NASA Cover-up?

Makalakumu

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
There is a current controversy among space afficianados. Is NASA covering up the discovery of actual evidence for life on other planets? No, this is not the vast X-files alien conspiracy, this one involves something tiny. It involves something that looks remarkebly like an animal that lived 500 million years ago in the Ordivician period. A crinoid...

http://www.enterprisemission.com/articles/03-08-2004/crinoid_cover-up.htm

Check out the site and chime in...perhaps this is just the tip of the iceberg.

"Live Long and Prosper"

upnorthkyosa
:asian:
 
First of All I believe in life on other planets.

Second of all I do not think this is a cover up. The grinding of fossil material be it stone or other would cause more damage to the stone face. The striation lines do not line up. Also in the grinded photo there are three circles as if dowels of metal were driven into the stone? How come this one is nto in color, as the point out later the blue berries or the blue rocks.

I think people are streaching here to create something that is not there. I do not see the same thign they are seeing in the fossil. I see where a rock cooled, and or had some liquid boiled off of it. I do not see the same fossil they claim was destroyed.

Just my opinions



upnorthkyosa said:
There is a current controversy among space afficianados. Is NASA covering up the discovery of actual evidence for life on other planets? No, this is not the vast X-files alien conspiracy, this one involves something tiny. It involves something that looks remarkebly like an animal that lived 500 million years ago in the Ordivician period. A crinoid...

http://www.enterprisemission.com/articles/03-08-2004/crinoid_cover-up.htm

Check out the site and chime in...perhaps this is just the tip of the iceberg.

"Live Long and Prosper"

upnorthkyosa
:asian:
Click to expand...
 
Rich Parsons said:
First of All I believe in life on other planets.

Second of all I do not think this is a cover up. The grinding of fossil material be it stone or other would cause more damage to the stone face. The striation lines do not line up. Also in the grinded photo there are three circles as if dowels of metal were driven into the stone? How come this one is nto in color, as the point out later the blue berries or the blue rocks.

I think people are streaching here to create something that is not there. I do not see the same thign they are seeing in the fossil. I see where a rock cooled, and or had some liquid boiled off of it. I do not see the same fossil they claim was destroyed.

Just my opinions
Click to expand...

First of, the stratification of the rock clearly indicates that this rock is sedimentary. The rock did not cool or boil off, it was deposited over time in an aqueous environment. This is how NASA is able to say that there is direct evidence for water on Mars.

Secondly, the fossil in question looks suspiciously like a crinoid. This is coming from someone who has actually dug them up and held them in hand.

Thirdly, the RAT is a small circular grinding device that has a series of spinning teeth. It looks very much like the mouth of a lamprey. The teeth spin, cutting into the rock and a vacuum tube sucks the powder into a various analysis equipment. One is a mass spectrometer. One is a NMR. One is an IR. All of these are very powerful, but require material enough to get good readings. The vacuum on Mars is hardly as strong as that on Earth, so a LOT of material needs to be ground in some instances, in order to get a good sample. In this case, the grinding striations are visible and they are circular.

I'm not sure what those three holes were for. I noticed those too.

Check the Hoagland interview on Coast to Coast for more info...

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/gen/page408.html

"Kloplach"

upnorthkyosa
 
Probably another Bush conspiracy... ;)
 
upnorthkyosa said:
First of, the stratification of the rock clearly indicates that this rock is sedimentary. The rock did not cool or boil off, it was deposited over time in an aqueous environment. This is how NASA is able to say that there is direct evidence for water on Mars.

Secondly, the fossil in question looks suspiciously like a crinoid. This is coming from someone who has actually dug them up and held them in hand.

Thirdly, the RAT is a small circular grinding device that has a series of spinning teeth. It looks very much like the mouth of a lamprey. The teeth spin, cutting into the rock and a vacuum tube sucks the powder into a various analysis equipment. One is a mass spectrometer. One is a NMR. One is an IR. All of these are very powerful, but require material enough to get good readings. The vacuum on Mars is hardly as strong as that on Earth, so a LOT of material needs to be ground in some instances, in order to get a good sample. In this case, the grinding striations are visible and they are circular.

I'm not sure what those three holes were for. I noticed those too.

Check the Hoagland interview on Coast to Coast for more info...

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/gen/page408.html

"Kloplach"

upnorthkyosa
Click to expand...
I have dug many years ago for fossils. I do not remember what would have caused the concave indention? Unless it was a build up of material and it was real biological, and in that case the Mass Spec and others woudl be able to determine its' composite make up. Yet, I still contend that the before and after pictures do not line up. Holes or no holes, they do not line up and or form the right pattern. Can you provide me with a section of the pictures I can line up?
 
All kidding aside....what would NASA's reason for hiding it be?? I would think a discovery would assure additional and better funding.
 
Here is a good explanation for the three holes...check this picture

http://www.enterprisemission.com/articles/03-08-2004/images/Fossil.jpg

In the before picture you can see some globular objects embedded into the rock. These are sulfate nodules, which are kind of like amorphous quartz formations. These form naturally in aqueous environments. In the after picture, the RAT ground them hemispherically making them appear like actual holes.

This grinding also needs to be taken into account over the general area because you have worn away the weathered surface and revealed a "fresh" surface in the rock. The features you see on the weathered surface very often differ from those on a fresh surface. That is why field geologists carry rock hammers.

The rock, itself appears to be a large clastic sedimentary rock with definite striations. This indicates a rapidly changing environment, which is not very conducive to live and would also explain the relative lack of other fossil structures. It is reminiscent of sandstone formed on a beach. I can see a crinoid (or similiar type of organism) being slowly covered with sediment and eventually buried.

It is interesting to contemplate the reasons why NASA would want to cover-up a find like this. My first thought was that it would be completely rediculous for them to do something like this because they would get whatever funding they needed, but then you have to take into account the fact that funding sources are limited and that some people may have more immediate places they would like to see that funding placed. That is my first stab...

Hoagland goes into detail on this in his interview on Coast to Coast. I listened to it and it is very interesting. I have it on file, but I don't know how to post it.

"He's dead, Jim"

upnorthkyosa
 
*LOL....having worked at JPL (Jet Propulsion Lab), and on the rover I might add, I can tell you, any type of conspiracy would be nearly impossible. Too many people have access to all kinds of information. Not to mention the ego's there. Imagine being the one to discover life in the photos, that alone would carry bragging rights for decades. Some people need to get a life....conspiracies..too funny.
 
Ender said:
*LOL....having worked at JPL (Jet Propulsion Lab), and on the rover I might add, I can tell you, any type of conspiracy would be nearly impossible. Too many people have access to all kinds of information. Not to mention the ego's there. Imagine being the one to discover life in the photos, that alone would carry bragging rights for decades. Some people need to get a life....conspiracies..too funny.
Click to expand...

I have future relatives who buy into the 'we didn't land on the moon' conspiracy and really believe that it was all sound stage special effects and television tricks.

Come on, the gov. can't hide a blowjob in the oval office and the number of people involved and the scale of production to pull something like that off would be huge. By now, someone would have come forward and named names on this. Along those lines, Ender's comment about the egos and competition for publishing, someone would have given someone else up long ago.
 
qizmoduis said:
See www.badastronomy.com for a good discussion on Hoagland and his antics. Hoagland is a typical spew-peddling, pseudo-scientific, conspiracy monger.
Click to expand...
Phillip Plait is the author of the Badastronomy site. He's also been a guest on Coast to Coast and was given an invitation to debate Hoagland on the show but declined. Both men sound, to those of us with no training or knowledge in the stuff, to be knowledgeable. Coast to Coast itself can get a little out there with the paranormal stuff but their shows on space are usually pretty good. I certainly believe in life on other planets if for no other reason than the law of averages. The universe is just, well, astronomically huge :uhyeah: and to believe that our one little spec on the edge of it all is the only place where life exists is just odd. As for the conspiracy theory behind it all... I ain't sayin' nuffin' 'cause Big Brother might be watchin'. :uhohh:
 
CT pundits will retort that, all good conspiracy theories are organized in blind pyramids. You only know what THEY want you to know, which includes things they you think THEY don't know. The theory with the Martian fossil picture is that someone inside the organization betrayed the "Organization" and leaked the "before" photo. Now, NASA has gone into "damage control" mode and is attempted to discredit those who have blown their cover.

Aren't Conspiracy Theories a load of fun!
 
I failed an Honors Colloquium project in college because I used sources back in the early 90's that said that the evidence supporting no life, nor had there ever been life, on Mars was inconclusive. I used some of the fossil interpretations that were being thrown around at the time, but there was far less data to support the theory, just like there was not enough data to conclusively say Mars was/is lifeless.

The teacher had a masters in Chem, Bio and Eng. Lit and taught a Sci Fi class along with her hard science courses and she still shot down my paper and my evidence. I wasn't even saying that there WAS life, just that the results for either side were still inconclusive at the moment. Intellect doesn't always become internallized I guess.
 
I just want to know why they keep sending rovers to the remote parts of Mars, instead of sending an attempt to explore and explain Cydonia (other than saying "it's just shading")...

And yes, I'm very big into Conspiracy Theories.
 
Superficially it at least sounds plausible. It does look fairly like a crinoid. However, I'm very sceptical. (My palaeontological skills were never that great anyway. I once confused a roof tile for Lepidodendron.)

So let's say for argument that they're right. What kind of theory can explain crinoids living on Mars? After all, crinoids only turned up here what, 550 Million years ago? To decide we need a lot more info, starting I guess with the age of the Martian rock. But sedimentary rocks aren't easy to date isotopically.

Could crinoids evolve independently on both Earth and Mars? What are the odds of that? Not good! Which means we have to assume Earth crinoids and Mars crinoids are linked. I'll make up a random theory now. Seeing how abundant life on Earth only kicked off half a billion years ago, and Mars has been dead for a long time, surely Mars had life first. And if crinoids existed in both places, we can assume Mars must have had Cambrian style fauna at some point, because independent evolution is so unlikely.

So- can we expect more Cambrian or Pre-Cambrian fossils to turn up on Mars? A few trilobites perhaps or a brachiopod? Bearing in mind these little beasts have to survive the friendly vacuum of space to get to Earth.

It's a lot far-fetched. Have any actual theories turned up yet?
 
I dont think there is a cover up.

If they did find something like that it would def. bring more funding their way esp in a time now where people are debate all the extra spending going on in our government.

Chicago Green Dragon

:asian:
 
OUMoose said:
I just want to know why they keep sending rovers to the remote parts of Mars, instead of sending an attempt to explore and explain Cydonia (other than saying "it's just shading")...

And yes, I'm very big into Conspiracy Theories.
Click to expand...

And that is a very good one! ;) I don't really care if the CT is true or not. Most are purely fictitious. I enjoy thinking about them though...
 
Andi said:
Superficially it at least sounds plausible. It does look fairly like a crinoid. However, I'm very sceptical. (My palaeontological skills were never that great anyway. I once confused a roof tile for Lepidodendron.)

So let's say for argument that they're right. What kind of theory can explain crinoids living on Mars? After all, crinoids only turned up here what, 550 Million years ago? To decide we need a lot more info, starting I guess with the age of the Martian rock. But sedimentary rocks aren't easy to date isotopically.

Could crinoids evolve independently on both Earth and Mars? What are the odds of that? Not good! Which means we have to assume Earth crinoids and Mars crinoids are linked. I'll make up a random theory now. Seeing how abundant life on Earth only kicked off half a billion years ago, and Mars has been dead for a long time, surely Mars had life first. And if crinoids existed in both places, we can assume Mars must have had Cambrian style fauna at some point, because independent evolution is so unlikely.

So- can we expect more Cambrian or Pre-Cambrian fossils to turn up on Mars? A few trilobites perhaps or a brachiopod? Bearing in mind these little beasts have to survive the friendly vacuum of space to get to Earth.

It's a lot far-fetched. Have any actual theories turned up yet?
Click to expand...

Some purely theoretical evolutionary biology which has incorporated the "magic" of chaos theory states that similiar environments produce similiar features. Evolution across the universe would then be connected depending on environmental similarities. This is explainable by the "strange attractors" postulate in chaos theory. If a criniod-like organism evolved on Mars, it would be the first bit of evidence for this theory.
 
Well, looks like this discussion is dying. Perhaps this will enliven it a bit.

I just finished the coast to coast episode with Hoagland. He says that NASA covered it up because they don't want people to see the other stuff, the bigger stuff, on Mars. They don't want people to see the remnants of the civilizations that existed long ago. They don't want people to learn that we are not alone...we are not suppose to learn who our master truly are.

Hoagland is too far out there. It's obviously obfuscation. THEY are trying to link this wacky conspiracy to the people who think this fossil is real in order to discredit them. People will read Hoagland's stuff and say, wow, what a kook and put it away and forget it. Man, if you were going to cover something up, this was the perfect plan. HOAGLAND IS THEIR MAN!!!!

The whole site is a mind trap. It's a set up. hmmmmm

upnorthkyosa

PS - Why in the heck would NASA grind this thing to dust? So many professional people think it looks like a crinoid wouldn't it have been best to study it? Instead, NASA (the government/THEY) is/are trying to get us to forget about it. hmmmmm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Iraq on the Record

Previous Thread

The Mass Extinction is YOUR Fault...

Next Thread

Similar threads

Bob Hubbard
Excerpt: Bikes, Boats, and Boxing Gloves, Adventure Writer in the Kingdom of Siam
Replies
1
Views
2K
dubljay
D

Latest Discussions

Back
Top