Lujendra Ojha, a graduate student at the Georgia Institute of Technology, turned to an instrument on the orbiter that identifies types of molecules by which colors of light they absorb. But this instrument, a spectrometer, is not as sharp as the camera, making it hard to zoom in on readings from the narrow streaks, a few yards across at most.
“We had to come up with new techniques and novel ways to do analysis of the chemical signature,” said Mr. Ojha, the lead author of the Nature Geoscience article.
The researchers were able to identify the telltale sign of a hydrated salt at four locations. In addition, the signs of the salt disappeared when the streaks faded. “It’s very definitive there is some sort of liquid water,” Mr. Ojha said.
The perchlorate salts lower the freezing temperature, and the water remains liquid. The average temperature of Mars is about minus 70 degrees Fahrenheit, but summer days near the Equator can reach an almost balmy 70.
Many mysteries remain. For one, scientists do not know where the water is coming from.
“We had to come up with new techniques and novel ways to do analysis of the chemical signature,” That sounds great doesn’t it. Do you know what it means? It means they jerry-rigged some processes which they had not previously tested properly so that they would have the baseline data necessary to calibrate the plus or minus of what they were hoping to figure out.
“The researchers were able to identify the telltale sign of a hydrated salt at four locations”
Unless NASA has reversed the image, it looks more like gullies than it does raised areas of hydrated salts, although near the end of them they do look raised. When you see the larger picture, it appears that the gullies are going down a gentle slope. So one has to wonder if they were caused by rocks that rolled down the hill leaving a groove and the rocks at the bottom were covered by sand storms. However, why weren’t the groves filled in? If the perchlorate salts were left ater the so-called water evaporated or froze, then why didn’t the salts show in the groves and only at the bottom? See, I can come up with at least one-half dozen other theories (all based upon previous guesstimates from NASA and JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, CA. Pay attention that may become important a little later on).
Next step is the temperature, which has been documented for years. From this website: http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q2681.html
The daytime SURFACE temperature is about 80 F during rare summer days, to -200 F at the poles in winter. The AIR temperature, however, rarely gets much above 32 F.
The temperatures on the two Viking Landers, measured at 1.5 meters above the surface, range from + 1° F, ( -17.2° C) to -178° F (-107° C). However, the temperature of the surface at the winter polar caps drop to -225° F, (-143° C) while the warmest soil occasionally reaches +81° F (27° C) as estimated from Viking Orbiter Infrared Thermal Mapper.
In 2004, the Spirit rover recorded the warmest temperature around +5 C (41 F) and the coldest is -15 (5 F) Celsius in the Guisev Crater.
Notice the graduate student at the Georgia Institute of Technology changes the concept of the temperature range to be more convenient for his theory.
So how does one compare something from one planet to a similar thing on another planet without being there? http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/Sibling_Rivalry.html Not that NASA has any prejudice involved in this situation.
“The similarities are striking. Each planet has roughly the same amount of land surface area.” Well, yes. But Mars is smaller and is all surface and Earth is 1/3 surface the rest water. “Atmospheric chemistry is relatively similar, at least as Earth is compared to the other planets in the solar system.” Compared to the other 7 planets, one of which is frozen solid (Pluto), one is completely obscured with gaseous clouds (Saturn), etc., etc. so it is probably somewhat similar. From Wikipedia, “The Martian atmosphere consists of approximately 96% carbon dioxide, 1.9% argon, 1.9% nitrogen, and traces of free oxygen, carbon monoxide, water and methane, among other gases.” Earth’s atmosphere “By volume, dry air contains 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.039% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases. Air also contains a variable amount of water vapor, on average around 1% at sea level, and 0.4% over the entire atmosphere.” I don’t know about you but it seems considerably different
“The neighbors also present strong historic evidence of changes in climate.” We have been accurately measuring the Earth’s climate for about 60 years, and we guess about everything that might have happened we believe in the past. I wonder how many tornados, hurricanes, floods that they have measured on Mars. We know they have sandstorms, but does it rain after them as it does on the ones on Earth?
Now let us get a little into the political ramifications of this. What you say, how can science be political? Well obviously you haven’t been reading my blogs lately.”
For just a small sample of the bias and cheating in the peer review process. So back to the political attacks coming. Here is what Rush Limbaugh discussed”
Radio host Rush Limbaugh came down hard Monday on NASA’s claim of finding water on Mars, stating that the dubious science would be used to promote the climate change agenda here on Earth.
Limbaugh read from a U.S. News & World Report article on the finding, saying, “quote, ‘Eons ago, ancient Mars had “an extensive atmosphere,” along with “an ocean two-thirds the size of the northern hemisphere and a mile deep,” said Jim Green, director of planetary science at NASA said during a press conference on Monday.’
“Okay, now, look, how do they know that?” he said.
“How do they know that there was an ocean two-thirds the size of the northern hemisphere and that it was a mile deep? We haven’t been there. We haven’t probed a mile down on Mars.”
Limbaugh warned his audience to “realize all this stuff is not based on any data whatsoever. It’s all based on computer models predicting things.
“This guy, Mr. Green, Jim Green at NASA, may be a perfectly nice guy, but, I’m sorry, the days where I listen to some scientist come out and say, ‘Yeah, two-thirds of Mars used to be covered with water and it was a mile deep,’ because what comes next, he’s the director of planetary science at NASA, and he said, ‘After an unknown catastrophe, “Mars suffered a major climate change and lost its surface water.”‘”
Limbaugh then asserted that Green’s words slide easily into the climate change cause back on the home planet.
“Now, doesn’t that fit amazingly well with the scaremongering they are engaging in about planet Earth?” he said.
“Was it Mars’ version of Hurricane Katrina, do you think? Was there a President Bush on Mars at the time? … I’m not joking here. I’m really serious about this. An unknown catastrophe, unknown. How do we know that? If we’re gonna admit that it was an unknown catastrophe, how in the name of Sam Hill do we know what it was and that it was brought on by climate change?
“Yes siree bob, that’s what it was, folks. After an unknown catastrophe, Mars suffered a major climate change and lost its surface water.” Limbaugh referenced a 2007 National Geographic article that claimed the sun was to blame for climate change on Mars.
“In 2007, February 28, National Geographic, ‘Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says.’ This is National Geographic eight years ago saying that data that we had collected on Mars now tends to indicate that it’s the sun, and not man, that’s causing changes on earth. Do you think anybody today is gonna go back and revisit that story in light of the discovery of flowing water on Mars?
“Sorry, folks, I’m not buying any of it. The evidence suggests that you shouldn’t either….
“I think this is – word for this – not ‘criminal.’ But this is dangerously incompetent. This is the attempted manipulation of people. To me this is hideous, to try to make something like this certain without doubt. ”
This is what Media Matters reported:
RUSH LIMBAUGH: “There’s so much fraud. Snerdly came in today ‘what’s this NASA news, this NASA news is all exciting.’ I said yeah they found flowing water up there. ‘No kidding! Wow! Wow!’ Snerdly said ‘flowing water!?’ I said ‘why does that excite you? What, are you going there next week? What’s the big deal about flowing water on Mars?’ ‘I don’t know man but it’s just it’s just wow!’ I said ‘you know what, when they start selling iPhones on Mars, that’s when it’ll matter to me.’ I said ‘what do you think they’re gonna do with this news?’ I said ‘look at the temperature data, that has been reported by NASA, has been made up, it’s fraudulent for however many years, there isn’t any warming, there hasn’t been for 18.5 years. And yet, they’re lying about it. They’re just making up the amount of ice in the North and South Poles, they’re making up the temperatures, they’re lying and making up false charts and so forth. So what’s to stop them from making up something that happened on Mars that will help advance their left-wing agenda on this planet?’ And Snerdly paused ‘oh oh yeah you’re right.’ You know, when I play golf with excellent golfers, I ask them ‘does it ever get boring playing well? Does it ever get boring hitting shot after shot where you want to hit it?’ And they all look at me and smile and say ‘never.’ Well folks, it never gets boring being right either. Like I am. But it doesn’t mean it is any less frustrating. Being right and being alone is a challenging existence. OK so there’s flowing water on Mars. Yip yip yip yahoo. You know me, I’m science 101, big time guy, tech advance it, you know it, I’m all in. But, NASA has been corrupted by the current regime. I want to find out what they’re going to tell us. OK, flowing water on Mars. If we’re even to believe that, what are they going to tell us that means? That’s what I’m going to wait for. Because I guarantee, let’s just wait and see, this is September 28, let’s just wait and see. Don’t know how long it’s going to take, but this news that there is flowing water on Mars is somehow going to find its way into a technique to advance the leftist agenda. I don’t know what it is, I would assume it would be something to do with global warming and you can — maybe there was once an advanced civilization. If they say they found flowing water, next they’re going to find a graveyard.”
http://www.mediamatters.org/video/2015/09/28/after-nasa-announces-it-found-water-on-mars-rus/205820 This was the banter before he actually got into the further discussion listed above from NewsMax. Convenient they cut out the important part, but what do you expect from MediaMatters.org a George Soros left wing funded group. And as usual the other lap-dog media outlets, took the Media Matters story as gospel and ran with it to try to discredit the conservative side of American politics as being stupid and lazy. Now that seems to me to be what’s wrong with the lap-dog media because all they had to do was look up the discussion on Rush’s web site where the entire program everyday is provided in transcript form for free for everyone to read WHAT WAS ACTUALLY SAID.
From his response on Tuesday: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/09/29/what_i_really_think_about_mars
“So yesterday we have this big announcement that they’ve found flowing water on Mars and that two-thirds of the planet used to be an ocean, two-thirds of the northern hemisphere used to be an ocean, it was a mile deep. I raised a question. How do we know this? Have we probed a mile deep? We know that there’s always been water on Mars because they have ice caps on the poles. So it’s not news that there’s water. That’s why they said free flowing water. But that wasn’t the big deal. The big deal was that some scientist — and it was important to call the guy a scientist — some scientist said that a catastrophic event probably related to climate change on Mars, resulted in this. “
And continued, “I’m sorry, folks, but that’s not science, and that’s not even a good wild guess. How can there be a catastrophic event on Mars when there is nobody there to experience the catastrophe? How can there be a catastrophe on Mars when we can’t even prove it? All we can do is wild guess it? And the very fact that my objection to this is being noted is proof positive that there is an agenda attached to this, otherwise they would leave my comments alone. “
Remember I said the JPL is close to Hollywood?
“This is from Yahoo News, even, the Millennial news network. “Did NASA Time its Mars Announcement to Coincide with ‘The Martian’?” a movie starring Matt Damon. “
“NASA’s announcement confirming that it found evidence of water flowing on the surface Mars,” not now, but many, many moons ago, or I should perhaps say many, many Marss ago, “was celebrated by scientists searching for life in the universe — and by publicists at 20th Century Fox looking to promote ‘The Martian,’ the upcoming Ridley Scott film starring Matt Damon. In the film, Damon plays Mark Watney, an astronaut who must survive alone on Mars after being left for dead by his crew during a fierce storm on the red planet.”
“NASA wants to go to Mars, and Obama’s turned NASA over to Muslim outreach, in case you’ve forgotten. NASA wants the money to go to Mars. It makes total sense in the world that they would time, NASA, the release of, “Look what we found! We found flowing water on Mars, oh, my God, there could be life…”
You need to remember that NASA was converted to Muslim outreach by Obama. It was one of the first things he did when he assumed office in 2009 to convert NASA’s budget and then use that money for Muslim outreach.
Therefore, it starts to make sense now, doesn’t it? The final decision that this hydrated salt meant there was running water on Mars was made months ago, but the announcement was delayed to coincide with the release of the movie, to get some rollover effects for NASA to stir hope for an increase in their budget.
Besides, if a “scientist” is going to get up in front of the world and claim that there was a mile deep ocean on Mars and some “unknown catastrophic” event occurred to eliminate the water, then, please show how you come to that conclusion with the facts that are available to all of us. I don’t want your so-called “considered opinion”, I want facts, not wild hypothesis.Possi