Mars Flying Saucer Test Postponed By NASA

    June 12, 2014
    Val Powell
    Comments are off for this post.

NASA is preparing to launch a “flying saucer” into Earth’s atmosphere in order to test the technology that may be used to land on Mars. However, the test has been postponed many times due to incliment weather conditions. The next chance to launch the flying saucer will be on June 14.

According to the agency, the flying saucer test will be conducted in order to test technology that will aid in landing spacecraft, and maybe even humans, on Mars.

NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory developed the LDSD or the Lowe Density Supersonic Decelerator. It looks similar to a flying saucer. The dish is part hard shell and part inflatable bladder. Project Manager Mark Adler said that the balloon is “big enough to fill the Rose Bowl.”

Scientists have long been waiting to get the LDSD to take flight, since they also have long-term Mars plans including robot sample missions, and even crewed missions further down the line. Adler said that they have been using the same parachute design for 40 years. “The last time we did a test like this was 1972.”

The latest Mars rover, the Mars Science Laboratory, weighed around a ton. The new technology that is now being tested will allow heavier loads, twice as heavy as the Mars Science Laboratory, to land on Mars.

The LDSD will be ascending into the skies while dangling from a balloon filled with helium. It will be launched from the Navy’s Pacific Missile Range Facility, which is located in the island of Kauai in Hawaii. When the LDSD reaches 23 miles high, the balloon will break and drop to Earth. The rocket attached to the saucer will then be fired.

“We want to test them here – where it’s a lot cheaper – before we send them to Mars,” Adler said.

Image via YouTube

  • bgrnathan

    SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE CANNOT BE ETERNAL because it could not have sustained itself eternally due to the law of entropy (increasing net energy decay, even in an open system). Einstein showed that space, matter, and time all are physical and all had a beginning. Space even produces particles because it’s actually something, not nothing. Even time had a beginning! Time is not eternal.

    The law of entropy doesn’t allow the universe to be eternal. If the universe were eternal, everything, including time (which modern science has shown is as physical as mass and space), would have become totally entropied by now and the entire universe would have ended in a uniform heat death a long, long time ago. The fact that this hasn’t happened already is powerful evidence for a beginning to the universe.

    Popular atheistic scientist Stephen Hawking admits that the universe had a beginning and came from nothing but he believes that nothing became something by a natural process yet to be discovered. That’s not rational thinking at all, and it also would be making the effect greater than its cause to say that nothing created something. The beginning had to be of supernatural origin because natural laws and processes do not have the ability to bring something into existence from nothing. What about the Higgs boson (the so-called “God Particle”)? The Higgs boson does not create mass from nothing, but rather it converts energy into mass. Einstein showed that all matter is some form of energy.

    The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence and power for the origin and order of the universe. Where did God come from? Obviously, unlike the universe, God’s nature doesn’t require a beginning.

    EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn’t mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life or the universe works doesn’t mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws may explain how the order in the universe works and operates, but mere undirected natural laws cannot explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell then the genetic code and biological machinery exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how could life or the cell have naturally originated when no directing code and mechanisms existed in nature? Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.

    WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports.

    Some things don’t need experiment or scientific proof. In law there is a dictum called prima facie evidence. It means “evidence that speaks for itself.”

    An example of a true prima facie would be if you discovered an elaborate sand castle on the beach. You don’t have to experiment to know that it came by design and not by the chance forces of wind and water.

    If you discovered a romantic letter or message written in the sand, you don’t have to experiment to know that it was by design and not because a stick randomly carried by wind put it there. You naturally assume that an intelligent and rational being was responsible.

    I encourage all to read my popular Internet articles: NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION and HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

    Visit my newest Internet site: THE SCIENCE SUPPORTING CREATION

    Babu G. Ranganathan*
    (B.A. Bible/Biology)


    *I have given successful lectures (with question and answer period afterwards) defending creation before evolutionist science faculty and students at various colleges and universities. I’ve been privileged to be recognized in the 24th edition of Marquis “Who’s Who in The East” for my writings on religion and science.

    • imnalen

      thanks for sharing… the bus will be here soon to take you back to the asylum

    • SCowan3

      Did you ever think that our UNIVERSE isn’t eternal, but cyclic? Expansion, stasis then compression to BIG BANG state? Or does that offend your religious sensibilities?
      Men do not live long enough to be able to definitively prove any answer to such questions, but intelligent men can come to an agreement as to what is feasible, possible and probably according to physical laws as we discern them. No need for hocus-pocus or Eden stories.