UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > Feb > Feb 17

Re: The "Bunny" And The Mainstream Media's

From: Paul Anderson <paulanderson.nul>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 11:23:28 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:00:41 -0500
Subject: Re: The "Bunny" And The Mainstream Media's


>From: Mac Tonnies <macbot.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 12:05:14 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: The "Bunny" And The Mainstream Media's Literalism

>See: http://posthumanblues.blogspot.com

>--Mac Tonnies

>OY!!! Those "debunkers" sure are a clever lot, huh?

>The esteemed New York Times, no less......

>Instead of going out of its way to edify the public with a
>guffaw-inducing image of the Face on Mars with cartoon rabbit
>ears, why didn't the Times' illustrious staff do any
>investigative reporting?

>If they had, they'd learn that the lander-debris idea is porous,
>that the so-called "bunny" has evidently moved, that the
>Opportunity rover had a perfect chance to take a closer look but
>was steered onward to save "precious machine time," and that no
>one - not even the biggest nuts out there (and there are a ton
>of them) - think the "bunny" is actually a rabbit (I personally
>labeled it the "pronged object", in an unsuccessful attempt to
>avoid "hit-pieces" like this one).

>The Times is brandishing the "bunny" label literally. What about
>"Sushi," the rock lovingly (and quite incomprehensibly) named by
>JPL's own? Will the Times run a condescending article chastising
>NASA geologists for suggesting the presence of raw fish in a
>Martian crater?

Apart from my more current crop circle studies, probably my
biggest passion since I was a little kid was space exploration,
planetary in particular, so I've been watching these new Mars
missions with much interest.

I can back Mac up on this, this "bunny" saga is puzzling. Nobody
I ever heard of actually thought this thing was a real rabbit
(!), yet this is the treatment from the NYT. Yet NASA itself, as
Mac points out, has often take to giving "cute" names to
interesting objects or photos. Where are these kinds of
condescending articles about that??

It is odd-looking in the available images, with two easily seen
protrusions or "stalks" pointing upward, hence the "bunny"
analogy.

The object itself is clearly visible in the full-size colour panorama for
anyone who wants to examine it themselves.

What's interesting also is that it is (or was) located _directly_
between the lander and the far right-hand end of the bedrock,
which is where the rover just went straight to.

In subsequent front hazcam images taken after the panorama, when
the rover is first on the ground, but not yet moved at all, the
object is apparently gone, even though the images show the same
location, even given the "fish-eye" type distortion. What
happened to it?

In public comments within the last few days JPL MER team members
have stated that they believe it was a piece of flimsy debris
from the airbags. I see that as plausible, the thing that annoys
me is that they have done nothing to back that up. There has
been no mention of it in any of the press briefings, etc.

If you look at some of the newest images within the last day or
two now, you also see the rover's tracks going to the bedrock,
passing right through the spot where the object used to be, even
doing "circles" around what may be the exact spot, as if they
were looking to see what happened to it.

Perhaps JPL is puzzled also as to why it is no longer there, and
their best guess right now is that it was a piece of lightweight
debris that blew away (an interesting comment from Ronald
Greeley of the MER team though, in response to the question of
whether the rover's instrument arm could have picked up the
object, was that no, it can't pick up anything of weight). Or
maybe they were just hoping that if they publicly ignored it
long enough that it would go away, which it apparently did!

Some have conjectured that the object was run over or somehow
otherwise removed by the rover, but if the assessment of the
images taken before the rover made any movement toward the
bedrock is accurate, it seems the "bunny" disappeared before
that on it's own. But that it _was_ there is certain.

Regardless of what the thing is or was, I think this is a good
example of how NASA and the mainstream media too often tend to
react when things that "shouldn't be there", unexpectedly show
up anyway.

At least on the other hand though, we are getting some wonderful
close-up images of the odd small grey-blue coloured "spherules"
covering the soil and attached to / imbedded in the bedrock at
Meridiani, whatever they may turn out to be!


Paul




[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com