14 mins read
Spread the love
 Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Univ. of Arizona
An image combining orbital imagery with 3-D modeling shows flows that appear in spring and summer on a slope inside Mars’ Newton crater. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Univ. of Arizona

By now many of you have heard and/or read about the NASA/JPL information release in the last few days speculating that there is salty (brine) water on the Mars surface in a liquid flowing state. The initial reporting is found HERE. They arrive at this conclusion in two ways.

FIRST is observational in that what appear to be eroded drains thought to be ancient in origin and inactive today are in the before and after MRO HiRISE imaging actually becoming more eroded in present time with sediment building up in the terrain at the drain exhaust points by some kind of liquid flowing through them. This before and after observational evidence is likely solid fact. The question then becomes, what is the liquid?

SECOND is not nearly close enough to be fact but more speculative. It is what they believe to be informed conclusions based on assumptions. You see, regardless of my book evidence indicating milder than thought Mars temperatures, these scientists still assume that the Mars general atmospheric temperature is far too cold to enable fresh water to exist in a liquid state. Yet what ever is eroding these drains must be a liquid. ergo for them it logically follows that this “liquid” can’t be fresh water and must be something else. It is speculated that the most likely source of this liquid is brine ice melting and flowing in the terrain.

Now, in our human Earth experience, CO2 ice when warming does not have a liquid state in open natural environments where expansion is possible but transfers directly from a solid (ice) to a gas state. A block of CO2 ice here on Earth in warming conditions quickly demonstrates this. So, with CO2 ruled out, the only thing left at the temperatures ranges they accept for the Mars surface environment as fact must be salt water ice melt during warming trends. Why? Simply because it takes colder temperatures to freeze salt water than it does fresh water and less temperature to melt it.

Key to this assumption by scientists is the temperature data obtained in years past via instruments landed by us on the Mars surface indicating temperatures as low as –180 to –220 F in the south polar regions. Temperatures like that are plenty cold enough to snap metal and freeze not only fresh or salt water but CO2 right out of the air to fall to the ground as snow/ice. That is why we are told that most of the white reflective snow/ice we see on Mars, and especially at the poles, is really CO2 ice. Remember that other instrument readings say that the Mars atmosphere is suppose to be 95.35% carbon dioxide (CO2) with only slight trace amounts of everything else including water vapor.

That of course is based on the assumption that instruments do not lie and even if one reading was inaccurate, there are supposedly other instrument readings verifying it. Likewise, that blind faith in the official instrument data is based on the assumption that there is no technology advanced life presence on Mars that might intentionally mess with our instruments and/or their data streams nor does it take into consideration that a hidden secrecy agenda here on Earth might also manipulate the data to designed secrecy agenda ends. You see where I’m going with this?

Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your outlook and the circumstance, scientists are for the most part interested in science only and not normally in related political or social issues. Of course, to be so well educated, that can lead them to often be among the most naive people on planet Earth. It can also lead them to just ignore the reality that their employers like NASA and JPL are riddled with military, military intelligence, and black opts personnel often answerable to mega rich power brokers that are often very interested in secrecy agendas and particularly when it comes to any knowledge of active civilizations on distant worlds.

Another thing that needs to be understood is that most scientific research today is conducted through computer modeling. However, the accuracy of that process is entirely dependent on the accuracy of the base information data being fed into the model. If one fundamental thing (instrument temperature or atmospheric data) is wrong entered into the model, then everything that subsequently comes out is suspect.

Now imagine yourself as a scientist setting up such a model to research this water flow issue. Since we are dealing with the critical issue of a substance in a liquid state on the planet’s surface, what kind of temperature and atmospheric data will you be feeding into the model? You can bet that it will be the data officially accepted by the science community consensus that is assumed to be accurate.

You’ll notice that there are a lot of assumptions going on in arriving at this idea that the substance in a liquid flowing state on Mars doing this eroding is salt water. You know how the old saying goes, assumptions often make an ass out of you and me.

Likewise, psychology, expectations, and career considerations also play a role. Even if a scientist suspected the official consensus base data to be inaccurate and/or manipulated and created a model using different data points, that scientist would know that any results revealed would run the risk of not being welcomed either by his or her employer or even by his or her own peers with a perceived vested interest in the consensus remaining unquestioned. This means that one is likely setting oneself up to be a considered a maverick headed for conflict on a number of different levels that may eventually wind up costing one their employment or even a future career in either the work of science and/or academia.

It has been this way for so long that generations of scientists have grown up thinking that this state of affair is normal and no need to question it. They are deeply conditioned by it and likely conditioned to resist anything that smacks of changing it.

So what do you think would happen if someone high up in the secrecy ranks reversed direction deciding that the science communities needed to open their eyes/mind and come to some real truth about some distant place like Mars? Imagine yourself in that position for a moment. It would amount to expecting the science communities to switch gear in mass in mid stream and just ignore generations of psychological conditioning that you helped establish in them. Can you say good luck on that!

Sound a bit too far fetched to some of you? Doesn’t sound like the leadership we know to others of you? Consider that those that have hidden truth from us in the past may be being influenced by new generations of secrecy types coming up through the ranks with different views and there are likely opposing sides taking shape on the question of whether to reveal any truth to the public or not.

The real question from the newer point of view is how to reveal some limited truth and not suffer being torn down and held responsible for past duplicity in the process. The obvious choice for them is to let the scientists zero in on a few smaller truths with secrecy leading the way in order to get the ball rolling and the myopic science communities will then hopefully be too focused on what is around the next bend in knowledge gained to be thinking about retribution for past wrongs done.

The idea is for the newer thinking secrecy types to nudge the truth out in front a little as bait for the scientists to grab on to and run with. This nudging has happened before but failed. Find that concept strange? Take a look at my Report #160 where the Phoenix Lander demonstrated some surface melt salty fluids under and around the Lander, some water ice just below the soil surface, and a substantial amount of water vapor cloud (fresh water) evidence far beyond what is suppose to be present. On the latter, they even made moving videos of the water vapor clouds trying to drive the point home. The problem is that the science and academic communities are just too bogged down in their conditioning and assumptions to adequately pick up on it.

Now days it is very hard to find educated types who can escape the academic conditioning and think outside the nice comfortable box that has been prescribed for them for decades. My own work and book of Mars surface water in a liquid state and biological forest life evidence has apparently so far fell on science minds too thoroughly conditioned to wake up but it was likely tolerated by some secrecy types for this same reasoning. Now these communities have been thrown another added piece of dangling bait in the form of surface water flows that they assume must be salt water in order to try and force a fit within the official temperature and atmospheric consensus data.

It remains to be seen if established scientists can break from the conditioning, dig into this forging ahead to break what will be new ground for them even if it is old ground for you and I, and challenge the older Mars surface temperature base data? This herding profile is a pathetic reflection on the Earth human condition but any movement off of the pot will be better than nothing at all. Surely such well educated minds do not require it to be spelled out to them letter by letter or digit by digit by NASA and JPL?

One good thing that this newest NASA/JPL revelation has done, as so many of you have pointed out to me in email, is verify the basic truthfulness of this work that surface water in a liquid state is a Mars reality and what ever follows from there. For any scientist just beginning to wake up some from the old conditioning stupor to start thinking outside the box a little, start by taking a serious look at the very fundamental and basic surface water and bio-life evidence in my book. It will pry your eyes open even wider! In fact, relative to where you have been, you may be in for a shock.

Loading Facebook Comments ...