Bitcoin Forum

'Mars mystery solved': Nasa prompts speculation with promise of major announcement

Nasa is making big promises for Monday, saying it will reveal the answer to a major mystery about Mars.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/mars-mystery-solved-nasa-prompts-speculation-with-promise-of-major-announcement-a6668031.html

The last option of the poll had me laughing pretty hard...

When Nasa announces something im more excited than a kid on Christmas morning.
Its like finding something you lost years ago times 1000.

My pure guess - traces of H2O

Thanks for your vote!

 :D

I would love it if its a fossilized organism because as they said before mas may have been
earth like million years ago so a very high chance of living creature has been living in mars.
but my best bet is micro organism because if there is a moist place there`s an micro organism.

We shall know on Monday. Thanks for voting

 :)

Probably some fossil or like-it. It will reveal the life on earth.

Option 5: Lies

I think it would be more likely a fossil of some previous life forms or some bacteria. Something lame like that.

Lies? Vote #4

 ;)

Someone might argue that there really was "A 2 million year old human skull found, with a bullet hole in it" as long as NASA says it, it has to be true. /sarcasm

That's. Not. Lame!

It would mean the cosmos is teeming with life. You'll be part of the first humans since the start to know for a fact life is everywhere. Huge.

Thank you for voting

 :)

I think they will declare the presence of micro organism on mars and that they will be sending men on Mars to bring back some sample :D

At least we know whodunnit... (https://i.imgur.com/1OROMpF.jpg)

bad idea...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p35JDJLa9ec

My best guess.... most probably that they found water and or traces of it.

Not trace. Water. Plenty of it. Vote #1

 :)

I bet 1 month of signature campaign that will be something irrelevant that people will forgot in 3 days. Like some rock that has 1% more of some rock stuff than others and it doesn't matter.

Unless they are going to surrender to martians, I doubt they would announce an announcemente of some important stuff, they would just publish it

Vote #4 then...

 :)

Not that bad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMpXj899D9c

Either the discovery of a large aquifer, or the presence of enough oxygen trapped underground. The other options are just myths. Life can never be sustained in Mars. It's atmosphere is too thin, and full of Carbon di Oxide to support any form of life. Also, Mars is located far away from the sun, for plant life to sustain in the long term.

I read that NASA's main purpose since Obama became Dear Leader is to make the Muslim world feel good about itself. So my guess is:

Mars was discovered by Muhammed. As a consequence, like Mecca, only Muslims will be allowed to visit.

Well. I'd like to think that they'd be announcing the find of my lost 2010 bitcoin wallet, but I voted that they'd announce that they've found water...I'd love to think that they'd announce that they found life but don't think they would, even if they did find it.

Water discowered on mars long time ago. Polar caps on mars contains a lot of water. It's not a sensation. But finding living microorganisms on mars will be a sensation. That would be exciting. Im waiting for this.

If we have a live feed from the Rose Garden, you'll know 0bama would want to take credit for everything happening on Mars, for the history book. Forever. If it is a ustream feed from a VGA webcam then it would be about how they fixed their rover remotely, or something as "lame", to quote someone on this thread...

 :)

I think they will say there was something on Mars, used to be life or water, and then the question will be, what went wrong with Mars?

They'll use it to push the NWO/GlobalCitizens/Agenda2030, to push their climate change thing here, saying we have to shape up and get our acts in order to take care of this planet, because otherwise we'll end up like Mars.

Don't worry about it. Obama's term is about to end, in less than a year. After that Hillary Clinton, who is a Jewish convert will be the POTUS. So after a Muslim POTUS, we will be having a Jewish POTUS.


For Muslims, history before the invention of Islam is a taboo. That is why they are destroying pre-Islamic structures in Bamiyan, Palmyra and Timboktou. I just hope that they will refrain from nuking mars.

Why bring religion into this?Cant we stick to topic of the thread please

Mars' current climate is anthropogenic.  ::)

Water can only exist on Mars as solid or gas, liquid at that thin atmosphere immediately boils off.  Because in the mid and equatorial latitudes the ground can get to 80F (NOT the air) ground water anywhere near the surface at those latitudes would boil off.  But not at the poles, that is why there is water near the poles.

For this reason if they figured out what causes the streaks on the crater, it would be interesting.  This would be the discovery of a geological mechanism.  My guess is that most people wouldn't be excited about that.

PS.   Reporting is dismally unscientific.  For example -

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/09/26/mars-mystery-solved-says-nasa/

Most scientists already agree that the canyons and gullies that cover the Martian surface were once carved by water that flowed across the planet’s now-desolate surface. Now the plant’s poles also sport massive caps of frozen water. But one mystery persists: what happened?

Liquid water on Mars would be a groundbreaking discovery, imagined by scientists for over a century, at least since Italian astronomer Giovanni Schiaparelli captivated the world when he announced the discovery of a massive infrastructure of canals criss-crossing the Martian surface in 1877.

This guy writing does not even understand the effect of pressure on boiling temperature.  I have just explained that no liquid water will be found on Mars....there is no mystery.  The lack of radiation belts such as our Van Allen belts allowed the atmosphere to be ionized, and to be mostly lost.  The atomspheric pressure dropped too low to support liquid water.  There you are.

if it was a micro organism they wouldve announced it instantly, my guess is something to do with lauching another mars rover or something.

Rover fell through the ice, transmitted pictures of the second Stargate (the first one found in Iraq (http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-719922)) and the inscription of the dialing codes. Once they move earth's Stargate to the Antarctic, no more need for a manned spacecraft, SG-1 just has to gate over in a submersible, dial back, and flush the lake!

Duh just wanted to write that you watch too much stargate ^^

80% chance: traces of water
15% chance: aliens
 4% chance: something else
 1% chance: human like skull with bullet and similiar

There is nothing wrong watching too much Sci-fi.

 :)

Mars suffered a "climate change" and lost it's water. Do I win anything?

Martians apparently loved hairspray, poked a hole in the ozone and Al Gore wasn't there to save them.

such a pity.  Mars in the spring was so lovely.....

Mars Speaks Out on Climate Change: “The time is now for global collaboration and action” (http://www.einnews.com/pr_news/288662329/mars-speaks-out-on-climate-change-the-time-is-now-for-global-collaboration-and-action)

"Mars urges business and government leaders to drive toward concrete solutions on climate

Climate change is one of the biggest threats to our planet and our way of life. Science tells us that each year it is causing more heatwaves and wildfires, deepening droughts and aggravating flooding. As a result, it’s affecting agriculture and the future security of the food on our plates, without which we cannot survive.

Mars recognizes the threat of climate change and we believe that as a big global business, we must do our part to help tackle the challenge. We are taking advantage of this month’s Climate Week in New York and December’s United Nation’s Conference of the Parties (COP21) in Paris to underscore our commitment to doing our part to tackle global climate change—and to call on business and governments to do more.

Barry Parkin, Chief Sustainability and Healthy & Wellbeing Officer at Mars, feels strongly that business must lead the push for real change: “We know it's going to be important for companies to lead on climate change, and we’re already taking action,” he said. “We’ve declared our own decarbonization commitment – to eliminate the use of fossil fuel energy and greenhouse gas emissions from our operations by 2040 – and our Mesquite Creek wind farm is already generating the equivalent of 100% of the electricity needed to power the entirety of our U.S. operations.”...."

---

“Mars used to have a huge ocean that may have been as much as a mile deep 3 billion years ago,” NASA’s Jim Green said at a press conference. “It had extensive water resources. But something happened. Mars had a major climate change and lost its surface water.” (Forbes article (http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2015/09/28/scientists-confirm-the-presence-of-flowing-water-on-mars/))

---

Seriously do I win anything?

 :D

its liquid water!!!

Revelation! 40000 + strong views! You are like a little ant, always working hard. You've already won in my book...

 :)

YES! The poll got it right!

LMAO. Ahhh shucks. Thanks. :P

 ;)

It's not "liquid water" but some sort of hydrated salt.

The article in Nature's abstract is here.

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo2546.html

The hydrated salts most consistent with the spectral absorption features we detect are magnesium perchlorate, magnesium chlorate and sodium perchlorate. Our findings strongly support the hypothesis that recurring slope lineae form as a result of contemporary water activity on Mars.

Wikipedia article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorate

"Chorates are relatively toxic."

This is not exactly human or animal or bacteria friendly stuff.

*I should have wrote - confirmed H2O instead of "traces of H2O" *

NASA scientists found evidence of perchlorates, (hydrated minerals) which form the streaks on Mars’ surface.
Before todays announcement, they were just guessing it was water.

It will be incredible when we can actually bring back samples of ( fill in the blank ) back to earth for further study.

http://aem.asm.org/content/67/6/2499.full ?

SO....we just genetically modify humans to run on this stuff....

I'm afraid though, if they get to Earth, they burst into flames or blow up.

LOL...

[...]
One concern this is raising for NASA is how to check out the areas with liquid water (presumably the best shot at finding life) without risking contaminating them with life from Earth. Personally I think that ship may have already sailed. We recently found plankton living on the outside of the space station (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/11049504/Sea-plankton-found-living-outside-International-Space-Station.html) so we’ve pretty much proven that extremophiles can live pretty much anywhere and can even survive for extended periods in the freezing vacuum and radiation of space. We do try to sterilize everything we launch, but are we that effective at the microbial level? I bet there’s already some Earth based microbes hanging out on Mars thanks to us.

What I’d really like to see is some bacteria that’s actually Martian and figure out a way to bring it back and study it. If it has the same basic type of DNA as all the sub-microscopic critters on the Earth that might really tell us something about the solar system and the universe. (And before you ask, yes… bacteria have DNA. It’s just really simple and located in the nucleoid in the bacterial chromosome.) More to the point, if it’s completely different than any life on Earth, then it arose independently. That might really change our outlook on the world, eh?

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/09/28/big-nasa-mars-mystery-announcement-gets-watered-down/

Flowing Water On Mars indicates that LIFE CAN HAPPEN ON MARS. (Screw the religious people ;D )

If you believe NASA.....

DID SPACE.COM ADMIT WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON?  (https://youtu.be/IWN7s6KTENQ?t=1m33s)

NASA Admits They Can't Send Humans Through The Van Allen Radiation Belts  (https://youtu.be/51DED8dcNkA?t=1m29s)

We'll know in 2020 if life also exists there.  A planned mission will return Martian soil to the Earth for analysis. 

Great time to be alive and not brainwashed!  :)

Yes, actually we can and have sent humans through the Van Allen belts.  

That would be very, very interesting if it could return say, a thousand samples from diverse locations. 

Something like that might actually be near term possible these days.

We do not have geostationary labs for deeper sample analysis... Yet there will be point when it would be safer to have a lunar base (for example), when we start bringing stuff back home.

strong evidence, but still no hard proof.

will be nice when they are able to collect martian water with a drone

Hate to have to collapse your world, but, if it was really done, the truth of it is not being told to us. The videos in the link are not concrete evidence of this lie. But examination of the moon flight pictures shows that it was all faked.

http://www.aulis.com/stereoparallax.htm

:)

Can you tell me why the people at NASA don't think they have yet?

So you didn't want to watch the NASA engineer talk about the Van Allen belts in the first video?

And you didn't watch the other man in NASA in "space" talking about how they can't get through the Van Allen belts and right now we can only fly in earth orbit and we "could" go to the moon if we could get through them?

Keep your eyes closed, then.

I'm only simply asking that you produce facts, and figures to support your opinions instead of Youtube videos.  No, I don't care to watch your videos and the idea that Youtube videos are some kind of "proof" is laughable.

Astrophysics is a science.  Buy a textbook or two.
Van Allen belts are well studied.  Look up the facts.  From a simple Wikipedia 1 minute check.

The Apollo missions marked the first event where humans traveled through the Van Allen belts.....Astronauts' overall exposure was actually dominated by solar particles once outside Earth's magnetic field.

The total radiation received by the astronauts varied from mission to mission but was measured to be between 0.16 and 1.14 rads (1.6 and 11.4 mGy), much less than the standard of 5 rem (50 mSv) per year set by the United States Atomic Energy Commission for people who work with radioactivity.

Emissions from the Sun are a major danger, not the Van Allen belts.

This is so funny, lol.

I said people from NASA said we haven't been through the Van Allen belts. The proof that they said it is in the videos.

I'm not arguing about whether or not we can. I'm not trying to prove we can or can't. But it's funny you think I am. I'm telling you the people from NASA said we can't. Why did they say that?

I'm not concerned about some video that you think says something.  You may have misunderstood it, their words may be taken out of context, whatever.   "One person from NASA talking" is not "NASA."

This isn't rocket science.

Yeah... it's not. I said these quotes -

"Can you tell me why the people at NASA don't think they have yet?" (video links showing people at NASA saying it)

"I said people from NASA said we haven't been through the Van Allen belts."

I didn't say NASA said it in some sort of official document. I never claimed that. Please read next time.

Here is the BS you are now backtracking on.

If you believe NASA.....

DID SPACE.COM ADMIT WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON?

NASA Admits They Can't Send Humans Through The Van Allen Radiation Belts

Carry on!

But since you brought the subject up, let's explore it a bit.

1.  Do you now, or have you ever, held the belief in whole or part, that the US did not put men on the Lunar surface?
2.  Do you now, or have you ever, held the belief in whole or part, that the US did not have spaceships that move men through the Van Allen radiation belt?
3.  Do you have, or have you ever, an official Moon Denial card?
4.  Are you in reality a secret operative from the Nazi Lunar Base on the far side of the Moon?
5.  As a secret operative of the NLB, have you sworn to use propaganda Youtube links to sow confusion and mistrust of Diet Pepsi?

I await your answers. 

I'm not backtracking.

That was a quote where I was responding to someone. You just seemed to ignore that.

They wrote, "Flowing Water On Mars indicates that LIFE CAN HAPPEN ON MARS. (Screw the religious people :) )"

So I responded, that the statement is true, (that life can happen on mars) if you can believe NASA. If NASA says we went to the moon officially, and people from NASA say we can't get through the Van Allen Belts, I find it hard to believe anything NASA says officially.

Tarry on though, this is funny.

Edit: I think you think I named the links, I copied the youtubes name for the links. I wasn't saying the link's names as a statement. ;)

In case it isn't clear, I am practicing here the "Are you still beating your wife?" logical fallacy.  Which if even answered implies -

1.  You have a wife.
2.  You have a history of beating your wife.
3.  You may today be beating your wife.

Now, before thinking all that through too carefully....what is life like today in those secret far side Nazi Lunar bases?  When vil de Battle de Earth commenz?

And why are you wasting your time writing out fallacies?

This whole thing has been a blast for me. Maybe not for you, but hopefully you learned you should actually read/watch what someone writes about before responding to it as if you know what's going on with assumptions.

Oh, ignore Spendy. He's a government agent or a troll for government or both.

The question always was the Van Allen Belts. Back in the '60s, NASA let slip that there was some kind of iodine isotope injection for astronauts that they could take to protect them from the radiation. Of course, when they let it slip out, they were simply playing us all so that we would think that they had gone through the Belts.

Now that the technology is really here to do a real moon shot, and the only problem needing fixing is the Belts problem, NASA is trying to let the truth about the fake moon shots of the past come out slowly. Besides, they did such a shoddy job of making it look real back then, that the truth is surfacing anyway, without the NASA admittance.

Spendy has some good ideas at times, but he is a total government stooge. So, expect that he will run you in circles when you start to get too far out of line regarding the thing that government wants us to believe.

:)

Lol. Well it wasn't the best way. The links I was discussing and all the back and forth, probably called a lot more attention to the videos, which in turn probably made more people check them out.

I wasn't really suggesting to ignore him. And, you are right. All the extra publicity.

This forum format is a good one. There should be some way to set up a forum like this for each good topic that we have in this one, rather than only Bitcoin.

:)

Not sure which is the better conspiracy theory... that NASA made it to the moon or that NASA altered physics and/or used CGI decades before it was invented, to produce the Apollo videos at the time.

According to some, you should just Ask Youtube To Get Your Answer.

No need to use your brain or open a book.

MythBusters were asked to use their brains, and... myth busted. Not even plausible.

You're so funny. :P

Making things up and coming up with fallacies for no reason.

True.  Here's the link.  Didn't take them very long, either. 

http://mythbustersresults.com/nasa-moon-landing

Charlie Chaplin made some pretty good films back in the '20s.

:)

When you use your brain to get the truth, even if it is on Youtube, you may not need to open a book.

:)

Of course Spendy is referring to the videos of actual people from NASA talking and discounting them being from NASA because they're on Youtube. It's like discounting the pope was in the US because you only saw it on TV. lol

For someone who needs books for proof, MythBusters?   ???

http://www.aulis.com/stereoparallax.htm

:)

EDIT: I forgot the part about "brains." No matter.

Did you notice the cute comment on the MythBusters page (http://mythbustersresults.com/nasa-moon-landing), "The episode proves that landing on the Moon can be reproduced in studio :)
Knock, knock – wake up!"

LOL! Didn't think of that.

Problem is that according to the evidence offered at http://www.aulis.com/stereoparallax.htm, MythBusters failed, because their set was way too small.

:)

No, the episode does not prove that.

Proof that the Moon Landing was not faked is not proof that the Moon Landing could have been faked.

Once again you reply to me as if I said it. That was a quote. That's why there are quotation marks around it and a link for a reference. What I said, was it was a "cute comment". Do you have anything to say about the cuteness of the comment?

The point is, that when you have MythBusters using a studio that was far smaller than the one used for faking the moon landings, it doesn't really prove anything.

Again, when checking out the info at http://www.aulis.com/stereoparallax.htm and many other websites, it is becoming very evident that, even if mankind went to the moon, the evidence of it that is out in the public is fake.

:)

did you guys watched the youtube video that proofs that the dark age and holocaust is a hoax?  :o 8) ::) :-\

(i really dont want to discuss fake moon landings or whatever, just wanted to point out that youtube videos arent the best sources)

That's a strawman fallacy. No one was using youtube videos to prove the moon landings were fake in this thread.

I neither see a strawman argument nor a logical fallacy on my side.
My argument covers the ongoing discussion pretty good imho

*edit

Btw. How to land on the moon if you cant cross the van allen belt? :P

This is indeed very important news. We have all heard it but have you seen the awesome photos?
Below I present the actual picture of liquid water on Mars.

http://ct.weirdnutdaily.com/ol/wn/sw/i38/2/8/4/wnd_6de06ed1dec06276476a6997d5712fca.jpg

See, the misdirection of Spendy has you thinking this. The videos weren't proving we can't cross the van allen belts. The videos were proving people from NASA say we can't. There's a difference. See if you can see it. Spendy sure couldn't.

Martian microbes are a more urgent danger than little green men
Technology must ensure planetary landers do not bring bacterial doom, writes Anjana Ahuja


Fabulous discoveries are often followed by exceedingly dull paperwork, such as the checking and rechecking of data, graphs, statistical analyses and conclusions. This week’s announcement that scientists had found evidence of briny water on Mars will have had many experts reaching for the small print of Nasa Policy Directive 8020.7G.

The directive is required reading for those who send spacecraft to hunt for extraterrestrial life. It codifies the etiquette for “planetary protection” — preventing earthlings and their emissaries from contaminating their celestial bodies (known as forwards contamination), and arguably more importantly, guarding against the encroachment of alien microbes into the terrestrial biosphere (backwards contamination).

While the concerns about our germs hitchhiking to other worlds date back to the 1950s, this week’s revelation — and its implications for the possibility of life elsewhere in the solar system — should prompt an urgent reappraisal of how we maintain the absolute integrity of both the Martian and terrestrial biospheres.

The evidence for water flowing on the red planet was gathered by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, a Nasa spacecraft launched in 2005, with images that showed dark streaks down the walls of a crater. The streaks were found to carry the infrared signature of hydrated salts, which is regarded as a proxy for water.

The results were published on Monday in Nature Geoscience. They were prefigured, however, in images dating back to Mariner 9, which began orbiting Mars in 1971. These revealed a world seemingly sculpted by liquid: valleys and canyons, ancient river beds and branching canals. Even in the 1960s, Earth-based observations suggested the spectral signature of water vapour in the thin Martian atmosphere.

A succession of orbiters and landers added layers of evidence: polar caps comprising vast quantities of water ice, rocks and pebbles rounded and smoothed as if by water, clumps of material dug up by a robotic arm which subsequently vaporised, indicating subsurface water, permafrost-like patterns beneath the scarlet dust.

What made Monday’s announcement significant was its confirmation that liquid water flows on the planet’s surface today, albeit only seasonally. Mars is smaller than Earth with a much weaker gravitational field; it had been postulated that liquid water would just float away.

Astrobiologists, who study the origins of life in the universe, are thrilled: their guiding principle is to “follow the water”, since all known life, or life forms, need water for survival.

There is a class of extremophiles — organisms that survive in extreme environments — which thrive in salty, dehydrated surroundings. Scientists have found such “halophiles” in the ultra-dry Atacama Desert in Chile, in the form of microbes living in salt crystals (they absorb moisture from the atmosphere). Halophiles often contain a protein called bacteriorhodopsin; this might narrow the search for a smoking gun for life on Mars.

The obligation of space agencies to prevent contamination of Earth and other planets is stated in the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty, which started life as a means of preventing the Moon and planets being used for hostile purposes. Earlier this year, astrobiologists raised concerns that ultra-sensitive space instruments and their associated electronics were now made of materials too delicate to withstand heat sterilisation.

While that is usually fine for orbiters, which do not land, it poses a challenge to missions such as Nasa’s Mars 2020 mission, due to touch down on the Red Planet after 2020.

There is an urgent need to develop the technology required to make sure future landers are not the bringers of bacterial doom. As humanity embarks on a search for Martian life in the brine, we must ensure that our methods are ethically watertight.

https://next.ft.com/content/7a5073e0-66c0-11e5-a57f-21b88f7d973f

You would start from low earth orbit, and simply set an orbit which avoided the belts.  This would obviously not be on the plane of the sun and the planets.   The orbit would loop out past the Moon, and would be calculated to intersect the Moon on the spacecraft's way back.

It's not the fastest method or the safest - that is the Hohmann maneuver used by Apollo.  Also it would limit the landing sites.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hohmann_transfer_orbit

No, the "videos do not prove" any such thing.  Facts prove things.

So do you think the pope visited the US and talked to the UN and congress recently? If you weren't there, how can you believe the TV? They only have video proof for you.

First of all the links that you have quoted do, as I said, cut and snip Kelly Smith's talk.  They superimpose imagery and words on top of his snipped sections.  To make it simple, they lie about what he said.  That's what you seem to be somehow in favor of.  No, Kelly Smith didn't say we can't cross the van allen belts.  No, your videos don't prove people from NASA say we can't cross them.  No, you don't have a point.

Here is the unabridged video of Smith.

http://www.space.com/27560-orion-capsule-test-flight-video.html

Here are some parts of his talk -

can harm the guidance computer...pass through twice...once up and once back...shielding will be put to the test...

...we must solve these challenges before we send people through these areas of space...

Once it breaks away from Earth, the Orion capsule will pass through the Van Allen Belts, huge swaths of radiation that could wreak havoc on a spacecraft's electronic equipment. The data Orion collects when passing through the belts will help engineers design shielding that can safeguard the craft during future human missions, Smith said.

This is a talk about an operational systems test of the capsule that involves sending it through the belts before sending the capsule up with people in it. 

Would you like to get real please?

If you don't, I suggest you simply email Kelly and ask him your questions.  This is not complicated.

He says, "...we must solve these challenges before we send people through these areas of space...". If they don't know how to solve these problems to get people through that area of space now (in 2015), then how did they do it in 1969?

No part of your statement is true.  No more than your links accurately reflected what "NASA says," or "What a NASA engineer said."

See, the misdirection of Spendy has you thinking this. The videos weren't proving we can't cross the van allen belts. The videos were proving people from NASA say we can't. There's a difference. See if you can see it. Spendy sure couldn't.


Testing a spacecraft is standard practice.  It was done with Apollo, and it is being done with Orion.  It's as if you intentionally mistake things.  

Well, you got caught.

The concern is clearly stated as to the electronics being a matter of concern.  If your car's computer and sensors quit, your car would quit.  Was that true in 1969?  nope, because none of today's miniaturized electronics existed.  Regardless, systems testing is good practice.

Again, I invite you to simply ask your question to Kelly Smith, if you actually believe he said things - or implied things - that he didn't.

Right, deflecting from what I was actually talking about... strawman fallacies. I agree testing a spacecraft is always a standard practice, but of course that has nothing to do with what I was originally talking about.

If they knew how to get through the radiation in 1969, then they should know how to get through the radiation now.

But thanks for showing he said what I said he said.

"Radiation like this can harm the guidance systems, on-board computers, or other electronics on Orion. Naturally we have to pass through this danger zone twice, once up and once back. But Orion has protection, shielding will be put to the test...Sensors aboard will record radiation levels for us to study. We must solve these challenges before we send people through these areas of space..."

What you're saying is that because there is a different technology (miniaturized electronics) on Orion, it may malfunction when it goes through the Van Allen Belts, which is why they're testing it without humans first. What he should have said, "We must solve these challenges before we can send people in Orion through these areas of space". Because everyone knows we've already sent people through these areas of space.

So how did they protect the previous 1969 Apollo mission's guidance systems, on-board computers, or other electronics? Because they were bigger back then, they were more protected? Why didn't they test the radiation levels back then to figure out how to get their electronics through the Van Allen Belt back in '69?

Oh you want me to ask them. I don't care. My point was he said they need to study up, get the radiation information, by sending Orion up through the Van Allen Belts, so they can then actually get humans up there. Which is what he said.

Your goalpost shifting is quite obvious.

Not only is spacecraft testing standard practice, so is aircraft and auto.  Van Allen belts were extensively studied before Apollo.  Instead of asking misleading questions based on lying youtube videos, why not just read a bit about it?

Yes, today's electronics is far more sensitive to radiation than that of 1969.  That is why solar storms and Carrington events are problematic today.

When Apollo flew, the program directors and the astronauts knew the exact risk factors from Van Allen, solar radiation, and solar storms.  Everybody knew that if a bad storm hit, the men in the capsules were dead.  Everyone knew there was no risk from the Van Allen belts they traversed.

Just as an example, here is Wikipedia on the van allen belts.

Solar cells, integrated circuits, and sensors can be damaged by radiation. Geomagnetic storms occasionally damage electronic components on spacecraft. Miniaturization and digitization of electronics and logic circuits have made satellites more vulnerable to radiation, as the total electric charge in these circuits is now small enough so as to be comparable with the charge of incoming ions. ....

The Apollo missions marked the first event where humans traveled through the Van Allen belts...

The astronauts had low exposure in the Van Allen belts due to the short period of time spent flying through them.....

... total radiation received by the astronauts varied from mission to mission but was measured to be between 0.16 and 1.14 rads (1.6 and 11.4 mGy), much less than the standard of 5 rem (50 mSv) per year set by the United States Atomic Energy Commission for people who work with radioactivity.[30]

You act as if I based my info from the youtube personalities, instead of straight from the mouth of the NASA employee. Couldn't be further from the truth as the quotes you wrote up said what I said he said. The video of him talking was the same in both videos. I couldn't care less about what you're writing, because I was never arguing about whether or not we got through the belts, purely pointing out the NASA employee says they need to do more work to get humans through them.

Well, Spendy, I watched your video at http://www.space.com/27560-orion-capsule-test-flight-video.html. And after seeing this, all I have to say is, BULLSHIT.

Besides MakingMoneyHoney being right about Smith saying, "...we must solve these challenges before we send people through these areas of space...," the whole thing is total BS.

The Smith quote, above, says what it says. The problems weren't solved back with Apollo, or else we lost it. Losing it is stupid thinking. Therefore we never had it.

This whole NASA video is stupid. The Space Shuttle could have taken something like Orion up there, and brought Orion back if NASA was going to do something like send guys to the moon on Orion.

Furthermore, the Space Shuttle, itself, would have been a much more viable method for a moon or Mars shot, simply because of its ability to land on a runway. We did lots of runway landing missions with the Space Shuttle.

In addition, the gigantic cargo bay of the Shuttle would have been ideal to take equipment out and beyond, at the same time it housed the astronauts in much better living conditions.

This whole NASA thing is a big cover-up. What are they covering up? Who knows? But Orion is stupid when comparing it to the Space Shuttle.

What does this mean? It means that NASA is at least deceitful. And this means that NASA is also lying right out in the open about some if not many things.

As MakingMoneyHoney said, "Wake up."

:)

EDIT: The Youtube link for this video is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyZqSWWKmHQ.

Here is your post #55, referencing "people going through Van Allen Belts" -

Can you tell me why the people at NASA don't think they have yet?

Now you say you were never arguing about whether or not we moved people through the belts.

Moving goalposts.  Probably want to delete your prior posts, before claiming something different.

Your link (not you) was a twisted, sick misframing and misrepresentation of Smith's actual talk.  It took things out of context to make a point that is obviously wrong to anyone with a glimmer of understanding of the science.  You bought into it or whatever, and I called you on it. 

This is not complicated.  A one minute google search would have shown you the propagandist doing the video was a outright liar.  There's nothing wrong with not understanding why bigger electronic parts are affected less by radiation than miniaturized parts.  But these are not matters of opinion, they are well understood.

See? I knew you didn't get it. I'm sorry, but I wasn't moving goal posts, you simply were making them up (strawman). My post was about "why the people at NASA don't think they have yet", yet you claim I'm discussing whether or not we have. I am discussing people from NASA (who are talking about whether or not we have).


You called me on stuff that doesn't matter. I was simply pointing out what the person from NASA said, which you agreed with. It's not my fault you don't know how to look at a video and ignore certain people, and focus on others without getting sidetracked.

Here is your post #55, referencing "people going through Van Allen Belts" -

Can you tell me why the people at NASA don't think they have yet?

So since you wrote post 55 you now believe that NASA didn't say that people had not gone through the radiation belts?

In the past no one knew if the space would be deadly or not. Only way to verify was send animals and verify

But send living things to mars is more complicated of course

I'm sorry you're having such a problem comprehending things. But since it's come to my attention you don't know what I'm talking about, even though I've explained it multiple times, I think it's time to end this conversation. I'm sorry if you feel like you're in the right and I'm ignoring you, but I've clearly explained what I was talking about... you just don't get it.

Brain... cells... dying... /unwatch

I heard about last monday they found liquid water on mars
But a given when they found ice on mars anyways liquid water
Means source of life high chance of dicovering fossils and microbes
In mars.

Spendy is simply hot-headed, and way to fast. Lots of Muslims are like this. They don't slow down enough to analyze what is actually being said, or is happening.

There is nothing wrong with this. They are very dynamic people in a lot of ways. And this can be very good at the right time and place.

So, relax. As you said, he doesn't get it. And in Spendy's case, he doesn't want to get it, either.

:)

If life microbes or fossils are there on Mars, the life came from earth. The Bible talks about how everything in space was sent there from earth, including the material the stars are made from. It's in the creation story, right in the beginning of the Bible. But you will need to think about what you read to see it.

In addition, look at the pictures inside the Temple of Hathor in Egypt. The pillars are imperfect replications of the exterior of rockets from an ancient civilization on earth, one that far predates ancient Egypt. This civilization placed their rocket engines at the top of their rockets, probably for rocket stability, so that the center of gravity would be below the propelling force.

The Egyptians revered the people from this civilization as gods. And Hathor was the goddess of the sky. That's why you don't see this kind of pillar much of anywhere else in Egypt. The sky goddess was the keeper of the knowledge of the sky. See the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8-WWVlk_3E, and start watching about 5 or 6 minutes in, for Hathor.

The prehistoric ancients probably had a space program that was greater than ours, even though their science was probably different... focused in other areas of science than ours is. They probably went all over the solar system. However, they were probably plagued by funding problems just as we are. Not everyone wants to travel all over the universe.

If you are incredulous regarding the fact of an advanced civilization in the far distant past, watch these videos - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CwwrwFyTFs - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuwQi91KQgk.

:)

SO you haven't been reborn in zombie mode yet?

This means no man ever set foot on moon?

Do you really believe in shit you just said?

Well, finding liquid water on Mars is pretty exciting.  At least it gives us a target to investigate...a platform from which we can point our research in the search for life beyond Earth.  Everything else is just speculation until more facts are accumulated.

The radiation problem is just a matter of shielding. A meter thick shielding of liquid water is enough to absorbed most of the radiation.

I was looking for shit in what I said, and I couldn't find it. Please elaborate, if you wish.

Science doesn't have many answers to the past beyond about 4,500 years. Even the answers they have regarding the age of things older than, say, 2,000 years, is often hypothetical. They don't know, and they say that they don't really know. At the same time, they firmly hang onto their beliefs regarding the age of things in the distant past.

Probably the firmest direct knowledge of things in the distant past comes down to in the writings of the Bible. These are things of witness.

Other ancient writings, be they in books, or on scrolls, or on the walls of ancient temples like in Egypt, give us many good points. But even the Sumerian writings are NOT written in a direct, straight-forward manner as the Bible is, NOR are they backed up by the historical traditions of a stubborn nation like Israel, which traditionally has backed up the things of the Old Testament as being eye witness truth. Bible is witness.

Most of science hypothesizing about the ancient past is guesses, or guestimations.

Bible is still the best history book we have regarding ancient, prehistoric history.

Regarding an ancient, worldwide civilization that existed long before ancient Egypt, THAT is fact, which is found in archaeology. Regarding their science being in advance of ours, some of it definitely was.

One simple fact regarding this is, while our science could figure out ways to move some of the 300 to 1000 ton blocks of stone over distances of hundreds of miles (as did the ancients), we don't know for sure how we would do it, because we haven't done it. And while technically it might be viable, economically it isn't, so it might be impossible for us.

Regarding the things about Hathor and the Temple of Hathor, much of what I wrote is speculation. But there is as much logic to it as there is to much of the standard garbage teachings of modern science and archaeology.

Now don't get me wrong about science. Science at its core is extremely accurate. At its core, archaeological writings state that the archaeologists don't really know the facts about a lot of what they have found, or what they think about it. It's the political twisting of what the archaeologists say, that has turned much of modern archaeological writing into science fiction, and has us believing that we know more than a smattering about the distant past.

Regarding the things that Graham Hancock says, note that he makes a distinction between the evidence, and his theories about the evidence. Again, the political element often dismisses his evidence right along with his theories, rather than expressing the evidence and alternate theories.

You certainly are welcome to keep on believing the science fiction of standard archaeological teaching. I understand how hard it would be to throw away as much as 99% of the things that you have been taught and believe in about your ancient past, simply to look at the truth.

:)

True.  It'd be nice to find materials on Mars which chemically react to produce free heat, such as what we use fossil fuels and wood for here.  I'm not optimistic about that, since chemical reduction looks pretty complete, at least in the soil and sand.  But it's a whole planet, who knows.

I hope there are uranium on Mars we can use as fuel. Or we use Solar Energy on Mars. Or we can harvest the Helium 3 on the Moon.

We would need for all three of these options ..... to know how to build photovoltaic panels on Mars, or to know how to build a fission, or a fusion reactor .... on Mars.  Then we'd need to demonstrate that capability, and prove reliability.  Even making copper wire would be a huge undertaking - finding the ore, refining it, devising some method of producing the plastic for the shielding, etc. 

We have not once to my knowledge exported off this planet an industrial process at the pilot plant level.

try not to be disappointed when you realise that NASA's idea of flowing water is a mark in the dirty that may or maynot be a sign that there once was flowing water

No, this is about a location where water flows now, part of the day for part of each year.