I have never been accused of charming my way around here, and I sure as heck have not promoted the promotion of water for funding conspiracy.
Nick has never in my presence mentioned a conspiracy regarding the same.
His reasoning seems to be founded on the basics of the science: water vapor pressure, CO2 vapor pressure and the absence of atmosphere on Mars.
The "cryoclastic flow" name is something I believe makes sense in the context of the evidence, but the term is not aparently catchy enough for whatever reason.
EP is a prophet of actual doom, and he is as fervant as any spiritual prophet. The fact there are rocks out there, and one we nothing about could hit us with basically no warning at all is something I think he obssesses over, but I respect his ultimate points.
I have never offered my opinions asa actual scientific opinions to compete with peer reviewed work, nor do I intend to start.
My hope is that at the next LPSC to put together a dinner and drink time with you and Nick, and possibly others, to share your thoughts and insights to those of us lay people who try to follow what you guys do.
Ed
Space/Science » in reply to Re: A word from the peanut gallery
Ya talking ta me?
The whole thread (18 posts)
- Contemporary near-surface liquid H2O on Mars
- Re: Contemporary near-surface liquid H2O on Mars
- Re: Contemporary near-surface liquid H2O on Mars
