PDA

View Full Version : Life on Mars NASA conspiracy?


white horse
01-07-2009, 11:56 PM
Is a plug for a boook, but interesting nontheless . Weird how so many mainstream types do see 'conspiracies' in things theyresearch, but so few join them together!

http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2009/06/is-there-a-mars-conspiracy.html#c6a00d83451586c69e20115709c026e970 c

Is there a Life On Mars Conspiracy?

Michael Brooks, consultant for New Scientist and the author of 13 Things That Don’t Make Sense, sends us a new perspective on the riddle of the empty planet next door

MARS

Some pesky scientists have just pointed out an appalling design error in NASA’s latest attempts to find life on Mars. This is beginning to look like a conspiracy. Does someone not want us to find life on Mars?

NASA has tried looking for signs of life on Mars precisely once, in the 1976 Viking mission. The result was positive. The reason nobody says there is life on Mars is that another experiment, part of the same mission, couldn’t find any carbon-based “organic” chemicals in Martian soil. This, NASA decided, overruled the other result: with no carbon present, there could be no microbes living on or under the surface of Mars.

Last year, the Phoenix lander repeated the carbon search and failed to find organic molecules. The problem is, we know that there ought to be organic molecules on Mars. Asteroid and comet impacts will have put them there. So what’s going on?

Both of the searches for organic molecules, it turns out, have been deeply flawed. In 2000, the chief engineer on the 1976 experiment finally admitted that his experiment was simply not sensitive enough to overrule anything. Put bluntly, it didn’t work properly – and it never had, even during testing on Earth.

Now a handful of brave NASA scientists have exposed a problem with the latest attempt to pronounce that Mars was dead. [Emphasis added]

The best argument for why no one has even found carbon brought in on asteroids and comets is that chemicals called perchlorates, also thought to be in the Martian soil, have destroyed it all. When perchlorates get hot, they burn up carbon-based molecules. That’s why NASA uses them in rocket fuel.

The problem is, as NASA's Douglas Ming (the Merciless) has pointed out in a recent paper, the experiments to search for carbon involve heating soil samples to a few hundred degrees and sniffing the vapours. If the soil contains carbon molecules and perchlorates, the carbon molecules will simply burn up. No wonder they couldn’t find any.

Gilbert Levin, who ran the 1976 experiment to search for life, the one that got a positive result, thinks it’s all down to a religious conspiracy dating back to the early 1960s. When I was researching my book 13 Things That Don’t Make Sense, I travelled to Levin’s Maryland offices and listened to his account of the run-up to Viking. In 1961, he told me, the Executive Director of the American Institute of Biological Sciences, invited him to attend a meeting in Washington. When Levin arrived, he found himself among fifteen of the top scientific minds in the US. None of them knew what the meeting was about until John Olive told them he had been charged by NASA with directing an effort to look for life on other planets.

“Phil Abelson, editor of Science magazine, was sitting next to Dean Cowie, a nuclear physicist,” Levin told me. “He grabbed Dean by the arm and audibly said, “Dean, let’s get out of here. The Bible says there can be no life on Mars.”

I was skeptical at first. No one likes a conspiracy theory more than I, but John Olive died in 1974, Dean Cowie died in 1977, and Philip Abelson died in 2004. There is no independent written source on this secret Washington meeting. And it’s not like the search for life didn’t go ahead.


But I have to admit there is a troubling history here. Rocket scientists joke about the “curse of Mars” because the success rate of spacecraft bound for Mars is lower than 50 per cent. The most famous failure is perhaps the 1998 Mars Climate Orbiter mission, which crashed onto the surface because one team of engineers used imperial units in their design, while the other team used metric.

So, the question remains: have attempts to explore Mars been secretly scuppered by religious scientists keen to keep planet Earth “special”? Have they been hiding their sabotage under a veil of incompetence? [Ed - Well doh!] Or is it that scientists really can be astonishingly incompetent without any outside help? Only Dan Brown’s next novel can tell us.

tracker
02-07-2009, 12:23 AM
hhhm now that puts a new outlook on things .

I might bring this up in our local astronomy club .

see the reactions it gets .:cool:

mikesingh
02-07-2009, 08:08 AM
Here's an article I wrote on one of the web sites.
Yes, it does seem that NASA and the PTBs are hiding something!

Scientific Evidence Of Life On Mars!! Why is NASA Obfuscating The Truth?

Here is an analysis of evidence of life on Mars. What is surprising is that the positive results produced by the Viking Landers have been stone walled for reasons which needless to say, seem to be obvious.

This is a paper I found while going through the LANL archives, which I think has pretty much been collecting dust. I wonder why NASA has not commented on these findings? If it has, I haven’t chanced upon it as yet.

Having said that, this paper was presented to the scientific community at the Carnegie Geophysical Laboratory seminar by Dr Gilbert V. Levin, Ph.D. Chairman, Executive Officer for Science, Spherix Incorporated. I would recommend you read the seemingly incredible analyses where you will learn the truth and evidence of life on Mars.

Other revealing analyses and papers which are worth a read have been included in the acknowledgments at the end. Though extremely thought provoking and interesting, I must warn you that this makes for heavy reading! But then life on Mars has to be scientifically proved, and all science which can get pretty complicated, is not everyone’s cup of tea!

For those who find it tough to go through the labyrinth of scientific terminology, here are a few excerpts from these papers/lectures that will set you thinking.

The Viking Project was begun by NASA on November 15, 1968, and was composed of two orbiters and two landers. The launch was initially planned for 1973, but postponed to 1975 due to the complexity and challenge of the project.

http://www.msss.com/mars/pictures/viking_lander/22a158corr.jpg
Viking on Mars.
Courtesy: MSSS

In a May 3, 2007, Carnegie dinner, Carnegie Institution Chairman, Michael Gellert, pointed out that the Institution was founded to - and does - concentrate on high risk problems.

This makes Carnegie the proper venue for exploring a major scientific paradigm change – there is life on Mars. And, most importantly, to determine whether life had more than one origin, as would be indicated were Earth life and Mars life is fundamentally different.

Such a result would have profound implications for the existence of life, including intelligent life, throughout the universe. I am thus very pleased to have the opportunity to present this prospect at the Carnegie Institution Geophysical Laboratory seminar.

The Excerpts.

The Carnegie Institution Geophysical Laboratory Seminar
Analysis of evidence of Mars life held 05/14/2007.

The Viking Landers carried nine courses of the Labeled Release experiment (LR) designed to detect any metabolizing microorganisms that might be present on the Martian surface. The LR was designed to drop a nutrient solution of organic compounds labeled with radioactive carbon atoms into a soil sample taken from the surface of Mars and placed into a small test cell. A radiation detector then monitored over time for the evolution of radioactive gas from the sample as evidence of metabolism: namely, if microorganisms were metabolizing the nutrients they had been given.

When the experiment was conducted on both Viking Landers, it gave positive results almost immediately.

(Now why has this remained a subject of debate when the results were positive in the first instance?) The reasons cited were:

1. “The Viking organic analysis instrument (GCMS), an abbreviated gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer designed to identify the organic material widely presumed to be present on Mars, found no organic molecules”.

After years of discussion and experimentation, a consensus was reached explaining this negative result as a lack of sensitivity.

2. "UV destroys life and organics".

Yet sampling soil from under a rock on Mars demonstrated that UV light was not inducing the LR activity detected.

3. "Strong oxidants were present that destroy life and organics".

Findings by the Viking Magnetic Properties Experiment showed that the surface material of Mars contains a large magnetic component, evidence against a highly oxidizing condition.

4. “Too much too soon”. The LR positive responses and their reaction kinetics were said to be those of a first order reaction, without the lag or exponential phases seen in classic microbial growth curves, all of which seemed to argue for a simple chemical reaction.

However, terrestrial LR experiments on a variety of soils produced response rates with the kinetics and the range of amplitudes of the LR on Mars, thereby offsetting this argument.

5. “Lack of a new surge of gas upon injection of fresh medium”.

However, a previous test of bonded, NASA-supplied Antarctic soil, No. 664, had shown this same type of response to a 2nd injection. The failure of the 2nd injection to elicit a response can be attributed to the organisms in the active sample having died sometime after the 1st injection, during the latter part of Cycle 1.

6. "There can be no liquid water on the surface of Mars".

Since November and December 2006, the accumulated evidence shows that liquid water exists in soil even if only as a thin film. Viking, itself, gave strong evidence of the presence of liquid water. Snow or frost is seen in Viking images of the landing site (e.g., Viking Lander Image 21I093). Pathfinder has shown that the surface atmosphere of Mars exceeds 20 degrees C during part of the day, providing transient conditions for liquid water.

http://mars.spherix.com/spie2003/SPIE_2003_Paper_GVL_files/image007.jpg
Heavy Frost, or Snow. Deposit at Viking Lander 2 Site (Viking Lander Image 211093).
Courtesy: Spherix Inc

7. "Cosmic radiation destroys life on Mars".

A recent report calculated the incoming flow of both galactic cosmic rays particles (GCR) and solar energetic protons (SEP) over a wide energy range. As a result one may acknowledge that -without even invoking natural selection to enhance radiation protection and damage repair- the radiation incident to the surface of Mars appears trivial for the survival of numerous terrestrial-like microorganisms.

Adding to this rising tide of facts supporting the detection of life by the Viking LR experiment are the recent findings in the Martian atmosphere of methane, formaldehyde, and, possibly, ammonia, gases frequently involved in microbial metabolism.
Excerpt from the lecture by Dr Gilbert V. Levin, Ph.D

http://mars.spherix.com/spie2003/SPIE_2003_Paper_GVL_files/image009.gif
Hydrogen Densities (Probably Water) on Mars with Viking 1 and 2 Landing Sites Located (VL1 & VL2).

http://mars.spherix.com/spie2003/SPIE_2003_Paper_GVL_files/image011.gif
Where there’s water, there’s life!
Courtesy: LANL

Have the colors of Mars images been fudged too? Why? The first is the untouched one from NASA. The second image is I think what it actually is after I reduced the red tinge....

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o83/mikesingh_bucket/marscolor2.gifhttp://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o83/mikesingh_bucket/Marscolor1.gif
Courtesy: MSSS

I have attempted to summarize the main points here, though there are many more surprises, if you read the links provided.

So what do you make of this? Why is the scientific community shying away from the reality that alien life forms exist on Mars, considering this scientific evidence? Why are we being denied the truth? The hesitation probably lies in the fact that accepting the reality of life on Mars would result in profound implications for the psyche of mankind as a whole.

Cheers! We may not be alone after all!


http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/0705.3176
http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0705/0705.3176.pdf
http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0610/0610093.pdf
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/marslife.html