in seeing your work

innovative solar generators and also working on a nanosatellite launcher

and awaiting more info on Mars.

There was a special on TV a few days on life in extreme environments.

I was just wandering if you had a hand in it.

harry · Post by **harry** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 6:55 am

Hello All

Hello aichip

got this link in the mail

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsde ... s/2006/48/

I'd like to know what you think.

Dr. Skeptic · Post by **Dr. Skeptic** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:14 pm

eyecapitain1 wrote:I can't understand how you can ask questions,recieve an adroit and susinct reply,then blow it off by making jokes that only reflect your inabillity to process the information.
Everyone WANTS to be a comedian,but FEW actualy have the tallent.I would suggest you occupy the later descriptive since the jokes were niether funny nor APROPRIATE.
It would have served you better to post a sincere and prompt "thankyou" to Sir Charles for digging up and coralating all of these FACTS in a manner we can all easily understand. BTW:IE:Fully referenced FACTS.
Thanks again Sir Charles for clearing the waters of this muddy pond so we can all understand our universe a bit better than yesterday.

Happy Reentries!

I wouldn't consider the responce anything other than a typical tabloid scientific hoopla saying "LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME!". Adroit and susinct - now who is trying to be funny!

I am not the one with a problem understanding science, the rock in question is a very typical vesicular igneous rock, a basaltic rock filled with gas that split, far from being evidence of life on Mars.

Pseudo-science and tabloid logic is what is not appropriate for this site.

aichip · Post by **aichip** » Sat Oct 21, 2006 7:12 pm

Hello Harry. Very nice link. I have no doubt that microbes are still thriving in the soil of Mars today. That is my reason for objecting to the present plans for a sample return. We need a far more secure facility for their study, preferably on the Moon.

For Dr. Skeptic, your main reason for objecting to all of this is that you believe everything you have been fed. There is liquid water on Mars now and there always has been. If you can get over that one hurdle, you might begin to understand how life is there and how the fossils came to be.

You should have no problem showing me a hollow volcanic rock with a spiral tip poking out, just like the shell in the Sol 913 images. You should also have no problem showing me any number of spiral rocks made by inorganic processes, right?

So what about this?

Small spiral sea shell, exactly identical to terrestrial shell fossils. See the whole page here:
http://xenotechresearch.com/mk505a.htm

And how about a trilobite fossil?

Segments, head, tail, the entire form of the body is perfect. Here is the whole page with terrestrial fossils to compare to:
http://xenotechresearch.com/mk558a.htm

This is a really nice trilobite showing the shape of the head and the eyes are even present, along with the clear central lobe and the segmentation.

The whole page on it is here:
http://xenotechresearch.com/mk158a.htm

If you cannot see what is in front of you, then you have blinded yourself to the facts. If you think this is pseudo-science, then surely you can point out the flaws in my findings and my reasoning. It should be a simple thing for you. Of course, I have to also point out that you felt that the pentagonal structure was a rock split on cleavage lines, but you missed the fact that no natural crystal can have pentagonal symmetry.

You also decided that poor humor was the appropriate response when I proved the presence of carbon and sodium, rather than the gracious and professional course of admitting that you were wrong. So far, your batting record with admitting the facts is poor.

But I suppose we all need a hobby.

harry · Post by **harry** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 1:19 am

Hello Aichip

I cannot wait to see the evidence and proven beyond doubt.

Imagine life on Mars, I would never had even thought about it until you came on board and persisted.

Good on you mate.

Reagardless even if you are proved to be wrong, you gave it your best shot.

eyecapitain1 · Post by **eyecapitain1** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 12:58 pm

I don't give a rats ass who "looks at me". Either does Sir Charles.
The body of facts is his only concern.

Dr. Skeptic · Post by **Dr. Skeptic** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 7:10 pm

eyecapitain1 wrote:I don't give a rats ass who "looks at me". Either does Sir Charles.
The body of facts is his only concern.

Achip is not posting facts, only an interpretation of data - and not doing it very well.

Andy Wade · Post by **Andy Wade** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:18 pm

Dr. Skeptic wrote:
eyecapitain1 wrote:I don't give a rats ass who "looks at me". Either does Sir Charles.
The body of facts is his only concern.
Achip is not posting facts, only an interpretation of data - and not doing it very well.

Sigh...

Any chance you chaps could stop this "I can pi55 higher up the wall than you can" competition?
Because it's getting pretty boring now.
I don't know who to believe any more.
It may as well be Martians using a felt tip to paint the lines in the sand.
Come on guys, you're bigger than this aren't you?
I may know very little about science and Mars in particular, but I know an argument that's going nowhere when I see it.
Please?

Now please shake hands and agree to disagree.

eyecapitain1 · Post by **eyecapitain1** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:16 am

Spot on Andy. I'm done.

Dr. Skeptic · Post by **Dr. Skeptic** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:47 am

SCIENCE NEWS
October 24, 2006
Martian Soils Point to Ancient Acid Ocean--And a Dearth of Life

Despite being separated by thousands of kilometers, Martian soils from Gusev Crater and Meridiani Planum have proved broadly similar in parts--rich in chlorine and sulfur. Recent high-precision measurements have shown that phosphorus--the critical energy carrier in all known forms of Earth life--is equally abundant in such patches of Martian dirt. And the only explanation for such similar soils in disparate locations is a large, acidic ocean, according to a new paper published today in the November issue of Geology.
Geologists James Greenwood of Wesleyan University and Ruth Blake of Yale University examined various explanations for the similar soils sampled by both Mars Rovers as well as at the two Viking and the Mars Pathfinder landing sites. Each contains at least some so-called bright dust or soil that has proved to contain much sulfur, chlorine and phosphorus along with the typical ferric oxide that gives Mars its red tinge. The researchers examined Martian meteorites here on Earth to determine that the sulfur and chlorine likely resulted from ancient volcanic explosions.

But phosphorus is a different story. "The ultimate source of phosphate in Martian fluids is likely from the weathering of calcium-phosphate minerals in igneous rocks," the researchers write. Unlike on Earth, where phosphorus rarely dissolves in water because of its uptake by life, it appears to be behaving like a soluble element on the Red Planet, leached from rock by a surrounding acidic ocean. Such high levels of correlation between phosphorus and sulfur, for example, "can likely only be obtained under acidic conditions," they note.

Such a broad dispersal of similar soils argues for an acidic sea stretching across large swaths of Mars, or perhaps lakes with the same inherent chemistry. Overall levels of the elements argue for such a sea to have been short-lived, as deep ocean waters on Earth typically mix every 1,000 years or so. "Evaporation of a global acidic ocean could lead to [nanophase ferric oxide] particles with constant sulfur, chlorine and phosphorus, as seen in the Martian bright soils," the researchers note in the paper. Such a global acidic ocean would also help explain the lack of carbonates in the soil, a key indicator of the presence of former seas on Earth. But such a sea might not have been a boon to life, even though acid-loving microbes persist here; high levels of phosphorus argue against a living presence. "High concentrations of phosphorus in a Martian ocean," Greenwood and Blake conclude, "would not be expected if Mars had an active biosphere during the ocean's existence." --David Biello

aichip · Post by **aichip** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:23 pm

I will be on Coast to Coast AM tonight discussing the new commercial space industry and some ventures that my company is working on. I will also present (time permitting) an update on some of my Mars research.

I have assembled some excellent anaglyphs showing proof that the soil in Meridiani is wet today, and will shortly post a link to those images on my site.

harry · Post by **harry** » Mon Nov 06, 2006 7:30 am

Hello Aichip

Do we get that in the land of Ozzzzzzzzzzzzz.

BMAONE23 · Post by **BMAONE23** » Mon Nov 06, 2006 2:01 pm

Harry,
I don't know if the program is broadcast on any networks there but the show content as well as other interesting articles is available on their website http://www.coasttocoastam.com

harry · Post by **harry** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 5:04 am

Hello BMAONE23

Thanks mate.

aichip · Post by **aichip** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 2:17 pm

The NASA press release scheduled for today is apparently about water on Mars. Just so you know, I have published some information for the upcoming book that details this information. You can download a sample of it here:

http://xenotechresearch.com/chapter_10proofed.doc
http://xenotechresearch.com/chapter_11.doc

You can bet they will be vague, so here are the facts. There are active water geysers, sand boils, and mud present on Mars today. You can see everything in those files.

BMAONE23 · Post by **BMAONE23** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 5:43 pm

Well, aichip, congrats on all your hard work causing the powers that be to look more closely at the available information. This is a truely significant find.

aichip · Post by **aichip** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:19 am

I will do one better. Here is actual photographic proof that water does not boil or freze instantly on Mars. From the Spirit rover, microscopic imager, you will see a droplet of water that has dripped on the solar panels, and in the 40 seconds between the two images, it is exactly the same.

Check the time codes, look at the Sun movement, verify the data sources. This is it, actual photographic proof that water exists quite well on Mars today.

http://xenotechresearch.com/wetnow04.htm

It's a shame that it is taking all this insane wrangling to get this information out. I could be doing something more entertaining.

Or even profitable.

Dr. Skeptic · Post by **Dr. Skeptic** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 3:00 am

The finding of trace liquid H2O is no surprize, it is well documented already - it is not surface H2O nor has persistent surface H2O existed in at least 2.7 billion years. It is where the H2O is found, the concentration of dissolved compounds, and the longevity of the liquid of H20 that is the concerns of scientist.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/ ... ss_big.jpg

It is also documented that the ancient pools of surface H2O were highly acidic and show no signs of having reactive compounds metabolize by any organic or unexpected inorganic processes. Your theory of pseudo arthropods, encephalopods, mollusk, ... etc, evolving in the stated environment is pure fantasy and some of the most unscientific deductive reasoning I have ever witnessed.

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/ ... 7atc2g.jpg

The bedrock striations shows a H2O history of near identical from both rovers sites of thin sedimentary deposits seldom exceeding 1 cm, nearly the same chemical fingerprints which does not support the existence of oceans or persistent pools of H2O of any size, more conducive to consistent seasonal melting and refreezing of sub-surface ice.

Early Mars was wet from volcanic activity and comet impacts, for the first few hundred million years, as it lost its protective magnetic field the solar winds eroded the atmosphere away, the planet cooled with little change in 2 to 3 billion years, there is zero evidence in the data collected of complex organisms or algae filled seas ever having existed on Mars. Your unscientific account of Martian history does not fit the data set nor is applicable to an acceptable theory.

BMAONE23 · Post by **BMAONE23** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:06 pm

In this latest "Gully washer" image from Mars, http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/gallery/im ... a_anno.jpg it would appear that the water source is another of aichip's possible geyser cracks in the crater wall.

It looks to me like these Water seepage points might all be at an almost uniform depth http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/gallery/20 ... #allimages
In the first image it would appear that the source point is inside the same darker striation level in the crater wall.

Keldor314 · Post by **Keldor314** » Mon Dec 11, 2006 1:55 am

I have to admit that the hollow pentagonal rock looked rather interesting, but upon further examination, it looks like nothing more than an ordinary basalt column.

Compare to this:

aichip · Post by **aichip** » Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:36 am

Hi Keldor314.

I can think of four objections. First, columnar basalt is typically hexagonal (as in your image) and not pentagonal. This object is a regular pentagon and there are no minerals with regular pentagonal symmetry. Measure the angles and you will see- take into account that the object is tilted.

Second, this object is hollow and concave, whereas columnar basalt is solid.

Third, the sides of this object are cinched inward, something that shows in the three dimensional images. Columnar basalt is very uniform in width.

Fourth, where are the other columns? If this is basalt, it would have formed its column structure inside a much larger mass of columns, but we see only this single example. There are absolutely no other examples of this anywhere in the image.

Thanks for the input. Only by raising the questions can we dispense with those answers that don't fit.

Dr. Skeptic · Post by **Dr. Skeptic** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 11:28 pm

there are no minerals with regular pentagonal symmetry

This is correct for simple or uniform crystalline symmetry. The photo in question may not be a symmetric pentagon or a pentagon at all. Non-symmetric pentagonal structures can be mimicked by cleaving crystals across multiple planes. http://www.steelpillow.com/polyhedra/ic ... chlost.htm
When I studied the photo I determined it was an irregular hexagon.

Tel · Post by **Tel** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:47 pm

Mr. Shults,

I find it terribly important to point out to the folks on this forum that your knighthood is neither condoned nor recognized by the Crown. While the BARONY OF BALQUHAIN is quite legitimate and recognized by Burkes, the Crown doesn't acknowledge your honours.

I find it in poor taste to pass yourself off as a proper knight in light of the fact that the honours were not bestowed upon you by Her Majesty or her official representatives. And to do so for the sole purpose of sounding important and credible to this community is in further poor taste.

And, if by any stretch of the imagination your knighthood was valid, you are not a subject of Her Majesty, and therefore could not even accurately call yourself 'Sir' anything.

I call on you to stop this chicanery.

Regards,

Tel

For more information on the British Honours System, you can go here...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_honours

aichip · Post by **aichip** » Thu Dec 21, 2006 12:23 am

tel wrote:

I find it terribly important to point out to the folks on this forum that your knighthood is neither condoned nor recognized by the Crown. While the BARONY OF BALQUHAIN is quite legitimate and recognized by Burkes, the Crown doesn't acknowledge your honours.

Burkes does indeed recognize the Barony of Balquhain, and that the Baron is a landed baron. This gives him the right to knight people into his service. The institution was originally meant for the defense of the land held by a baron and in times past, the knighthood also carried a tract of land to be worked by a knight in the support of his family.

This created a vested interest in that the knight would also be motivated to defend the baron because in doing so, he also defended his own home and land. In more recent times, instead of land, a sum of money was awarded. This is what Dr. Nelson Ying, the Baron of Balquhain, has done and that is how I was knighted. He also bestowed this honor upon Sir John Dooer.

You may find this of interest, and informative as well:
http://members.aol.com/balquhain/KnightService.html

tel wrote:

I find it in poor taste to pass yourself off as a proper knight in light of the fact that the honours were not bestowed upon you by Her Majesty or her official representatives. And to do so for the sole purpose of sounding important and credible to this community is in further poor taste.

You are making some assumptions about my purpose. This sounds like an accusation of sorts.

tel wrote:

And, if by any stretch of the imagination your knighthood was valid, you are not a subject of Her Majesty, and therefore could not even accurately call yourself 'Sir' anything.

Another assumption- that somehow, there can be no other knighthoods on planet Earth because the Crown exists. What rubbish. You are poor in your grasp of history. Knights have existed for ages, and many countries had (and have) them. But you still fail to acknowledge that knights are (and were) created in the service of landed barons, and that Burkes does indeed recognize the Baron. That is all you need to substantiate my title.

I consider it an honor and have practiced to uphold this honor. I am not personally important, it is the facts that are important. I only work to find them and present them.

tel wrote:

I call on you to stop this chicanery.

Chicanery (noun) - trickery: the use of tricks to deceive someone (usually to extract money from them).

It is easy to make the accusations fly when you are not face to face with me. Would you be so bold to my face? I think not. You feel safe behind a monitor and keyboard, snickering to yourself. You don't have anything I want that would be worth the effort of chicanery.

But I feel that you dislike my conclusions so strongly, yet are unable to find fault with the logic or the physics, that you will resort to personal attacks rather than honest analysis. You don't know the meaning of propriety- study the data and leave the personal attacks to the dimwits.

If you feel your attack should be of a more direct nature, as in to resolve this honorably, feel free. You can find me if you want to.

Starship Asterisk*

Meridiani Is A Seabed (APOD 05 Jun 2006)

Dr Skeptic. SHEESH!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Dr Skeptic. SHEESH!!!!!!!!!!

Microbes and pseudoscience

look at me

Re: look at me

Re: I can pi55 higher up the wall than you can.

Spot on Andy

Coast to Coast AM tonight

Sorry for the absence

NASA asleep at the helm

Basalt does not match well at all

knightskylive?

The poor attempts at personal attack continue