/sci/ - Science & Math

One of the features they point out on Mars is the Valles Marineris. In this topographic map, you can see the massive canyon along the equator. On the western end you can see a mountain range extending to the south and wrapping back toward the middle. On the eastern end you can see a valley extending to the north, getting lost in the lower elevations, but also wrapping back around toward the middle.

This creates a figure-8 pattern, and they believe the creation of the Valles Marineris was a result of an electric discharge and the subsequent rotating plasma currents. The current which flowed to the north was a negative flow of current, leading to the removal of material on that arm of the spiral, and a positive discharge to the south, leading to the elevated mountain range of the south arm of the spiral.

This video talks about the Valles Marineris a little more:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wOogk2LSSw

>>5928076
>There's a lot of good videos on their channel, and a lot of other things that make you go "hmmmm..."
What do you mean by the latter? It makes me think that you have a high amount of respect for them, BUT SOMETIMES they post 9-11 truth movement videos and discuss how flouride doesn't free your teeth from bacteria, but it makes them more visible to satelight imaging.

>>5928121

Oh no, things that just blow your mind. No fluoride, tin-foil hat bullshit.

>>5928113

"It was Georg Christoph Lichtenberg who in the 18th century first showed that electric arcs create ravine networks on more negatively charged surfaces and elevated ridges on more positively charged surfaces. Could it be that simple? That a cosmic thunderbolt carving Valles Marineris acted on two regions of different charge. Negative to the north, and positive to the South. If such was the case, the only plausible cause of the charge differential would be an electrical exchange between Mars and other charged bodies in the past."

bumping

Again with the bumping.

>>5928076
It's utter and complete bullshit.

All that plasma should be detectable from earth with radio telescopes, we simply don't see this.

>>5928297

I would liken it to the dark energy and dark matter we claim we see the effects of everywhere in space. Why can't it be the electric force instead?

Also, the radiation belts of Saturn move AROUND the rings, rather than through them. We can see the plasma torus around the Sun. This is a composite image of the Sun taken in two different spectrum, showing the double-banding of activity at the edges of the plasma torus in the corona.

>>5928347

And here is a picture taken by Kristian Birkeland in the lab with his terella experiments.

>>5928297

How do you explain the figure 8 pattern, then? Do you deny that the valley wrapping to the north and mountain range to the south are completely unrelated to the Valles Marineris?

Bumping for decent discourse. Not insults and bullshit dismissals.

>>5928297
>All that plasma should be detectable from earth with radio telescopes

Citation please.

bump!

Another thing which catches my eye of the EU theory is the belief that Olympus Mons is also another feature created by an electric discharge. They say that if you look closely, you can see the caldera has craters which are centered on the rims of other craters. This is because as the discharge progressed, at some point the arc jumped from the lowest point (the center) to the highest point (the rim) and began creating another crater there.

Looking at it, don't you believe it looks too smooth and clean-cut to be the site of a volcanic eruption?

Returning the to creation of the Valles Mariners, the proponents of the EU theory point out that the excavation of all the dirt and rock that was in the canyon had to land somewhere, and they believe that the material had a net drift westward where you can see that several craters across the landscape have been buried and filled with it all.

>>5928756
>because A == B, therefore B==D~~~
In other words, since all dogs are four-legged and all cats are four-legged, therefore all cats are dogs.

Again, the the excavation of the planet's surface would also explain the vast fields of rocks seen by the rovers, as well.

>>5928773

Yeah. Sure.

You can see the circular striations in the "caldera", as well as a closer look at how the craters appear to be cut into the others.

EU proponents believe tornadoes and earthquakes are triggered by electrical events in the sun that coincide with sunspots. Batshit fucking crazy.

>>5928790
Have you ever done any kind of study into volcanism?

Because those are kind of normal characteristics for certain kinds of volcanoes.

Sure, gigantic spacelightning is a great story and a compelling mental image, but there's no compelling evidence to support the hypothesis that wasn't explained by more likely theories.

>>5928821

And why is that? It's obvious (when you look at it) that tornadoes are electric phenomena. Earthquakes I'm not so sure about.

This guy gives a great analysis of the electric nature of tornadoes. Hurricanes are much the same. Some of the most POWERFUL electric fields measured over hurricanes were the hurricanes of the 2005 season which included Katrina and Emily. There was a LOT of eye wall lightning seen in these hurricanes, which is not typical.

"Generally there's not a lot of lightning in the eye-wall region," Richard Blakeslee of the Global Hydrology and Climate Center says. "So when people see lightning there, they perk up -- they say, okay, something's happening."

Blakeslee says, the reason most hurricanes don't have lightning is understood. "They're missing a key ingredient: vertical winds."

This explanation is fucking terrible. They're confusing cause and effect, and the reason why there are vertical winds is the same reason there's lightning and powerful electric fields. I can't say that for sure or cite anything, but holy fucking shit what caused the vertical winds in the first place if that's what they believe?

>>5928858
>>5928858

From a distance they look like cracks, but when zoomed in do you see any evidence of faulting in those grooves?

>>5928858

And again, how do you explain my original image? There's clearly a figure-eight and all the features are strongly associated with the canyon.

If you look closely at the Valles, you can even see that the western and eastern halves are concave south and north respectively, in the direction their spirals flows.

Are there any explanations for this? Does anyone believe that this is a coincidence, or that the mountain range or valley is not associated with the Valles and is merely a coincidence, as well?

A close up of the Valles, so you can get a closer look at the concave features.

>>5928907

>Does anyone believe that this is a coincidence

Unless you have other examples that show this is a reproducible incident, yes.

>you can even see that the western and eastern halves are concave south and north respectively

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. The terrain slopes down in that image from bottom-left to upper-right anyway, even outside the "figure-eight".

>>5928907
If you look at something long enough you can see whatever pattern you want. That's how the human brain works.

>>5928928

All those galaxies, yo.

>>5928930

In this instance though it's blatantly fucking obvious. No "seeing what you want" needed.

>this fucking thread

>>5928931
>and_then_there's_this_asshole_Pen&Teller-Bullshit.PCX

EU is half-baked at best. It's major flaw is that it is not in the least bit quantitative, so when it comes to actually testing it nothing can be done. A theory isn't a theory if it's just a collection of ideas modified ad-hoc when things don't fit the evidence. It needs to make quantitative predictions that can be tested. EU proponents don't publish papers, they don't test their ideas.

For example with this mars s
It's drivel.

>>5928347
>We can see the plasma torus around the Sun.
That's called a radiation belt, where particles from the Sun and elsewhere are confined loosely by the magnetic field. Entirely within "main stream" astronomy.

>Why can't it be the electric force instead?
In a plasma the electric force is screened out at some distance by the charges. It could be the electric force if the people who claim it is so would make testable predictions. Plasma cosmology was model of large scale structure in the universe based on plasma but it doesn't fir the observations.

>is this guy trolling or really serio...
>icomefromb
>well that answers that
Why don't you take your stupid trolling to /pol/ or /lit/ instead.

>>5928933
"This looks vaguely like that and I claim they are this" is not science. Unless you make a model that is testable you have nothing.

>>5928947

There's not a lot of them. They have jobs, and don't get paid to do the research they do. It's hard to devote your life to a passion or theory if it doesn't put food on the table.

>>5928955

Sorry I'm a fucking regular dude and don't give enough of a shit to major in this stuff.

You still haven't actually discussed what the fuck you think what I've said about the Valles, the features, why it makes the spiral pattern, whether any of the features are related or not, how it occurred. So what the fuck are you doing here? Trying to shame me into shutting up? Fuck you and your elitist attitude you prick.

>>5928347
>We can see the plasma torus around the Sun.

No. I'm pretty sure that isn't a real image. The site I found says it comes from SOHO but no instrument onboard could take an image like that. Unless you know where it came from I'm inclined to believe it's not real.

>the radiation belts of Saturn move AROUND the rings
[citation needed]

>>5928947

Oh, and the point I was making was just one small one, showing how it was similar to the magnetized globe in the lab.

There's still plenty of other things we don't know about the Sun, or the mainstream model fails to explain. The problem with the coronal heating is a big one, for instance. Why the solar wind accelerates, and as close to the surface as it actually does, the missing neutrinos, how the equator rotates faster than the rest of it, and sunspot even faster still.

>>5928963
I have no problem with that. What I have a problem with is making dozens of bold claims about every corner of science with absolutely zero data. If they worked away at making something of it I would have no issue, the problem is it's not science. Without something to test it isn't science and they should row back on their claims.

>>5928967
>Sorry I'm a fucking regular dude and don't give enough of a shit to major in this stuff.

This has nothing to do with you, don't take offense. The issue is this is presented as evidence of EU when really it's not science at all. It's not just you it's all of the people on that bus.

>You still haven't actually discussed what the fuck you think what I've said about the Valles, the features, why it makes the spiral pattern, whether any of the features are related or not, how it occurred.

Read some papers, I'm not a planetary scientist and neither are you. I've done nothing to shame you, and yet you claim this is somehow personal. What I stated is fact, you cannot seek to change the face of science with "this looks like that".

>>5928974

Yeah, I just made that image up.

As far as the radiation belt of Saturn goes I read it a long time ago in an article on Space.com. It isn't going to change your mind anyway so I'm not going to bother looking it up.

>>5928983

Well quit getting your panties in a bunch about it, as if it's an insult to your beliefs. Fucking shit, sciencefags are almost as bad as Christfags. I'm not here to flip-turn science on its fucking head.

I'm here asking what the fuck you guys think about these claims, to have an actual discussion instead of have someone say "hurrr you're retarded lololol" and to give me reasons why the shit sounds fallacious.

I think they make a compelling argument and the pictures and similarities and features they point out seem to be just as good an argument as any other.

>>5928976
Coronal heating has solutions the difficulty is measuring if either solution is occurring to the extent required to heat the corona. Similarly for the acceleration of the solar wind.
The Solar neutrino problem is solved, neutrino oscillations have been conclusively detected.
The motion of the Sun and sunspots is also not a total mystery, the difficulty is observation.

Just because the mainstream does not have a full picture does not give you licence you do what you want. All theories are subject to quantitative experiment, this is why these problems you mentioned exist because people wait until their is enough evidence.

>>5928998

Says you. Have you even looked at the pictures of the Valles I posted? To say you can't form an opinion, mull over the possibilities or consider why "this looks like that" is a fucking cop-out, laziness or some other problem that I think is endemic in the human population at large. Instantly discredited unless you have a much larger following, money, or other large backing. It's horse shit, and exclusion under the guise of keeping science sterile and clean.

>>5929015

How is this any different from claiming the Sun is a massive hydrogen cloud compressing the core under its own weight to produce heat and light in fusion, when everything we observe shows that the corona is the hottest part, the surface cooler and the interior (when viewed in sunspots) is cooler still? We came up with a long ass convoluted mess of explanations to explain this ass-backward notion.

>>5929011
>Well quit getting your panties in a bunch about it, as if it's an insult to your beliefs.

This is not about anyones beliefs this is about scientific rigour.
I have never insulted you in this thread, you however have. You wanted to know what people thought about EU, I told you.

> the pictures and similarities and features they point out seem to be just as good an argument as any other.

And this is where science diverges from opinion. A point in science is you design a test which is not subjective, which cannot be influenced by prejudice. EU doesn't have that.
The trouble is without a model of these systems they cannot claim they can in fact explain them, qualitative descriptions like theirs are not testable.

>>5929034

Well we can sit back and discuss this shit here until such time that they decide to test it. Observation is how it all starts. I'm not asking for a lecture on the scientific method. I'm asking for a fucking discussion on the stuff I'm posting.

Can you REASONABLY deny that the picture of the Valles I posted does NOT resemble a figure eight, or spiral? Can you give an explanation for this occurrence?

Goddam sciencefags are masters of double-speak.

>>5929035
>the interior (when viewed in sunspots) is cooler still
Sunspots aren't holes contrary to what some EU sites say. In standard theory they are formed by flux tubes emerging from the surface, this restricts the upward flow of convection (carrying the hot material) causing the region to be cooler. For this reason they are also sunken down lower than the surface. Not a hole.

The surface is not the coolest part there are several observable layered to the Sun other than the corona and the photosphere (visible surface). The lower chromosphere (above the photosphere) is actually cooler, it then starts to get hotter in the upper chromosphere and transition region.

We can probe the inner regions of the sun with how the Sun oscillates. Like tracking waves from earthquakes on Earth we can see inside the Sun based on oscillations of the photosphere and how they travel throughout the Sun.

Again if there was another sensible method it would be judged only on the evidence available. EU methods require big currents which are not observed but without numbers it cannot be tested with any certantly.

>>5929066
>until such time that they decide to test it. Observation is how it all starts.
With EU it's not observation that's needed. There are decades of data waiting around to be used, what EU needs is to be an actual theory. It needs to be written in the language of mathematics, not all at once or in some unified way but to any extent.

>Can you REASONABLY deny that the picture of the Valles I posted does NOT resemble a figure eight, or spiral?
It does look roughly like a figure eight but a spiral but that is not quantitative. One occurrence can be chance. Without more detailed predictions it's not evidence of anything.

IT's a straightish valley, a mountain chain and what looks like erosion, there's no reason that couldn't be a figure eight simply by chance.

>>5929113

Sounds like a great way of preserving the same old horse shit instead of having to change the status quo.

When you look at them closely the penumbra resemble tornadoes. You can even see twists in them. The filaments have dark cores, and are scalable to our tornadoes both in size and duration. The powerful magnetic fields are believed by EU proponents to be caused by the movement of charged particles into (or out of?) the sunspots themselves and down into the core of the Sun.

>>5929113

The sunspots themselves are massive tornadoes, as well. The penumbra move parallel to the surface and move the charged particles into the vortex that is the sunspot, and downward into the core (or out of, fuck I don't know). I imagine if there is a large build up of energy in any particular area as it has become saturated and a massive flow of charged particles comes out of the core this may be what causes the solar flares that burst of of the sunspot. Just an idea. Sorry I don't have any math or scientific experiments to back it up. Can you maybe "see" this idea though?

>>5929152
>Sounds like a great way of preserving the same old horse shit
This is called bias. That is the explanation which fits observation and computer modeling.

>When you look at them closely the penumbra resemble tornadoes.
We've already discussed "this looks like that" and why it's not a good idea.

>The powerful magnetic fields are believed by EU proponents to be caused by the movement of charged particles into (or out of?) the sunspots themselves and down into the core of the Sun.
But then you would get continuous emission like synchrotron in the Sun's normal magnetic field, again it could be tested if they're theory was a theory. If you want to change the status quo you need actual evidence not some revolutionary vibe.

>>5929139

Okay, man. If Hawking was talking about this shit I'm sure you'd swallow ever last bit of it right up and ask for more. That it's coming from some random dude from /b/ you're being overly skeptical. It took you this long to even talk about it and only after much prompting from me. You're simply trying to play the role of the eternal skeptic because you feel that's the right thing to do.

The mountain range growing out of the western area and the valley to the east are very obviously connected to the Valles Marineris and very obviously wrap back around to the middle. To claim "we need more research" or "it not quantitative" is an excuse not to form an opinion.

>>5929169
There's no problem with this sort of thinking if you you make it clear it's conjecture. The obvious question is why don't we detect these tremendous currents that allegedly power the Sun?
>this may be what causes the solar flares
But then the enormous question is how do you explain flare morphology. We see flares in loops with a source at the top, why if it's just a release of particles.

>>5929185
>That it's coming from some random dude from /b/ you're being overly skeptical.
No, I'm waiting for actual evidence. EU cannot explain these features. What they do is wave their hands and make something up but have yet to put pen to paper trying to actually prove it would work.

> To claim "we need more research" or "it not quantitative" is an excuse not to form an opinion.
I have an opinion, it's total crap. That opinion however has no place in science. It doesn't matter who you are, what matters is that you have the evidence yo back your claims, EU doesn't.

>>5929185
>If Hawking was talking about this shit I'm sure you'd swallow ever last bit of it right up and ask for more.
You're retarded if you believe Hawking doesn't have to stand up to scrutiny because he's famous. On the contrary, he's even more scrutinized because of it.
Argumentum ad auctoritatem, no real scientist would fall for this shit.

>>5929177

Except when they don't understand something they blame it on magnetism and plug whatever numbers they need to into the computer to make their simulations work. Science!

>Next point
So are you saying they don't look like giant tornadoes? It's just another coincidence? You say it's not a good idea but I think you're just being overly skeptical and dismissive. It also doesn't do anything to convince me since you're not exactly addressing what I said but falling back on other shit your teachers taught you how to do.

Anyway, this guy does a much better job at explaining what he thinks about sunspots:

http://www.holoscience.com/wp/sunspot-mysteries/

>>5929224
>Except when they don't understand something they blame it on magnetism and plug whatever numbers they need to into the computer to make their simulations work.
Nonsense. These things are tested and rigours. If you have evidence of this you would post it.

>So are you saying they don't look like giant tornadoes?
Did I say that? No, I said that isn't evidence of anything.
>It's just another coincidence?
In the mainstream they are totally different systems. "Looking similar" isn't quantitative so the fact you think they look similar is evidence of nothing.

So first he asserts that people blame what they don't understand on magnetism and then he, unashamedly, blames it all on electric discharge. Again, what i've always said, what's missing is the evidence.

>>5929248

Sure it does. We know that tornadoes on Earth provide powerful electric fields, and we can detect the presence of magnetic fields around sunspots. We see that the penumbra have a striking resemblance to Earthly tornadoes, both in their size and duration when scaled and the twisting appearance of cyclonic activity and a dark strip down the middle of the penumbra filaments associated with the core of a tornado. That the entire sunspot itself resembles a massive tornado is amazing, too.

I mean holy fucking shit, you can see the surrounding area leading toward the area of the sunspot, either working to disperse the charge over the photosphere or channeling something toward the sunspot.

"Hurrr! Science doesn't allow me to form an opinion, so I'll give you some lecture on the scientific method instead from atop my pedestal."

>>5929270
>That the entire sunspot itself resembles a massive tornado is amazing, too.
In your mind it may but that does not prove they are related.

>We know that tornadoes on Earth provide powerful electric fields, and we can detect the presence of magnetic fields around sunspots.
Those are different though. Strong electric fields do not guarantee magnetic ones or vice-versa. Where is strong magnetic fields in tornadoes?

> either working to disperse the charge over the photosphere or channeling something toward the sunspot.
That's conjecture, you need evidence to say such things. That's also the chromosphere not the photosphere.

Sci, you're doing a great job right now. I usually freak out and get upset when people with conspiracy theories come along and people just rage at them and don't actually respond to their points. This leaves the conspiracy theorist feeling self righteous and makes them even more closed minded. You guys are doing a great job of not getting too pissed off at the pseudoscience and just letting him know the difference between a theory and a scientific theory. Good job, keep it up.

>>5929291

But they're not responding to any of the fucking points. Goddam, just look at the Valles Marineris.

>>5929289

Why the fuck wouldn't they be? Goddam. There's a unifying force of nature, yet mainstream science puts everything in its separate little place and says "we'll put it all together later, if at all"

>>5929289

Would you fucking look at the sunspot. HOOOOLY SHIT whatever you've learned has turned you into a blinded fucking robot. I'm arguing with a wall here.

>>5929309
>Why the fuck wouldn't they be?
No, you need to prove the dominant processes are the same to prove they are related. Science once thought galaxies and nebulae were the same until they looked closer.
You didn't answer my point about magnetic fields. If something only looks similar if you ignore what doesn't fit they aren't similar.

>There's a unifying force of nature
Massive claim that you would need evidence for. This is a baseless claim, you cannot use it to prove that they are related. Even if there is a unifying force doesn't mean they will be shaped by the same processes. For example fluid dynamics and current are both driven by electromagnetism but that doesn't make lightning and a waterfall similar.

>we'll put it all together later, if at all
That's the correct thing to do. Starting off saying everything is related is an assumption. You should build up to that conclusion not use it as a starting point. The unification of the electric and magnetic forces came about by studying each separately not assuming they were the same.

>>5929317
You see a tornado in that picture?
a. You've probably never even seen a picture of a tornado before.
b. You've never seen video of a sunspot. Ever.

c. Holy throatfucking shitting dicknipples.

If you wanted to throw parallels, the sunspots most resemble the color spots on several different species of octopi. Thus, stars are cephalopods and solar flares are tentacles.

ia ia cthulhu fhtagn

>>5929317
It's a lovely image but this is not how science is done.

>>5929330

I need evidence of a unifying force of nature? Are you fucking serious? As if there ISN'T one? Goddam you sure are retarded, son. Asperger's, maybe?

>>5929352
>I need evidence of a unifying force of nature?
You aren't getting this whole science thing. Assumptions are bad.

>>5929371

But... a unifying force of nature.... I mean holy shit.

Never mind.

>>5929381
It doesn't matter what it is. Your feelings on it are irrelevant. It's a baseless assumption, that has no place in science.

>>5929388

Who the fuck seriously objects to the notion to a unifying force of nature? Does anybody seriously doubt the existence of such a possibility?

Goddam I thought you were retard but now it's been confirmed. I cite this and your last couple of posts as evidence of your retardation.

>>5929395
When all you have left is personal attacks you've lost the argument.

>>5929425

shittt sonnnn

>>5929425

Not at all. I've just never heard ANYONE deny the absolute fucking TRUTH that there's a unifying force of nature. That is, until I realized you're trolling, son.

bump

bump

>>5929541
>>5929684
Your an idiot.
I think the problem here is you simply don't know enough science to understand his explanations of why you are wrong.

>>5929477
Grand unification energy(i assume you're talking about this when you say "unifying force") only occur at VERY high energy. Much higher than even the sun. In fact to unify gravity it is theorized to require planck temperature.
Not something that happens naturally.

>>5929724

Wow! And you say it so matter-of-factly, as if all this is already solidified as the truth. You take on the persona of the Great Seer bringing the truth down from the mountain to the rabble below. I think perhaps this is why I hate you so much.

NONE of this has been shown to be true. If you're talking about the MATH then none of that can actually be based in the physical world. A massive theoretical circle-jerk of assholes peer-reviewing each others bullshit and giving it the stamp of approval so they can nominate each other for Nobel Prizes.

Seriously? The grand unifying energy only occurs at very high energy states? Then why can we see the vast similarities of its workings at the microscopic and macroscopic?

The double-helix nebula, for instance. "Hurr, a coincidence. Got any cites for that? We already discussed this."

It's the same horse shit. Things in nature appear as each other because they're following many of the same principles. Dismissing the similarities between the microscopic and macroscopic is shear lunacy, something fitting for someone that's gone so far down the wrong path they think they're above it all of a sudden and have lost sight of reality.

>>5929746

The unifying force, the electric force, is responsible for the development of embryos. This was proven in the lab by Tufts University scientists. An accident in the lab led them to discover that an electric imprint of a face on the surface of the cells determined the growth of the embryo which "grew into" that imprint. By manipulating the field strength the scientists were able to change how it formed, and even caused fully functional eyes to grow out of the tadpole's ass.

They theorized that the electric field changed the pH in those areas, which caused the embryo's cell to create different proteins which then caused the specialization of the cells.

http://now.tufts.edu/news-releases/face-frog-time-lapse-video-reveals-never-seen

This electric force, the unifying force, is responsible for our development, our weather, the features on our planet and the motion of the planets. But goddam, you elitist "smart than you" pricks are too fucking educated to see it. You won't even give it a chance, or you'll quickly cross-check anything with Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy site and immediately dismiss it because you assume the educated masses have already done all the thinking there is to do on the subject, so why bother?

>>5929750

The electric face on the bottom left. The tadpole then grew into it.

>>5929750

Just because electricity can affect embryos doesn't mean it's the original driving force.

>and the motion of the planets

Which is why equations describing how the planets move take electromagnetism into account, right? Oh wait... Gravity works just fine.

>>5929750

>and the motion of the planets

Which is why equations describing how the planets move take electromagnetism into account, right? Oh wait... Gravity works just fine.

>>5929746
>Wow! And you say it so matter-of-factly, as if all this is already solidified as the truth
And a few posts further up...
>I've just never heard ANYONE deny the absolute fucking TRUTH that there's a unifying force of nature.

ITT: Things that vaguely look like other things. Coming up next, a false-color picture of the universe kinda looks like the human brain

>>5929024
Please tell me that you are trolling.

>To say you can't form an opinion, mull over the possibilities or consider why "this looks like that" is a fucking cop-out, laziness or some other problem that I think is endemic in the human population at large.
Okay, we get it, you are elite because you like an obscure hypothesis that has absolutely no data, experimental OR theoretical evidence behind it.

>Instantly discredited unless you have a much larger following, money, or other large backing.
It's not about that tinfoil bullshit, it's about burden of proof. To be considered you have to present scientifically acceptable proof and until you do so, we don't have to take you seriously.

Be more mature, you sound like a tinfoil crackpot, scientific gubbimint cunspiracy, in order to, what, hide geology of mars? If it could be proven, guys who proved it would be famous, even more because it contrasts the existing theories.

>>5929066
Again, burden of proof, but here's an explanation: it's a coincidence.

>>5929750
>motion of the planets
Totally fucking lost it.

I mean seriously, I not only woke up the whole house, but three of my neighbors too.

This shit is fucking comedy gold.

Sure, I'll have to sleep in the hotel for the rest of the night, but this is so funny that I have no regrets. Thank you OP, this is the funniest stuff I've read all year.

OP is epitome of bad science.

Can it be tested through observation here on Earth?