...That's what it says in a spook site.
...What does it mean?
...How does a planet just lose its moons?

chai

Prince's thread: Phobos & Deimos A Go Go!

Ah, TMGNow I presume. Try this page as an antidote to them.

Bizarrely, in the link in the post above, they thank the Bad Astronomy site. My irony meter is pegged.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: The Bad Astronomer on 2003-02-27 15:58 ]</font>

Ehhh, if thats true then how come there isn't more news about it in the headlines? Shouldn't it be a big deal? I don't buy it.

__________________
-Zap
If you didn't like the opinions expressed in this post, get over it!

From that site:
6/4/00 - Comet 76p encounter with Mars

Hopi: "In all of this there still remains no evidence either way that Phobos and/or Deimos are still in orbit around Mars or if they are not."

This site includes images from 9/16/2000:
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/target/Phobos
(correction: 9/16/2000 was the add date. The image was taken on 8/19/1998 so it doesn't refute the claim.)

Here's an image from the night of 8/20/2001, from the Earth:
http://www.corvus.com/gd-deimos.htm

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: traztx on 2003-02-27 14:17 ]</font>

The BA's link wasn't working. So, I clicked the "quote" icon to find the page. I think it is supposed to be this .

__________________
"As I lay beneath the Southern Cross, the stars tell more than I could" . . . David Meece

There are several valid reasons why the moons of Mars, (Phobos and Deimos,) might be undetected. I list some of them below:

1. Eyepiece missing from telescope.
2. Can't find high powered binoculars.
3. Loaned telescope to a friend.
4. Overcast.
5. Mars not in sky.
6. Daytime.
7. Thought it was Mars but it was really Arcturus.
8. Perfectly good observing night with Mars above the horizon, and telescope in good working order. (But I went to the movies that night.)

And there are several invalid reasons:
1. The moons are there, but the Millennium Group has to come up with more goofy variety on their website.
2. The moons are there, but the Millennium Group wants to pull strings attached to their believe-it-all, unthinking followers.
[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

...It's extremely simple to determine whether Mars' moons are still in place.
...The Hubble is perfectly situated and perfectable adaptable to go LOOK.
...So, why don't we have an answer to this question?
...Who doesn't wanna look and see?
...Why isn't the Hubble being used to detect anomalies that might be artifacts of living persons, in the past or present?
...What is the Hubble FOR, after all?
...I guess I'm getting impatient with the idea that scientists are not giving us the information that our tax dollars are being spent, to GET.

Certainly Not chasing down every crackpot's pet conspiracy theory !

Is it a conspiracy theory, that the moons of Mars have gotten lost?

They're probably still there. But, if they're not...well, I hate to say it, but...better those moons than our moon. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif[/img]

Hubble would not be used becuase it is a large expensive piece of equipment for which thousands of astronomers apply for limited observing. Debunking crackpot ideas is not in Hubble's science mission.

There are plenty of Earth bound telescopes that can detect the moons of Mars (after all, they were discovered long before Hubble in the first place).

Deimos can be seen with telescopes as small as 10 inches. Phobos requires a 15 to 18 inch instrument. Thousands of amateur astronomers have telescopes this size...why the need for Hubble? Heck, I periodically get to observe with a 24 inch telescope and I am sure I will image Mars next summer near opposition with this instrument.

In short, if the Moons of Mars are gone, no "conspiracy" could cover it up since there are so many people capable of observing them who have no government connections.

Rob

Phobos and Deimos have been "hi-jacked" by the Moon Nazis, and are currently being transported to Earth's Moon via super-tachyon engines. However, don't bother to look for them, because they've been made invisible by an anti-graviton cloaking device, which will make their detection impossible without the proper instrumentation.

For further information please contact Bart Sibrel.

awww....one of your planets is missing [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]?

__________________
Stanly is a moron, kai is a walking dead beet, Xev just want sex.

From the page you cite you read this:
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/target/Phobos
This image of Phobos, the inner and larger of the two moons of Mars, was taken by the Mars Global Surveyor on August 19, 1998

That is
completly in accord with TMG claims:
"In all of this there still remains no evidence either way that Phobos and/or Deimos are still in orbit around Mars or if they are not. There are no images showing the two moons in orbit around Mars. The last public pictures we have of Phobos are from the Mars Global Surveyor taken on August 19th, 1998 and published by that great little organization Malin Space Science Systems out of San Diego"
http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/com...P_phobos1.html

Text near middle of the page below the image in black and white of Lasco C3 showing (what could be) comet 76P and Mars.Interesting part of the text about Phobos and Deimos (missing?) starting from there.

It didn't take me long to come up with an amateur image of Deimos from Aug 2001:

http://corvus.com/gd-deimos.htm

So the "TMG" statement is wrong. Of course, this game goes something like, "Yeah, but you don't have a picture from last week, do ya? See!"

They claimed the moons were missing at time A. I easily found an amateur image from time B > A. This claim should be retracted, but these folks sound like True Believers (tm) and are probably immune to such simple and direct evidence.

Gosh - when their page starts with the words "The following proof is irrefutable", do you REALLY think that they are immune to evidence/logical arguement?

Or ANY arguement for that matter?

Sheesh - I got a headache over there and only read a small part!

Jack

[quote]
On 2003-02-26 23:25, Aldrin wrote:
Sorry, I was confused by the add date. The other link I gave is from a more recent observation from the Earth. I didn't spend more than 10 minutes looking around the internet to find it. There is undoubtedly a lot more if you feel like searching, but I'm satisfied.

Guess what, heres is the rebuttal from TMG.
http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/com...P_phobos3.html

I'd imagine that this summer, when Mars is the closest it ever has been in historical times there will be lots of amature photographs of the moons.

I also imagine that there will be a lot of crackpot ideas and warnings of invasions from mars too...

::sigh::

__________________
"Ignorance has caused more calamity than malignity" H.G. Wells

"Getting lost is part of exploring." Uniqua in "Backyardigans-Heart of the Jungle"

"Trying to wrap my head around creationist astronomy is like trying to ride a unicycle around a Moebius strip: it’s off-balance, physically impossible, full of one-sided arguments, and in the end you don’t go anywhere." Phil Plait

OK. I promise to put them back by this summer!

Looks like you are correct, Rift.

From near the bottom of the article linked above:

No comment.

__________________
"As I lay beneath the Southern Cross, the stars tell more than I could" . . . David Meece

Am I the only one who thinks that maybe these guys are doing this all tongue-in-cheek. There's is just something kind of over-the-top about that whole site. If they're not, the fact that even Tom VanFlandern thinks thet're nuts is quite telling.

When the nuts start calling each other nuts does that mean that science is winning?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Rich on 2003-02-27 14:26 ]</font>

Just curious, but why haven't amateur (or pro) astronomers looked at Mars in a large telescope lately? If they see the moons that answers the whole stupid thing...if they don't they keep trying again. Either way, I'm sure the moons will be rediscovered this summer when Mars is at its very good view.

__________________
-Zap
If you didn't like the opinions expressed in this post, get over it!

Good point Zap.Why this is so hard to find someone on this board or elswhere willing to take a look at Mars and taking a picture of his Moons?

Turn the question around: Aldrin, why haven't you?

Let's see, I haven't because my small scope (not to mention abilities) won't allow me to. Many here may not have a scope powerful enough. Many here may not have the time to contact their local observatory and see if there is any scheduled Mars viewing on the program. Many here may not feel it's worth their time and resources to investigate this crack-pot theory when everyhting else logically tells them that the moons are still there.

For those that are truly curious, either go out and view them yourselves or find someone to do it. Then come back and report your findings.

I'm sure there are people who have looked. There was a thread on SAA in early Jan titled "What does it take to get phobos". There weren't any specific dates given but all the accounts seemed fairly recent. There were certainly no posters claiming that they couldn't see it because it was missing.

It does appear to take a big scope which rules out a lot of the quick look/ grab and go types. Mars is not terrifically placed for viewing right now, but then again, I'm not a morning person. Also as you mention the view will be getting much better.

To have any urgency to verify that the moons are still there, I think one would need a reasonable belief that they might not be. My personal belief is they are where they should be and waiting for warmer weather won't change that. Responding not only implies the possibility has merit but would also get tedious very quickly: "I think {choose moon} is missing, please check"

Rich

The Racine Astronomical Society has a C-14 and a 16inch Newtonian in a dome out in the country. The outer moon should be an easy catch for these guys this summer. The inner moon might be a challenge, but with a CCD camera should be observable.

I have friends with personal telescopes in the 22 to 25 inch range. I will admit the last time I have seen the moons of Mars was the 2001 opposition, so I can't say for sure they are still there, but I haven't looked since then either and have seen no credible evidence to the contrary.

This summer, I will again enjoy hunting those little specs of light.

Rob

I got the following from SAA (RichField in an earlier posting mentioned the thread):

There's an article about the moons of Mars in the June 2001 issue of S&T. At the time, Phobos was at mag 10.9 while Deimos was at mag 12.0. The article also describes tricks how to observe the moons

We may have to wait a couple of months (unless you have a really big scope and you observe right before morning twilight).

Sounds like a good challenge to try this summer. I think I'll try it. I wonder if someone (maybe in palm.astro on yahoogroups?) is going to come up with some software for viewing Mars and the moons. Or maybe one of the commercial planetarium software programs does that?





<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: aurorae on 2003-02-27 16:52 ]</font>

Aldrin, I don't have time to look over the "refutation" to which you linked, so for the purposes of argument I'll take the image off the table. I do not concede they're right, as they seem to have a tenuous grasp on the natural sciences in general - but I won't use this one image as proof for now.

However, it sounds like Hale_Bopp saw the Moons in 2001. I'm sure there are others - I can dig around if I have time.

My question is - why are you so convinced they're missing, when the vast majority of scientists think no such thing? And why do you think there's some massive coverup?

Also, do you think it's reasonable to divert the expensive and heavily-booked HST, or some other professional observatory telescope, to refute something that no serious astronomer believes?

Finally, suppose RichField, etc., take all sorts of pics of P and D this summer when Mars is close. Will you assert that they have been magically replaced? Or would you concede they were never "missing"?