From: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass)
Subject: Re: Higgs Spotted?
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 20:48:35 GMT

In article <1e8uetINNiaa@smaug.West.Sun.COM> Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM (Richard M. Mathews) writes:
>crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) writes:
>>>> "Mars is somewhat the same distance from the sun, which is
>>>> very important.  We have seen pictures where there are
>>>> canals, we believe, and water.  If there is water, there
>>>> is oxygen.  If oxygen, that means we can breathe."
>>>> 				     Dan Quayle, August 11, 1989
>
>>     It sounds pretty funny when presented the appropriate way, but
>>     nothing that is said above appears to actually be wildly incorrect.
>
>Not as I read it.
>
>>     1) compared to Uranus, Mars is roughly at the same distance from the
>>     Sun as the Earth.
>
>If you call 52% farther "somewhat the same," then I will grant this.
>A more complete quote from Quayle shows he preceded the above comments
>with "Mars is essentially in the same orbit [as Earth]."  P/Swift-Tuttle
>and the Perseids are essentially in the same orbit.  Earth and Mars are
>not.

     Feel free to give us the 'more complete' quote.

>>     2) there are large numbers of surface features that 
>>     seem to have been shaped by water, and while it is true that we
>>     may not be able to see the water ....
>
>While there are canyons and channels, there most definitely are not canals
>(unless you use a silly definition of "canal" being any markings on Mars;
>such a definition is irrelevant in a context discussing evidence of water).
>Second, Quayle used the present tense in saying that pictures show there
>*are* canals and water.  There most definitely is no photographic evidence
>of water on Mars *now*.

      Colloquial politician definition of canals as 'things that used
      to hold water'.  The existence of pluvial features on Mars
      *is* one of the justifications for assuming that there is water
      somewhere.  The pictures show things that look like riverbeds,
      thus we believe there may be water. 

>>     3) where there is water, there is oxygen,
>>     and 4) any number of proposals have been made in my community to use
>>     indigenous materials, including subsurface water, to breathe.
>
>In Quayle's statement, we can either take "oxygen" to mean atomic oxygen
>or molecular oxygen.  If the former, then Quayle's first statement is true
>and the second is false -- you need atomic oxygen plus a whole lot more.
>If we take "oxygen" to mean molecular oxygen, then the first statement
>is false and the second is true (with the qualification that you must
>have enough oxygen).  Either way, Quayle loses (but he took care of that
>2 weeks ago anyway).

     Only if you assume that he was talking about breathing water.
     He was fully aware of proposals to procure consumables from 
     Mars itself.

     You have to assume he is stupid to make him stupid.  This seems
     silly and very misleading.

                                dale bass

-- 
C. R. Bass                                          crb7q@virginia.edu        
Department of Mechanical, 
     Aerospace and Nuclear Engineering
University of Virginia                              (804) 924-7926
Newsgroups: sci.physics