Page 2 of 2
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 2:28 pm
by makc
craterchains wrote:And, finally today, as a multiple warhead delivery vehicle for modern high yield atomic weapons that can create concise systematic lines of craters, or to different cities in a region.
Funny how you have to use this atomic weapon example when you reject tidally torn comet theory that has
exactly the same underlying ballistics.
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 4:41 am
by FieryIce
tidally torn comet theory that has exactly the same underlying ballistics
WRONG!
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 6:27 pm
by makc
Really? What's the difference?
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:39 am
by makc
for everyone who will happen to ever read this thread, it appears they took that image from different angle, with following details visible:
(I've found this image at
BA blog)
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:18 pm
by BMAONE23
A nice image of another hole but I don't believe it is the original post aforementioned hole
http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/pdf/PSP_004847_1745.pdf
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:16 pm
by makc
no, I think it's the same hole
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:40 pm
by BMAONE23
It looks like your image is in the midst of a heavily cratered plane with a somewhat sizeable crater toward the top of the image but the PDF file image seems to be of a more sandy plane (like where opportunity is) with little noticeable cratering around the lip of the hole and no sign of the afore mentioned crater
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:20 am
by makc
hmm now i think you're right... but why did BA linked this image to
http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_004847_1745
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 4:58 pm
by craterchains
Good question makc.