Berry Bowl Options

[chaosman]

"Chaosman - can you say who your two NASA contacts were?"

Well I won't give the names to the public, because I don't know if they would like it.

But I can give you one original statement:


My email question was:


"Can you tell me:

Why doesn't NASA consider fossils as an option for explaining the spheres ?"


Answer:

"Simply stated, we ARE considering all possible explanations for the spherules. Also, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs".


I also remember a press briefing where one NASA guy said something like:

"...You can bet that we have fun speculating what that things might be...".

But they never used the "F"-word in public.


My best guess:

The dicussions going on in some forums like this pretty much reflect the discussions inside the rover team.
But the majortity inside the rover science team belives that this are concretions.


But as I said:

They will not be able to proff/disproof anything during this mission. :-(

Well it is fun to watch anyway !

[chaosman]

To Gray:

That might well be.

I don't know enough about geology to rule out you therory or to give any statement on how likely that would be.

Could that also explain the mables on stems/stalks ?

[Gray]

chaosman,
I've explained that in the 'marbles' thread on Mark Carey's forum. I think there might have been 'microchannels' in the muds parallel to the bedding which also experienced similar secondary mineralization. The 'marble-on-a-stem' was a place where one of the microchannels intersected a spherule.

[chaosman]

Interesting theory,

are you a geologist ?

If so:

What do you think:

Did the outcrop form in standing water or groundwater ?

[Gray]

There appear to be cross-beds in some of the rocks. Cross-beds are formed by water flowing parallel to the bedding. If it's flowing parallel to the bedding, it would strongly suggest surficial water as opposed to ground water. They can also be formed by wind.