Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Methane on Mars

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    193

    Methane on Mars

    There was a NASA press conference on methane on Mars today. http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2009...s_Methane.html

    They're still not able to say if it's biological or geological, though.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    16,659

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    7,193
    Certain groups in NASA are trying to get funding. Planetary Scientists are making a power grab.

    Right now there is Chaos in NASA....

    Griffin is leaving:
    http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/20...riffin_bi.html

    And my worst Nightmare has come true.

    A fighter Jock looks to be the New Nasa Chief

    http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/200..._resident.html


    Great. There goes ARES, and now NASA is just another branch of the Air Force.

    The Griffin Bashers finally won--and now NASA will be just one underfed branch of the military industrial complex. I hope all you anti-Griffin types are happy.

    The Methane on Mars deal is just another grab for NASA money.

    Engineers will be on the outs and science only wonks are already fighting for dollars.

    Back to the bad old Dan Goldin days. "Faster Better cheaper" is back.

    At least Jay Barbree let O'Grief have it with both barrels. Check out http://www.nasawatch.com for more.

    As for me, I think I'll jump off a cliff.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    7,193
    Double post

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    WA state, USA - Seattle area
    Posts
    1,843
    Quote Originally Posted by publiusr View Post
    The Methane on Mars deal is just another grab for NASA money.
    Are you saying the methane on Mars data is a hoax as part of a scheme for funding?

  6. #6
    Isn't this how every science fiction movie about Mars starts? Next will come spaceships ...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    449
    Im experienced with having ex-Airofrce guys in charge. The Airforce has organizational issues and has created a paradigm in that is unique even in military circles. Anyway I would be first to agree that having a military mindset in charge may be a disadvantage for NASA. There is a balanace to be struck between a focus on manned exploration providing (military and stategic advantages) and pure science yielding advances in knowledge and technology. In fact purely robotic exploration will yield all the pure science we seek, but will fail to provide the security of having settled humankind outside of "spaceship" earth. Ulitmately the earth is vulnerable and we must move on to survive.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,166
    Wonderful news.

    Now, who wants to bet that if there is life, it will be identical to life found on Earth since Mars has had billions of years to get hit with a contaminated meteor blown of off Earth?

    Could the Viking probes have contaminated Mars?


    Having an ex Airforce guy in charge may be a good thing. In theory, he'll be more aggressive with the other government agencies and get things done.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,793
    Quote Originally Posted by publiusr View Post
    The Methane on Mars deal is just another grab for NASA money.
    And exactly how do you justify this bizzare statement?

    Jon

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,080

    Irony

    Isn't it ironic that after dozens of fly-by missions, landings, rovers, etc.
    in the end it's good old earth-based observation that gives us this definite proof?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,793
    Quote Originally Posted by clint View Post
    Isn't it ironic that after dozens of fly-by missions, landings, rovers, etc.
    in the end it's good old earth-based observation that gives us this definite proof?
    Not really. There is still a place for terrestrial observations, for example they are the only way to get synoptic data of Mars at present. A ground based instrument unconstrained by power volume and mass can have sensitivity advantages over a small instrument on a spacecraft.

    Ground based instrurments can also be improved much faster that space probes instruments. The PFS on MEx is the same as it ever was. No better instrument is scheduled. The instrument on Keck is likely to have been modified and upgraded in the light of earlier observational camapaigns and data from MEx.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    10,369
    I thought it was interesting that a disconnect between the presumed locations of subsurface water and the methane clouds was perceived to be so mysterious.

    Did anyone bother to check the prevailing wind pattern?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Metrowest, Boston
    Posts
    4,059
    Quote Originally Posted by Doodler View Post
    I thought it was interesting that a disconnect between the presumed locations of subsurface water and the methane clouds was perceived to be so mysterious.

    Did anyone bother to check the prevailing wind pattern?
    Doodler. Good question. pete

Similar Threads

  1. Mars methane
    By Vultur in forum Life in Space
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 2010-May-11, 08:05 AM
  2. Methane on Mars
    By ToSeek in forum Astronomy
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 2005-Nov-09, 11:36 AM
  3. Mars Express detects methane on Mars?
    By RGClark in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 2004-Aug-24, 05:08 PM
  4. Methane On Mars
    By chaosman in forum Life in Space
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 2004-Apr-17, 03:44 PM
  5. Methane On Mars?
    By antoniseb in forum Astronomy
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2004-Mar-28, 05:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •