Comments on: MSL News: Landing Sites and Naming Contest

By: Granite

Granite — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:36:14 +0000

Very interesting post you wrote. Glad I have stumbled upon it. Cheers!

By: Laura Kinoshita

Laura Kinoshita — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:43:23 +0000

Thought you might also be interested in this:

How do you tell the difference between organics on Mars, and those you bring with you from Earth?

http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2940&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

By: geokstr

geokstr — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:30:49 +0000

David M:

"Would we attempt a remote controlled landing on the earth with an atomic battery on board – or would that be deemed to risky? If we wouldn't do it here, can we be sure it's safe to do so on Mars?"

I doubt very much that there is enough radioactive material in the power supply to hurt anyone even if it crash landed on earth in the middle of New York City. The fears of radioactivity have been vastly overblown in the public's mind, which is why we can't do what France and Japan have already done, and many other countries are on their way to doing, generating the majority of their electricity via nuclear.

Did you know that not one person was harmed in any way whatsoever by what was labelled a "nuclear meltdown" at Three Mile Island? That the employees of the plant and those downwind of the reactor in this "catastrophy" received less radiation exposure than the commuters get from the granite while walking though Grand Central Station?

I didn't think so.

You can thank the scaremongering media for that.

By: Steven

Steven — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:14:44 +0000

Be even better if they sent 10 of them.

Then we could all be happy.

But I suppose we have to leave some places for the astronauts.

By: Chris Coles

Chris Coles — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:09:31 +0000

I agree with both Andrew and Nexus. They should target the deepest valley they can find and expect to find both water and life there. Why do I say that?. Phoenix has landed where the summer daytime temperatures are as high as – 20C. Air temperature rises at 2.7C for every 1,000 feet drop from wherever you start out. I have already, previously, stated that there seems to be evidence of a cloud layer at the surface "mouth" of some of the valleys that have been photographed, particularly from an angle. And that such a cloud mirrors what we see here on Earth associated with thermals created by heating of the sunlit side of valleys causing rising air on the sunlit slope.

We should be going into a deep valley, not wondering about on the upper surface.

By: Nexus

Nexus — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:14:07 +0000

I've always thought Hellas Planitia would be an interesting place to study. It's got the lowest elevations on Mars (and therefore the highest air pressure).

By: Karl

Karl — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 03:39:47 +0000

Nili Fossae should be at the top of the list. Its anomalous methane production looks suspiciously like an indicator of ongoing biological activity.

The other sites look interesting too though… obviously we need more rovers.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:45:53 +0000

It's too bad they can't land it in the bottom of Valles Marineris. Exploring the layers of sediment and caves would be truly cool.

By: RetardedFishFrog

RetardedFishFrog — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 02:12:56 +0000

David M. said, "If we wouldn't do it here, can we be sure it's safe to do so on Mars?"

Of course it will be safe. There's no people or anything else alive on Mars that could be harmed by it. I'm sure the rocks don't care if we land radioactive material on them.

By: Ron

Ron — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:55:28 +0000

They should let the tax payers name something for once.

By: Joe

Joe — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:37:05 +0000

I'd name it "Martian Road Warrior"

Joe

By: David M

David M — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:22:52 +0000

This will be an tremendously exciting mission – very much looking forward to seeing the results.

It's a pity we have to use an atomic battery to power the vehicle, but of course there really is no alternative for a lander of this size and complexity.

Would we attempt a remote controlled landing on the earth with an atomic battery on board – or would that be deemed to risky? If we wouldn't do it here, can we be sure it's safe to do so on Mars?

By: George_McCain

George_McCain — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:17:12 +0000

the ship should be named the Cheney Rover

By: Astrofiend

Astrofiend — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:37:59 +0000

Can't wait until this beast is on Mars!