It may be something like the sailing stones that can be found in Death Valley? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailing_stone
That's pretty cool.
It may be something like the sailing stones that can be found in Death Valley? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailing_stone
Isn't it, but the Martian surface the rover is on looks too stony. The sailing rocks are on a softer clay surface than the one the rover appears to be on. Two theories in an article here are:http://www.space.com/24356-mars-rock-mystery-opportunity-rover-photos.htmlIt may be something like the sailing stones that can be found in Death Valley? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailing_stone
That's pretty cool.
I lean toward the rover kicking something up. The article mentions a high amount of sulfur, magnesium, and manganese, higher than normally found, so even if it's something the rover kicked up the rock's origin is still an interesting question.One suggests that the rock is a piece of debris from an impact crater somewhere near the rover that just happened to plop down in front of Opportunity, while the other theory is that the rock was kicked up by one of the rover's six wheels during its recent drive.
All of this To Do over the placement of a doughnut-sized rock, on a rocky planet strewn with rocks surprises me. I can only imagine what the reaction would've been, had it been a black monolith - HA! Nobody would believe it, probably! They'd say it was faked ... yet a common stone earns all of this publicity and interest.
Yeah, fuck science! Who cares about that noise? Let's talk about celebrities on the red carpets!yet a common stone earns all of this publicity and interest.
Taikonaut.A Chinese Cosmonaut
All of this To Do over the placement of a doughnut-sized rock, on a rocky planet strewn with rocks surprises me. I can only imagine what the reaction would've been, had it been a black monolith - HA! Nobody would believe it, probably! They'd say it was faked ... yet a common stone earns all of this publicity and interest.
Uh-huh. Because we shouldn't bother trying to figure out what the data sent back by the rover means. Rich!![]()
All of this To Do over the placement of a doughnut-sized rock, on a rocky planet strewn with rocks surprises me. I can only imagine what the reaction would've been, had it been a black monolith - HA! Nobody would believe it, probably! They'd say it was faked ... yet a common stone earns all of this publicity and interest.
Uh-huh. Because we shouldn't bother trying to figure out what the data sent back by the rover means. Rich!![]()
Plus, no matter how it got there it clearly indicates some sort of activity. Doubly interesting because everything else around the rock in question looks exactly like in the first picture, none of the other rocks have moved an inch from what I can tell.
So, unless the rover itself put it there, exploring an active environment is a lot more interesting than a completely dead surface like the moon.
yet a common stone earns all of this publicity and interest.
Nothing says common like a scientist telling you "It's like nothing we ever seen before. It's very high in sulfur, very high in magnesium, it has twice as much manganese than anything we've seen on Mars" does.
I don't see how the reaction of a handful of people who would get fired up over anything is relevant.NASA's own scientists and the language they used to describe this event fired up the UFO conspiracy theorists.
Nothing says common like a scientist telling you "It's like nothing we ever seen before. It's very high in sulfur, very high in magnesium, it has twice as much manganese than anything we've seen on Mars" does.
Exactly. NASA's own scientists and the language they used to describe this event fired up the UFO conspiracy theorists.
What I'd like to know is whether they've scanned the vicinity and found a spot this rock may have come from.let's have more science and less conspiracy junk.
I got that beat ... Try this on, for size:yet a common stone earns all of this publicity and interest.
Nothing says common like a scientist telling you "It's like nothing we ever seen before. It's very high in sulfur, very high in magnesium, it has twice as much manganese than anything we've seen on Mars" does.
http://www.universetoday.com/108733...-on-mars-came-from-and-no-its-not-a-mushroom/We received an email this week from neurologist and self-proclaimed astrobiologist Dr. Rhawn Joseph, of the Journal of Cosmology fame who we’ve previously written about.
He has filed a lawsuit in the US District Court Northern District of California claiming the white rock is biological in nature and is seeking an order forcing NASA, Administrator Charles Bolden, and others including Squyres to “examine a biological specimen on Mars” and that NASA is failing to investigate the rock thoroughly enough.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.