India Puts Spacecraft Into Mars Orbit

I feel I have to comment here but not venture too far into conspiracy theories. Just to point out for me, unanswered questions.

Being a keen amateur astronomer in my youth I looked at Mars many times through telescope. The truth is, unless you bought a very large one with a lot of light gathering power and supporting high magnification you would be sorely disappointed. The disk is very small compared with the likes of Jupiter and Saturn. You can hardly make out any markings on it either. The atmosphere of the Earth blurs it as well. A waste of time.

Even the largest telescopes on earth shows a blurry image.

When we got the Hubble up it was able to get much better views and consistently showed a blue tinge on the edges of the planets disk.. These photos for some reason are difficult to find now online. There are a few you-tube vids that still show them in slideshows. If someone could point me too some original pics?.

Back in the seventies when the first Viking pics came back from the surface they printed one in the newspapers in the UK. Color pictures were rare in those days in our newspapers so it was memorable.

I saw the red tinted photo and said no way. It was not sharp or accurate. It was not correct, it was a tinted job. And, there were a few earlier depictions I saw that did show a blue sky and rocks with tinges of green on them, were a lot more detailed and sharper.. This article along with some color corrected photographs I find interesting. They are using the flag as a reference. Viking Mars Lander Photo Color-Altering Revealed

The photo I saw in that paper was more like a blurry polaroid. photo with false colors.

In more recent times, due to some slipups at NASA press conferences and (mistake or intended) it finally became clear that the sky's were indeed blue and it was clearly shown. However, NASA for some reason, still seem to tint their pics red. Also, they did not seem to be very pro-active at releasing that many with great frequency. It actually prompted members of the government to say, for gods sake, give the public domain more pictures of the surface to look at. They are paying for it.

Forty five percent of the earths atmosphere is Oxygen, coupled with nitrogen. and some others it makes the sunlight be filtered as blue. So, is their another reason the sky is blue on Mars?

Aside from Shane's pictures and enhancements which I agree are rocks, shadows and reflections, their is out there, to view some interesting and much more sharper and startling anomalies on the surface.

I'm just drawing your attention to all this to ask the question WHY, why tint the pictures and say the sky is red when it really is not. Why do this. It appears to be a deception but why was it done in the first place. If their is a reason, what is it. Perhaps their is none but it does not appear that way.

Lets take just one thing! Why are all or most all the photographs of the Martain surface being tinted red and clearly, some of it's surface blurred?

This has nothing to do with honest, open investigative science that we the tax payers are footing the bill for.

I only hope India is more honest and open with what they find.

This is incorrect. Thermodynamics 101: The higher the pressure, the higher the temperature. The lower the pressure, the lower the temperature. And vice versa.

A good example of this is a pressure cooker. Because the pressure cooker allows for higher pressure, it cooks at a higher temperature than just boiling water can.

The opposite is boiling water at altitude, where the air pressure is lower. Since the pressure is lower, the boiling point of water is also lower.

Pressure and temperature have a direct correlation.

Hawking could not raise a leg to kick Riffles butt back. Riffle wins, except for the goatee, Hawking could grow a really good one.

I think we'll have outposts on the Moon, Mars and space stations first.



I read where a group of scientists believe that Mars could be terraformed (no relation) in about 10,000 years. If true, maybe this could be improved on?

Also, we need to differentiate between "inhabiting" and "settling".


Mining will be profitable, it's only a matter of time. I believe we have the technology now to capture and bring back a small asteroid using unmanned space craft.

I "think" the issue is more financial. The video I posted earlier is Musk's attempt to lower costs by developing resuable rockets.

I think this was fall in the "things we haven't thought of yet" category.

And I can add another reason for inhabiting the Moon and possible space stations and Mars: Tourism. I bet there's plenty of rich people that would pay a small fortune to spend a week on the Moon.

But Mike Tyson could kick Neil deGrasse Tyson's butt. Not to mention, I'd make Cicely Tyson the favorite over a tag team including both you and Riffle.

Three months ago, I said the words Terraforming, and Terrable. I also said "I know this may sound kind of kurt, but..."

Because I knew this day would come. Prepare for psychic battle.

I failed to read that so kudos to you, Master Joke Anticipator