UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > Mar > Mar 20

Re: Mars UFO Crops Up On BBC - Stanford

From: Ray Stanford <dinotracker.nul>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 20:10:15 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 08:55:32 -0500
Subject: Re: Mars UFO Crops Up On BBC - Stanford

>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:48:36 -0400
>Subject: Re: Mars UFO Crops Up On BBC

>>From: Ray Stanford <dinotracker.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 20:33:04 -0500
>>Subject: Mars UFO Crops Up On BBC

>>The BBC has finally picked up on the "UFO" (JPL's own name for it on
>>the photo's identification, not mine) photographed on Mars:



>When I first posted this I was surprised that JPL would use the
>"U" word. That's like government using the "R" word. Then along
>came the Cosmic Rays and Charged Coupled Device explanation
>which was a bit of a hoot. They shot from the hip on that one.

>You'd never be able to see anything in the photos if that was
>the case. And impacting the CCDs is such a nice straight line,

>As for a meteor, the trail looks to thick and too short-not
>forgetting of course that it would have to be much lower in
>Mar's atmosphere to have the same appearance as one in Earth's
>atmosphere. Would it not then be much closer/larger, and more
>easily identifiable? I think we can rule out a short duration
>con trail-or can we?

Not necessarily closer, larger and more identifiable. The
question is very complex, because meteoroids that produce
meteors (the luminous effects of their passage through the
atmosphere before retardation to subsonic velocity) can be
extremely tiny and still produce an impressive luminous effect.
Also, the velocity of atmospheric entry can vary greatly,
depending of the meteoroid's orbit (hence its aspect of
intersection with the orbit of Mars) and the angle at which it
intersects the upper atmosphere of Mars. Then too, the luminous
effects one sees in the atmosphere may vary greatly according to
the composition of the cosmic body.

For just one example, the high moisture content of some
meteoroids of cometary origin could become quite volatile and
even explosive, putting on 'much more of a show' than a more
coherent mass, such as small nickel-iron bodies, or some other
bodies of asteroidal origin.

In the photo of the Mars "UFO" streak, there are many unanswered
questions. It is my understanding that the 'photo' is really a
photo mosaic of many images taken over several seconds (either
six or fifteen, if I recall correctly), but I still do not know
for sure just how many of those seconds the luminous something,
per se, was photographed ('visible' to the camera).

Certainly the image seems to be a photo composite (mosaic), as
suggested by some things about the 'trail'. Even if we are
looking at a trail and not a singular, very long and narrow
object or phenomenon, we do not know whether the luminous thing
making the light-smear trail was circular, elliptical, or what.

There are things about the 'trail' that (if they are not an
artifact of the photo mosaic) might be interpreted as suggesting
a luminous object was either rotating or had a rotating pattern
of lights (as do some terrestrially reported UFOs) on its
surface, or both. There are even some things that might not only
suggest a spinning-of-axis luminous or incandescent body, but
that the body also might (only might) have had a slow wobble (or
slow tumble) aside from the spinning. The spinning and, or
tumbling is not unusual for some meteors seen and
photographically tracked on earth.

As I said in an earlier posting, however, there are things about
the image that make me doubt that it was a meteor. At least for
now, I will not try to describe those factors here, except to
say that one of them is the insubstantial width variation of the
'trail', despite the very evident luminosity differential across
it, horizontally.

There are a lot of questions I'd like to ask anyone at JPL who
might be able to answer them, but I suspect the JPL people have
their hands full with so much, right now, as to not want to
answer such questions. They might not want to answer them,
anyhow. :)

But, I can't help but recall former NASA head Dan Goldin's
statement upon release of items found in a Martian meteorite
discovered in Antarctica that was interpreted by some as
evidence of fossilized nano-organisms. He said, something like,
"...so we're opening the door just a little..."

Well, I hope this is an example of NASA deliberately "opening
the door" just a little more, but I wouldn't bet on that -- not
with the NASA director, Sean O'Keefe, in the pocket of the
President and one so short-sighted that he blocks a manned
servicing mission to the most scientifically productive
operation NASA has ever conducted, the Hubble Space Telescope.

It is just my personal opinion, but, I don't think the Columbia
shuttle disaster was the worse to ever hit NASA (albeit a
terrible personal disaster for the astronauts and their families
that might have been avoided if Director Sean O'Keefe had been
'on the ball') in recent years. I think the appointment of
O'Keefe as Director was the bigger disaster, and that he was to
some degree negligently responsible for the other disaster. In
some ways he does appear to realize that latter fact, however.
Still, O'Keefe seems only a businessman with no real grasp of
engineering or of science and appears to be devoid of the vision
that distinguishes pioneers from puppets, and men of vision from
political mice.

Ray Stanford

"You know my method. It is founded upon the observance of
trifles." -- Sherlock Holmes in The Boscombe Valley Mystery

[ 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