Slashdot Mirror


UFO Streaks Through Martian sky

lkatz writes "The BBC is reporting that the Spirit rover has observed an object streaking across the Martian sky. They believe it was either a meteor or possibly the Viking 2 probe which still orbits Mars."

21 of 440 comments (clear)

  1. Good old BBC by FrostedWheat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hmmm.. what took them so long? That picture was out a week ago.

  2. Fodder for future conspiracies by kjfitz · · Score: 2, Insightful


    You just KNOW this is going to go down in the books as PROOF of

  3. Re:Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? by Stile+65 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Remember your towel!

    --
    I claim first use of "Error No. 0B" - or "No. 0B error." It'll be the new ID 10T!
  4. Re:Misleading title by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's all the UFO/Area 51 hype that has made the term UFO synonymous with alien space ships. It's kind of like RAID 0 - which is not a RAID per its own definition.

    --

    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

  5. Re:Misleading title by ooby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But there are alien vessels on Mars. Well, ones that are alien to Mars.

  6. Re:Well... by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not necessarily. Just as extraterrestrial doesn't meen martian, extramartian doesn't mean terrestrian.

    --

    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

  7. Re:Well... by Lispy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "extramartian intelligence"

    Actually yes! But then again I'd say this would exclude you!

  8. Re:Meteor? by rjelks · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Considering Mars is about 86 million miles from earth today, that rock would have to be hurling at about 3.5 million mph to get near (26,000 miles) earth in a day.

    -

  9. Then again... by Gorimek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It would be different on Mars because there is hardly any atmosphere for the meteorites to burn in.

    Mars has about 0.5% of Earths atmosphere. I suspect that means that virtually every rock that would burn in our atmosphere to become a "shooting star", ends up instead hitting the ground and becomes a "crater".

  10. Re:Atmospheric phenomenon? by kippy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's an event similar to what we experience with the northern lights

    Huh? I thought the Northern Lights were due to solar wind hitting out magnetosphere. Mars lacks a magnetosphere so I don't think it's the same event. Are you perhaps thinking of something different?

  11. Re:Or perhaps... by happyfrogcow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    are you telling me you would not probe one of these
    http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&lr=&i e=UTF-8 &oe=UTF-8&safe=off&q=nice+ass&sa=N&tab =wi


    i won't probe Google with safe=off while at work, thats for damn sure.

  12. Re:Would you think up something new already? by spun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The jokes won't be old until at least a month after Bush confesses that he was wrong about the WMD. Until then, it's fair game.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  13. NASA could use it to gain public interest in Mars by Gary+Destruction · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When the Viking satellite took a picture of the famous "Face On Mars," scientists figured it was just a rock formation. But NASA revealed pictures of it to the public in an attempt to spark in interest in the space program. And the response was incredible. Books, conspiracy theories and other things were devoted to it. The people wanted the truth about the Face on Mars and NASA delivered it. The so-called Face On Mars was really just a Mesa. I'm sure that many people will think that the UFO really is extraterrestial in nature, even though it most likely is not. But if it gets the public more interested in Mars, it might be worth some publicity.

  14. Velikovsky serves a purpose... by vudufixit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And that purpose is to challenge the basic assumptions we've made about the universe and how it behaves.
    I'm not saying that anyone should junk the work that we've been building on since the Greeks through Galileo, Kepler and the like up till today.
    But when someone comes along like him I think that instead of outright dismissal, it's helpful and healthy to re-examine and re-articulate those assumptions.
    When speculative and sensational shows like the Fox "alien autopsy" and "faked moon landing" appear, it's a perfect time to re-explain that there hasn't been a single verifiable piece of evidence that UFOs are actually alien spacecraft, and that we DID go to the moon, and went there after creating an amazing space launch infrastructure in a very short time.
    Somewhat tangenitally, I sincerely believe we need heretics in any field to shake up orthodoxies and make people think a bit, even about how the basic assumptions came to be.

    1. Re:Velikovsky serves a purpose... by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is not a chance in hell the Russians would have let the US government get away with lying.

      The only explanation is that they managed to con the entire Russian security/intelligence structure. It'd be easier to go to the moon, so I have to assume they did.

      Also, I know people who worked on Apollo, and I tend to believe their word.

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
    2. Re:Velikovsky serves a purpose... by Silburn_Luke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That would be point C in the grandparent post then.

      Putting together a robotic mission that could emplace laser reflectors and return samples of lunar regolith would have been as technically challenging in the 60s as sending a manned mission. Automation and/or remote operation were very primitive back then.

      The technical problems would have been different challenges of course, but still bloody awkward; plus the technology and engineering spin-offs from Apollo would have been very different.

      Regards
      Luke

      --
      #include witty_one_liner.h
  15. Re:Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? by SashaM · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Re:Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? (Score:4, Insightful)
    by Stile 65 (722451) on Thursday March 18, @11:29PM (#8603357)
    (http://www.freestateproject.org/)
    Remember your towel!


    Only on slashdot :-)

  16. Re:Or perhaps... by SquadBoy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and is of course just pasted in there so anybody with half a clue could easily see that that is what it does. It was a joke. gawd some people are uptight.

    --

    Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
  17. Several billions to one... by Marnhinn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Its not all that unlikely. Simply think about it like this. Things with odds that are millions to one happen on a day to day basis. We simply don't notice them because they don't seem out of the ordinary. (to quote Dead Poet's Society).

    So yes - while the chances of Spirit taking that photo are millions to one, the chances of something odd happening like this are probably pretty darn good.

    --
    There is always a frontier where there is an open and willing mind
  18. Re:Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Re:Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? (Score:4, Insightful) by Stile 65 (722451) on Thursday March 18, @11:29PM (#8603357) (http://www.freestateproject.org/) Remember your towel!

    Only on slashdot :-)

    .... would such a lame thread actually exist. You know, Douglas Adams was funny for a lot of reasons, but he was never predictable.

    --
    Like what I said? You might like my music
  19. Re:Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? by ectoraige · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I like the fact that this was marked 'Insightful', as opposed to 'Funny'...

    --
    Vs lbh pna ernq guvf, ybt bss abj. Tb bhgfvqr. Syl n xvgr.