http://www.earthsci.unimelb.edu.au/mars/Enter.html

Well,it seems I've found Nick's "White Mars" page. Perhaps I should rephrase that: I've found it unconvincing and suffering from many of the same defecits as the water erosion theory it seeks to supplant.

tehre seem to be issues explaining where all the "magical" CO2 and/or water went in both models. How it is that many of the features are CLEANLY sculpted without any apparently flood plains or other methods for escape of the "mysterious" forces that sculpted them. Many if not most of the features have clearly demarcated and high lipped walls with NO SOURCE. They're literally just EXCAVATED out of the surface. Andwhere did all the material go? There don't, again, appear to be any flood plains or other places for said excavated material to go.

In the paradoxes section, Nick lists the problem of "layering" on the surface of Mars (IE, why, if there were massive volcanoes and other things of that ilk are there not boulders and large rocks, but finely layered sediment, dust, perhaps roud spherules known as "blueberries" scattered all over the place, etc.). All this is resolved if we consider these features as EXCAVATED by electricity. It is literally machined off the surface into fine particulates and redeposited as the fine sedimentary deposits we're finding. Furthermore, it has been show in the lab tht electrical arcing creates spherules just like the so-called "bluberries" we find everywhere. This is a common byproduct of electrical discharge machining. And electricity machines things SMOOTHLY, and often steeply. IE, it machines craters with circular appearance (sometimes even leaving the round lump in the middle where two filaments didn't quite connect as they rotate around each other; we see thatformation pretty often on Mars). It also machines rilles and other "channels" with steeply sloping walls that COULD NOT ave been carved by simple fluid action with no outlet or flood plain, or river/fluid delta. Nope, EDM creates teep smooth walls, with an often scalloped appearance. Electricity will sometimes also branch at right angles, which fluids generally don't. and they'll form branching patterns (we see this on the lower left portion of the Valles Marineris photo). Electrical arcs will also often travel in parallel to each other or split up and reform. We see this distinctly with Valles Marineris.

http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA06926

We can see that Valles Marineris is composed of several parallel chasms. Electrical arcs often flow in pairs or triplets. We see the two main gouge chasms, as well as another parallel above it, continuing off to the left, another smaller gouge to the bottom right, very thin easy to miss. Even another gouge two parallels above the main two channels. And should I mention how that larger gouge is connected to the very top gouge of the photo by a long thin snaky formation? How does traditional geology regard that? Let me guess, faultline? Hmm? Somehow I doubt it. And we might mention that the upper gouge on the Valles MArineris portion of the picture (not the one up toward the pole of the image), is separated into two distinct portions parallel to all the other parallel chasms, but separated by a fairly great distance. How does this paralleling and association get explained by traditional geology with no apparent faults or other features in the interim; rather a nice flat surface between them? Jut wondering. Shall I poke more holes in the surface and in current theory? I can if you really like. I'd preferred not to go into the overall electrical model of the planet, and had hoped to confine myself to JUST the spiders as a case-in-point. But it seems like there is an ideological issue going on. Anyway, considering the amount of material that would have had to be machined from the surface to excavatea gouge tht violent, a) it must havebeen about the most violent electrical event in the solar system's history b) it also would explain a considerble amount of the sedimentary paradoxes of the planet. Most likely, the larger chunks in such an interchange would have been flung off-planet, and the smaller chunks redeposited across the face of the planet. No need for invisible/imaginary CO2 or water. Just electrical discharge, granted on a scale unlike we've witnessed in modern history.

But I might point you to a parallel on earth: the Grand Canyon. Seriously, take a look at it. The formation looks suspiciously like a giant electrically machined figure. With the scalloped edges, high walls, filamentary arcs radiating from it, unsourced channels/arcs that pretty much couldn't possibly have been carved out by water, since there's no water SOURCE present in those areas. The edges are cleanly cut, and not rounded as would be expected by erosion via water. Makes a bit of an interesting parallel, don't it?

But I suppose this is a bit more out there than anyone is willing to accept. For now. I'm just saying that Electrical arcing explains a LOT of otherwise weird or "unexplainable" formations. OR formations that require such bizarre explanations that they're all but useless and unprovable. I mean, seriously why do we keep alluding to hidden water or hidden CO2 or "missing" water/CO2. Well, because we can't find it. We've looked and it's not there so far as we can see. So, what do we do? As always, we hide it below ground. Somhow there must be great "reservoirs" of the stuff hiding about someplace. So, what happens when we look and we can't FIND the reservoirs in the quantity necessary to adequately explain the theory? Well, then we just hide it again. It must have somehow evaporated into space, so we'll NEVER find it. I'm inclined to believe that it was never THERE to begin with. We're defining features in terms we understand, but we simply aren't finding the evidentiary support to back it up, and we're leaving out the feature with the most power (literally and in terms of explanatory power) to move mountains, cleanly excavate features, etc. And we can still see analogues in lightning strike today in terms of gouges carved in fields, Lichtenberg figures burned intp grass, excavated from "spiders" even seared into human flesh.

I know, I know. Needs more research. Thunderbolts.info is slowly putting together real world examples and other world examples (IE other planets, electrical interpretations), and mythohistorical accounts/support from ancient writings.

Anyway, there's a lot there. But a lot of research needs to be done, and thinking changed. Nobody's really taught about electricity's role on Earth let alone the solar system or cosmos. Eventually, that will change. 'Til then, the debate rages! And I remain unconvinced of water/CO2 carving theories. Considering there seems to be NO parallel examples here on earth of rivers that flow up one side of a hill and down the other against the pull of gravity. And I've never seen any CO2 carved features on Earth. Has that even been replicated in the lab? I'd be interested to see results of actual supporting experiments, and then a layman's explanation of the arcana.

Anywho, hope to hear back eventually. Have a nice trip, or whatnot. Hopefully it goes well. :)