Can you explain why the many, many scientists who are directly involved in the minutia of the rover research missions are not seeing the "water" you are seeing?
I'd sure like to hear the answer to that question too. Since Dfrank has conceded a lack of evidence for powerful religious interests suppressing that investigation, I'm wondering if he continues to believe suppression of some kind is indicated.
Why would they ignore what you see as obvious signs of water? Is it possible that you are mistaken in what you think you see?
I think Dfrank has made it quite clear that he might be mistaken, which is the basis for his argument that NASA has some obligation actually to drive the rover to the ditch in question and clear it up for him and for the thousands of other laymen also presumably riding the edges of their seats to see if their idle speculation has any substance to it. It only takes a minute, he says. It takes no effort, he says. So why the reluctance, even if his claims are entirely mistaken?
Pure conspiracism, if you ask me. That whole line of reasoning is based on the notion that Dfrank's claims make any sense; and further based upon the notion that NASA has some sort of obligation to check out layman's claims, no matter how absurd or evidence-less they may be.
|