> Everett, > All due respect but this was exactly my point. > ALH84001 does NOT match Martian Oxygen isotopes . The ones within ALH84001 > only match a theoretical but different Martian atmosphere. > Only the much younger SNC's match what we know to be Mars Ratios. > "Houston we had a problem" . No problem just say it matches Mar's older > atmosphere. Ya, that'll work. NOT! > Sorry but it still looks like a duck to me. How could we possibly know for a > fact that Mars once had a different atmosphere that ALH84001 matches? . > Sounds like to tail wagging the dog to me. > see link. > " Gas trapped in the meteorite's minerals does not match the ratio of gases > of Mar's modern thin atmosphere. Younger meteorites do match." Dr. Ben Weiss. > > http://www.mail-archive.com/meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com/msg12675.html > > So , again. ALH84001 may or may not be from Mars without a real stretch. ? > > Carl > -- > Carl or Debbie Esparza > Meteoritemax > > > ---- ekgm...@aol.com wrote: > > I would like to offer additional information about why we know ALH84001 is > > from Mars. In additional to the oxygen isotopes (which the scientific > > community now recognizes as the standard to recognized various > > extraterrestrial materials), the trapped noble gases match those previously > > identified to be from Mars (Bogard and Garrison, LPSC) in other SNC > > meteorites and the atmospheric gases measured by Viking's mass > > spectrometers in 1976 and 1977. Selected trace element abundances and > > ratios also match those recognized to be from Martian materials. The > > original diogenite classification of ALH84001 was based on a very limited > > chemical analysis and a single thin section which was not representative of > > the sample. > > Everett Gibson > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cdtuc...@cox.net > > To: JoshuaTreeMuseum <joshuatreemus...@embarqmail.com>; > > meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > > Sent: Wed, 5 May 2010 17:32 > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] New evidence for microbial fossils in Martian > > meteorite > > > > > > Phil, > > I have no arguments against your points here but, I do have a few questions. > > With all due respect and hope that I am not too far off base here. > > > > Based on thousands of photos of Mars it seems to be a lot like Earth less > > the > > water and growies. > > Although there are a lot of places here that do look exactly like Mars. > > Isn't it possible for igneous rocks to become metamorphosed into rocks that > > might be from past oceans on Mars? > > > > One of our probes definitely confirmed the presents of Glauconite and > > Albite on > > Mars. > > these are also found in Earths oceans. So, I tend to believe a lot of what > > our > > scientists say. > > Even without extraordinary proof. > > > > To me there are theories being postured that are far more in need of proof > > than > > the fact that Mar's may have life. Such as. > > . > > The Moon was created by a giant collision with earth? > > What? The Moon is nothing like Earth and what about all of the other > > planet's > > Moons? > > Did Saturn and Jupiter get hit as well? Wait! How would that work? Aren't > > they > > Gaseous? What would it have hit? > > > > But the most Crazy theory is that ALH84001 is even from Mars at all. > > It does not match any of the other SNC's in either Mineralogy or Isotopes. > > Yes, > > it has some like minerals but that should not come as a surprise. > > And Yes, they say if the O- isotopes match, that is diagnostic of origin. > > Problem is that ALH84001's O-isotopes does not match the others. So, how > > could > > it have the same origin? > > Please explain that one? > > It was first classified as a diogenite because it is very much like a > > diogenite > > (if it looks like a duck) . But for the some reason it suddenly became a > > new > > Martian meteorite. > > It may well be from Mars but, if the isotopes don't match the others then > > how > > could it be? Usually Isotopes rule. Don't they? > > I am asking because I would like to know not to disrespect anybody here. > > Seems to me it may be from a different planet? > > Carl > > -- > > Carl or Debbie Esparza > > Meteoritemax > > > > > > ---- JoshuaTreeMuseum <joshuatreemus...@embarqmail.com> wrote: > > > Melanie: > > > > > > I think they're just recycling their old claims to try and get more > > > taxpayer > > > funding for their project. I'm still waiting to hear their "new" > > > evidence. > > > It's the same as their old evidence, which is weak. McKay and his crew > > > remind me of Michael Mann and his CRU with their AGW agenda. > > > (Incidently, > > > NASA is involved in Climategate with their questionable Goddard Institute > > > for Space Studies data.) > > > > > > These people are seriously looking for microbial fossils in igneous rock? > > > Has a fossil of any kind ever been found in an igneous rock? Are life > > > forms > > > ever preserved in magma, granite or obsidian? This is laughable at the > > > least. > > > > > > So they found some magnetite crystals. They say 75% were naturally > > > formed > > > by a shock mechanism, while 25% were so perfect, they had to be biogenic. > > > What are the chances of this actually happening? Wouldn't it all be > > > natural > > > or all biogenic? > > > > > > And get this: the magnetite is exactly the same as that produced by > > > magnetotactic bacteria on Earth! So what are the chances of this > > > happening? > > > 2 identical life forms on two different planets. These things live in > > > the > > > ocean, could they survive an interplanetary journey? Why are these > > > magnetite > > > chain fossils not found in sedimentary Earth rocks, but yet they appear > > > in > > > igneous Mars rocks? Since these are aquatic creatures, it seems highly > > > unlikely they would turn up in igneous rock. > > > > > > Their whole argument rests of the morphology of a few magnetite nano > > > crystals, which they claim they can now see better with higher resolution > > > microscopes. I think this is very weak evidence, and I remain > > > unconvinced. > > > I think desktop cold fusion is more likely. > > > > > > Phil Whitmer > > > > > > ______________________________________________ > > > Visit the Archives at > > > http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html > > > Meteorite-list mailing list > > > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > > > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > > ______________________________________________ > > Visit the Archives at > > http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html > > Meteorite-list mailing list > > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > > > >
______________________________________________ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
