Who can debunk life on Mars?

Forums: Science, Mars, Biology, Astronomy, Geology
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Mars meteorite ALH84001 contained numerous blood vessels:

Dr. Treiman displayed a micrograph of meteorite ALH 84001 at http://www.lpi.usra.edu/publications/slidesets/marslife/slide_22.html

I found numerous blood vesel remains in the image and labelled them in Edit [Moderator]: Link removed

The above is negative effect of this photo:Edit [Moderator]: Link removed

Added on Oct. 23, 2011: Reasons why they were blood vessels.

1. 1.No minerals curve and contain bulging dots in structures smaller than 10 micrometers in diameter. Asbestos’ fibers are no larger than one micrometer across. Asbestos don’t contain bulging dots in their fibers or in bundles of fibers.
2. 2.No bacteria or fungi or plant rootlets have so many minute branches (<4 micrometers across) in such small area.
3. 3.No animal cells or tissues have such minute (<4 microns across) branches bulging with round dots, except blood vessels and lymph vessels. However, lymph vessels should be connected to lymph nodes, which are not seen in the image. So, blood vessels were the only real possibility.

A list of my posts: Edit [Moderator]: Link removed

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 3 • Views: 4,477 • Replies: 48

@bewildered,

Who can debunk life on Mars?

certainly not me, but it doesn't mean the bunk you post is proof there was

0 Replies

@bewildered,

well, its a new school year and apparently you still havent learned anything.

The reasons that this wasnt asbestos isnt foir the reasons you gave.MAny asbestos minerals have strand thicknesses greater than what you assert. *There are about 35 different varieties of asbestos or asbestiform minerals.The folks at NASA had done several spectrographic analyses to determine the structure and chemical makeup of the carbonate minerals. Their story of bacterial possibilities makes waay more sense than your fantasies.

PS welcome back to A2K, I need a good laugh more than ever

0 Replies

@bewildered,

Quote:

1. 1.No minerals curve and contain bulging dots in structures smaller than 10 micrometers in diameter. Asbestos’ fibers are no larger than one micrometer across.

Off the top of my head without resorting to any references .
BOULANGERITE
RUTILE
ELEMENTAL SILVER, GOLD, PALADIUM, and COPPER

1 Reply

@bewildered,

bewildered wrote:

Mars meteorite ALH84001 contained numerous blood vessels:

No it didn't.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

Why let facts get in the way of another one of those precious 'Is There Life on Mars' conspiracy. Never let facts get in the way of a good fable.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

No minerals look like the shape and size of the blood vessel remains, which curve,contain bulging dots, and measure less than three micrometers in diameter. White asbestos’ fibers are no larger than one micrometer across. Bulging dots are not found in white asbestos fibers or bundles of white asbestos fibers.

3 Replies

@bewildered,

No minerals possess the shape and size of the blood vessel remains, which branch, curve,contain bulging dots, and measure around two micrometers in diameter.

0 Replies

@bewildered,

bewildered wrote:

No minerals look like the shape and size of the blood vessel remains, which curve,contain bulging dots, and measure less than three micrometers in diameter. White asbestos’ fibers are no larger than one micrometer across. Bulging dots are not found in white asbestos fibers or bundles of white asbestos fibers.

Even if you could eliminate all mineral formations (which you can't), it still doesn't mean that the only possibility that remains is Blood Vessels for god's sake. If your claim was even moderately feasible we might let you get away with it, but since your claims are outright delusional, you're going to need just a teeny bit more evidence to back them up. Something truly impressive like one of those "God Books" which are written in Chinese which only "special" people can see. Now that would be fun, please post one of those.

1 Reply

@bewildered,

Quote:

No minerals look like the shape and size of the blood vessel remains, which curve,contain bulging dots, and measure less than three micrometers in diameter. White asbestos’ fibers are no larger than one micrometer across. Bulging dots are not found in white asbestos fibers or bundles of white asbestos fibers.

You are a total moron who knows not anything of which you speak. There are plenty of minerals that have the "Habot" that you describe. ANYWAY, even if that were true, why does it automatically result in you interpreting the micrographs as BLOOD VESSELS? Thats so idiaotic as to be borderline obsessive.

Which asbestos mineral are you speaking of? (Id look up the associations of minerals in the serpentine, asbestiform, and zeolite classes. Minerals of many varying acicular or fibrous habits are not only common theyre everywhere.

Heres some boulangerite crystal mass. Often, when these are in quartz or zircon, they appear like a slinky, all coiled up. We use these minerals as an indicator for lead deposits

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~adg/images/minerals/pb/boul3_sm.jpg

3 Replies

@farmerman,

Edited on Oct. 24, 2011: Reasons why they were blood vessels.

1.No minerals possess the shape and size of the “blood vessel remains”, which branch, curve,contain bulging dots, and measure around two micrometers in diameter.

2.No bacteria or fungi or plant rootlets have so many minute branches (~2 micrometers across) in such small areas.

3.No animal cells or tissues have such minute (~2 microns across) branches bulging with round dots, except blood vessels and lymph vessels. Lymph vessels should be connected to lymph nodes, which are not seen in the image.

So, blood vessels were the only real possibility.

A list of my posts: Edit [Moderator]: Link removed

P.S. to farmer: Chrysotile or white asbestos is the most commonly encountered form of asbestos, according to wikipedia.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

God will not waste time on you.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Nobosys tried to "debunk" life on Mars. I thik everyone is open minded toward evidence that is being collected by the last Rovers. Evidence to date primarily includes a strong case for a past water filled planet. Minerals that have been found could have been deposted as salts in brine or other water masses. I dont think ANYONE has jumped to the conclusion that any evidence of fossils (unequivocably) has been discovered. You, on the other hand, seem to have dispensed with all scientific data collection methods and have jumped to a conclusion that complex life existed on MArs. All your conclusions are made from idiotic interpretations of NASA data and photos. I understand that youve got a wacky religious agenda but please dont make believe that you are in touch with some higher order scientific fact .
Youre a moron , not a scientist.

2 Replies

@bewildered,

bewildered wrote:

God will not waste time on you.

It doesn't need to.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

"All your conclusions are made from idiotic interpretations of NASA data and photos."
Idiotic? You do not even know what the marked particles are.

3 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

[

I think that picture is clearly proof that porcupines live on Mars. Nothing else would have needles like that.

0 Replies

@bewildered,

The point, which you avoid, is that you don't know what they are, so you fire up your imaginary friend superstition, and make up wild stories about what the images show, in an idiotic attempt to support your hilarious claims about life on Mars.

0 Replies

@bewildered,

Quote:

You do not even know what the marked particles are

Shows me that you dont understand what you read. The "particles" are analyzed by Spectrophotometry and have undeniable patterns that they are metallic CARBONATE deposits , the crystals of which vay within 2 crystal systems . These compounds "Carbonate salts" are c.lear;y deposited via a supwrsaturated water solution, not "blood vessels" from some mysthical beast.

By the way, what happened to the animal that only keeps leaving blood and blood vessels laying about?

You need to do lots more reading up of evaporitic deposition of salts in water media, before you try blowing new "laws of science" up our asses.

3 Replies

@bewildered,

bewildered wrote:

farmerman wrote:

"All your conclusions are made from idiotic interpretations of NASA data and photos."

Idiotic? You do not even know what the marked particles are.

Just because he doesn't know what the particles are (and he knows better than you do) doesn't mean that your interpretations aren't idiotic (which they are).

0 Replies

@farmerman,

If I didnt know any better Id think that you are one of these guys at Sandia or Brookhaven who post real crap on the web in some sick attempts at being humorous.

1 Reply

Who can debunk life on Mars?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know