Where is the zebra? Options

[gorelick]

And no, they are not affiliated with Hoagland / TEM, before anybody asks...

And by "not affiliated with" you of course mean a regular collaborator, having even appeared on stage with him at one of Hoagland's seminars: http://palermoproject.com/Mars_Anomalies/H...New_Mexico.html

That said, Efrain's work isn't the usual garbage that comes out of the anomalists group. He's capable of doing reasonably competent research for an amateur astronomer.

[Bob Shaw]

And by "not affiliated with" you of course mean a regular collaborator, having even appeared on stage with him at one of Hoagland's seminars: http://palermoproject.com/Mars_Anomalies/H...New_Mexico.html

That said, Efrain's work isn't the usual garbage that comes out of the anomalists group. He's capable of doing reasonably competent research for an amateur astronomer.

Bad company doesn' t *have* to mean bad science, but it's sad if a bit of quality scientific work is ignored because of one's natural distaste for cultists (except for Cthulhu, of course! Yum, yum!). Sadly, the merest mention of the H-word makes my otherwise notoriously open mind snap shut with a resounding snap!

Bob Shaw

[Guest_paulanderson_*]

And by "not affiliated with" you of course mean a regular collaborator, having even appeared on stage with him at one of Hoagland's seminars: http://palermoproject.com/Mars_Anomalies/H...New_Mexico.html

That said, Efrain's work isn't the usual garbage that comes out of the anomalists group. He's capable of doing reasonably competent research for an amateur astronomer.

Ok, I just meant that Palermo is not part of TEM itself, he's independent.

I think he has done good work, and along with the other scientists referenced in Space.com, etc., has provided "reasonable doubt" that all the "stains" are simply dust avalanches. Some probably are, but I'm not sure they all are.

There are good studies that have been done by some "anomalists" but unfortunately they tend to usually get ignored and painted with the same brush as it were, as Hoagland, etc.. That's why I believe in evaluating anyone's work on an individual basis.

[Guest_Richard Trigaux_*]

Studying anomalous phenomenon or arguing for non-standard hypothesis don't make us nutters. It is even a fundamental freedom to be able to do so.

It is sad that so many scientists are closed to anomalous phenomenon or non-standard hypothesis, but I must say that they are not the worse ennemies of those who study these phenomenon. The worse ennemies are the nutters who spread so much garbage around the (few) serious works into these domains and discredit all the (few) serious works.

For instance, it is an independant private UFO studier group, the CUFOS at Chicago in 1989, which enquired about the Roswell case and demonstrated it was entirely bogus. But who know about this demonstration???

But nutters themselves would be completely inoffensive and ignored, if they were not given so much publicity by certain medias...

[The Messenger]

We should look for Zebras on Titan - if and when we have enough resolution - if avalanche are the cause, these features should be very sensitive to any movement of dust on or near the surface, and give us a good feel for how mobile the surface of Titan is. (I'm still wondering if the cat scratches / dunes are frozen or active.)