Worm On Mars

[ArMaP]

However my prediction is that the worm debate will go on for at least 2 more pages with no conclusion reached.

The first thing we need to do is to know which "worm" are we talking about, the original from the opening post or the other one introduced by funbox.

To me, the first one is the result of using the laser to analyse the soil, the second is just a rock.

[Ellirium113]

...and so it begins. This one.

[ArMaP]

The best way of seeing the differences in two photos of the same place is with an animation.


The photo without the "worm" is the oldest, taken at 16:59:44, while the one with the "worm" was taken at 17:11:42.

[Ellirium113]

Ok...well clearly that would not be what I had suspected. You got me there ArMaP...that is just weird stuff. Still not on board with the "worm" theory...leaning more towards possible strong wind. But hey, who knows.

[funbox]

Ok...well clearly that would not be what I had suspected. You got me there ArMaP...that is just weird stuff. Still not on board with the "worm" theory...leaning more towards possible strong wind. But hey, who knows.

strong wind ? feeble wind that can barely life two micron particles more like .. there lies the problem , you narrowed down to not many choices when it comes to movement on mars..

that's why ArMaP staying stum on the forces involved

funbox

[ArMaP]

that's why ArMaP staying stum on the forces involved

No, I'm just waiting for a clear question.

[funbox]

No, I'm just waiting for a clear question.

this may cross over to the current sanddune information dump from nasa.. but still no clarity on sand dunes that have been preserved for 3 million years? or was it billion... a picture of them at least.. to much to ask to add a relevant diagram and photo to a body of text so we can understand what they're talking about ,, rant rant etc so on and so forth


funbox