I'm not sure the RAT was used anywhere near this "flake"

Buck Galaxy — 2/13/2005 10:10:47 PM (archived)

I don't doubt there is a non-biological explanation for the odd look of this flake but I'm not a geologist so I have no idea what that is. I know the human eye also sees what it wants to see. For example, I can "see" a face in this thing too. :-) Just because it looks biological doesn't mean it is. (That doesn't mean it isn't either!)

The whole thread (16 posts)

Close up of "the flake" - Buck Galaxy - 2/13/2005 7:26:30 PM
- My take on the flake - jms - 2/15/2005 5:05:34 PM
  - That sounds jake. (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 2/15/2005 6:15:07 PM
- parallel linear impressions at bottom make it look extruded - alcaray - 2/14/2005 5:55:18 PM
  - I concure :) (n/t) - RobVG - 2/15/2005 3:15:04 AM
- It is intriguing...(whoa! man! can I digress or what?!) - R.L. the rambler - 2/14/2005 5:30:50 AM
  - NOTE TO SELF - R.L. - 2/14/2005 8:15:50 PM
  - lemme guess, Kona medium roasted? (n/t) - et - 2/14/2005 7:38:08 AM
    - Nahhh, just a F'd up sleep schedule.... (n/t) - R.L. - 2/14/2005 7:51:19 AM
      - I still suspect the coffee. - Tom Brosz - 2/14/2005 4:23:13 PM
        
        LOL.... - R.L. - 2/14/2005 8:05:16 PM
- Compaction? - RobVG - 2/13/2005 8:21:22 PM
  - I'm not sure the RAT was used anywhere near this "flake" - Buck Galaxy - 2/13/2005 10:10:47 PM
    - Sand rose - Gary - 2/13/2005 10:53:40 PM
      - Gusev - dtb - 2/14/2005 6:33:30 AM
        
        Are we sure that it's well associated with it's base? - et - 2/14/2005 7:43:34 AM

Recent posts

On this day in Space/Science

The whole thread (16 posts)