Do you actually know what a resurge gully looks like?

Can you point to some on the map?

if not, don't post such ludicrously inappropriate garbage.

To reply to an earlier point you raised, I did read the article, Bud. The authors showed small basins that one could conceive as being lacustrine and also showed that the haematite occurence DID NOT MATCH these basins. They didn't take that observation further because it would have painfully punctured their model.

I say again - The Haematite occurence lies largely outside of ANY mappable closed basin or "lake".

This means that a surface seepage of groundwater is almost certainly implicated in the development of the vast majority of the Haematite outcrop (and by inference, the whole acid-sulphate alteration suite). A lacustrine environment would have been a local and minor aspect, if developed at all.

If you have EVIDENCE to refute this, then go ahead. if not, stop posting irrelevant articles. In particular, stop posting stuff without thinking about it. 95% of what you post has almost zero relevance to the point you're trying to make and even where it does, you fail to explain how it applies. Posting without explaining is like saying "Nyeah nyeah nye nyear nyeh!", and you know we all hate playground brats.

Note that in the last few weeks, JPL/NASA have been talking more about aeolian transport and deposition and less about lacustrine processes.