[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Please comment

> Recent “Life on Mars” frenzy mostly based on the assumption that there
> are 12 “Martian Meteorites” in NASA collection
> 
> Leaving apart /by my opinion not substantiated/ conclusion of “Life
> Traces” I am absolutely disagree with
> alleged Mars origin of these meteorites.
>         Some common sense arguments:
> 1.      For MILLIONS years BILLIONS of meteorites traveling near Earth orbit
> 2.      Planet Mars is a very, very, very, very small part of possible
> originations of these Meteorites
  [never of these two are valid, competent arguments]
   Still, it gets hit. And, that's nothing compared to unbelivably small
asteroids which are the source of most meteorites.

The planets are 4.6 billion years old, that's more than enough time

> 3.      Scientists made probe of atmospheric composition on Mars one time.
> There are lot of probes which WERE NOT  made (on THOUSANDS of possible
> origination places

 Ever gasped for air after you changed atmospheres on a vacation, or
been knocked over by a nitrogen bubble in the park? On Earth, our
atmosphere is the same at all places on sea level. It does change 
over millions of years, but no drastic changes enough to mistake for,
Venus, for instance. Nothing else in the solar system has an atmosphere
close enough to Mars to mistake for Mars. 

You have failed to mention 4 vital aspects of the presumed Martian
origin.

1) They are the youngest of all known meteorites, presumably they
orginated on a planet, or else this age wouldn't be possible because it
need volcanism.

2) The crystal size implies fast cooling, faster than what you would see
in space
3) the crystal size appears to indicate formation inside a large
gravitational field, meaning a planet. The gas samples equal two plus
two, pointing to Mars.
4) Gas samples of these 12 SNC meteorites are  identical
> 
> BECAUSE OF CORRELATION OF ANALYSES OF THE CONTEMPORARY SAMPLE IN ONE
> PLACE ON MARS TO THE 12 MILLIONS YEARS OLD SAMPLE ATMOSPHERIC
> COMPOSITION - THESE METEORITES CALLED “MARTIAN”     

What other planet could it be? Earth? To big, wrong atmosphere. Luna
--no. Venus-- certainly not. 
Really, we would have to invoke a tenth planet to explain this away.
   
> It is just shameful speculations filled with scientific terminology.
> Unfortunately it is a natural human tendency - when people does not have
> real objective reliable and complete statistic data they attend to
> speculate on the basis of what they have, to declare a “discovery”

  Are you stating that the science of meteoritcs is invalid?
I haven't seen NEW evidence against Martian meteorites in a looong time,
and there wasn't any here.
 
> I will really appreciate if you could find a minute to send me your
> comments and in case if you are disagree with me please tell me the
> names of the scientists who also does not believe that this “mail” has a
> readable return address.

   You're challenging old dogma, the burden of proof is on you. 
   
   Harry McSween
   (I think) Dr. Carl Sagan supported it also

> P.S. I think that  many scientists just afraid to go against opinion
> supported by NASA...

I very much hope not. If so, then, people like you would just challenge
them, so keep up the good work.
References: