<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_05_1514241</id>
	<title>Mars Images Reveal Evidence of Ancient Lakes</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1262705940000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Matt\_dk writes <i>"Spectacular satellite images <a href="http://spacefellowship.com/news/art17601/spectacular-mars-images-reveal-evidence-of-ancient-lakes.html">suggest that Mars was warm enough to sustain lakes three billion years ago</a>, a period that was previously thought to be too cold and arid to sustain water on the surface, according to research published today in the journal Geology. Earlier research had suggested that Mars had a warm and wet early history but that between 4 billion and 3.8 billion years ago, before the Hesperian Epoch, the planet lost most of its atmosphere and became cold and dry. In the new study, the researchers analysed detailed images from NASA&rsquo;s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, which is currently circling the red planet, and concluded that there were later episodes where Mars experienced warm and wet periods."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Matt \ _dk writes " Spectacular satellite images suggest that Mars was warm enough to sustain lakes three billion years ago , a period that was previously thought to be too cold and arid to sustain water on the surface , according to research published today in the journal Geology .
Earlier research had suggested that Mars had a warm and wet early history but that between 4 billion and 3.8 billion years ago , before the Hesperian Epoch , the planet lost most of its atmosphere and became cold and dry .
In the new study , the researchers analysed detailed images from NASA    s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter , which is currently circling the red planet , and concluded that there were later episodes where Mars experienced warm and wet periods .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Matt\_dk writes "Spectacular satellite images suggest that Mars was warm enough to sustain lakes three billion years ago, a period that was previously thought to be too cold and arid to sustain water on the surface, according to research published today in the journal Geology.
Earlier research had suggested that Mars had a warm and wet early history but that between 4 billion and 3.8 billion years ago, before the Hesperian Epoch, the planet lost most of its atmosphere and became cold and dry.
In the new study, the researchers analysed detailed images from NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, which is currently circling the red planet, and concluded that there were later episodes where Mars experienced warm and wet periods.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657478</id>
	<title>Without romanticism exploration will stagnate</title>
	<author>dragmyfeet</author>
	<datestamp>1262716800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What is so special about humans manipulating measuring equipment versus robots? This notion that we must send people into space is just romantic.</p></div><p>The romanticism of the adventure is one of the strongest motivators of exploration. Take that away, and it's just work.</p><p>Besides, there are practical reasons for sending humans into space. One day, in order for the human species to survive, we will have to move off this rock and travel to other regions of our galaxy. We might as well start our baby steps now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is so special about humans manipulating measuring equipment versus robots ?
This notion that we must send people into space is just romantic.The romanticism of the adventure is one of the strongest motivators of exploration .
Take that away , and it 's just work.Besides , there are practical reasons for sending humans into space .
One day , in order for the human species to survive , we will have to move off this rock and travel to other regions of our galaxy .
We might as well start our baby steps now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is so special about humans manipulating measuring equipment versus robots?
This notion that we must send people into space is just romantic.The romanticism of the adventure is one of the strongest motivators of exploration.
Take that away, and it's just work.Besides, there are practical reasons for sending humans into space.
One day, in order for the human species to survive, we will have to move off this rock and travel to other regions of our galaxy.
We might as well start our baby steps now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656588</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>Sir\_Lewk</author>
	<datestamp>1262714040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You must be new here...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Unfortunately, not reading TFA is pretty par for the course here.  Comments like this get modded up because often the moderators haven't RTFA either.  "Playing a martyr to get easy modpoints" seems to be getting pretty popular as well. (note: I'm not accusing the GP of karma whoring... at least intentionally)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You must be new here... ; ) Unfortunately , not reading TFA is pretty par for the course here .
Comments like this get modded up because often the moderators have n't RTFA either .
" Playing a martyr to get easy modpoints " seems to be getting pretty popular as well .
( note : I 'm not accusing the GP of karma whoring... at least intentionally )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You must be new here... ;)Unfortunately, not reading TFA is pretty par for the course here.
Comments like this get modded up because often the moderators haven't RTFA either.
"Playing a martyr to get easy modpoints" seems to be getting pretty popular as well.
(note: I'm not accusing the GP of karma whoring... at least intentionally)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656148</id>
	<title>Terraforming?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262712360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So.. Mars is the best candidate for terraforming tests?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So.. Mars is the best candidate for terraforming tests ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So.. Mars is the best candidate for terraforming tests?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656292</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1262712900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Contrary to what the "internet" likes to tell you, many people question what scientists say because they want to see actual proof to support the claims rather than just additional layers of theories and educated "guesses".</i></p><p>And the people who are legitimately intellectually curious rather than simply delighting in taking jabs at the "scientific orthodoxy" don't universally phrase their questions as "Do you know what you're talking about or are you making shit up that supports your preconceived notions?"</p><p>"How do they determine those dates?" is a fine question, one I am curious about as well.  "Gee, in the scientific method <i>I'm</i> used to, you have to have a known reference.  Do they have one?  Have they been following the scientific method?" kinda makes you sound like the kind of person you are implying you aren't.  Maybe you're just being defensive, or using modding reverse-psychology.  But really, just leave that part out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Contrary to what the " internet " likes to tell you , many people question what scientists say because they want to see actual proof to support the claims rather than just additional layers of theories and educated " guesses " .And the people who are legitimately intellectually curious rather than simply delighting in taking jabs at the " scientific orthodoxy " do n't universally phrase their questions as " Do you know what you 're talking about or are you making shit up that supports your preconceived notions ?
" " How do they determine those dates ?
" is a fine question , one I am curious about as well .
" Gee , in the scientific method I 'm used to , you have to have a known reference .
Do they have one ?
Have they been following the scientific method ?
" kinda makes you sound like the kind of person you are implying you are n't .
Maybe you 're just being defensive , or using modding reverse-psychology .
But really , just leave that part out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Contrary to what the "internet" likes to tell you, many people question what scientists say because they want to see actual proof to support the claims rather than just additional layers of theories and educated "guesses".And the people who are legitimately intellectually curious rather than simply delighting in taking jabs at the "scientific orthodoxy" don't universally phrase their questions as "Do you know what you're talking about or are you making shit up that supports your preconceived notions?
""How do they determine those dates?
" is a fine question, one I am curious about as well.
"Gee, in the scientific method I'm used to, you have to have a known reference.
Do they have one?
Have they been following the scientific method?
" kinda makes you sound like the kind of person you are implying you aren't.
Maybe you're just being defensive, or using modding reverse-psychology.
But really, just leave that part out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656636</id>
	<title>Re:We'll Never Know For Sure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262714160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If u think the sun as a dimming candle, the region around mars could holding life back then, when the sun was hotter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If u think the sun as a dimming candle , the region around mars could holding life back then , when the sun was hotter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If u think the sun as a dimming candle, the region around mars could holding life back then, when the sun was hotter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30659552</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262682000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simple misunderstanding of the scientific method.  It is designed to make educated guesses and see if the data collected by a properly designed experiment bears them out.  Science then describes the relationship of the data to the educated guess (us scientists call this guess a "hypothesis", by the way) in what's called "Experimental Results" or a "Conclusion".  Proof is outside of the domain of Science.  The word "proof" should only be used in relation to mathematics or formal logic.</p><p>That having been said, I too am interested in how they determined the age of the lakes.  It sounds like they used spacial density of meteorite impacts within the bodies of the lakes, compared that to the surrounding surface, and extrapolated from there.  Not sure if that's correct, though, or the validity of the method they used.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple misunderstanding of the scientific method .
It is designed to make educated guesses and see if the data collected by a properly designed experiment bears them out .
Science then describes the relationship of the data to the educated guess ( us scientists call this guess a " hypothesis " , by the way ) in what 's called " Experimental Results " or a " Conclusion " .
Proof is outside of the domain of Science .
The word " proof " should only be used in relation to mathematics or formal logic.That having been said , I too am interested in how they determined the age of the lakes .
It sounds like they used spacial density of meteorite impacts within the bodies of the lakes , compared that to the surrounding surface , and extrapolated from there .
Not sure if that 's correct , though , or the validity of the method they used .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple misunderstanding of the scientific method.
It is designed to make educated guesses and see if the data collected by a properly designed experiment bears them out.
Science then describes the relationship of the data to the educated guess (us scientists call this guess a "hypothesis", by the way) in what's called "Experimental Results" or a "Conclusion".
Proof is outside of the domain of Science.
The word "proof" should only be used in relation to mathematics or formal logic.That having been said, I too am interested in how they determined the age of the lakes.
It sounds like they used spacial density of meteorite impacts within the bodies of the lakes, compared that to the surrounding surface, and extrapolated from there.
Not sure if that's correct, though, or the validity of the method they used.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656866</id>
	<title>Re:At the risk of being serious...</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1262714820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, we can't forget about mars, because we still have a crap-ton of stuff left to learn about it.  So much so that just about everything we do there results in us learning something new.  Hell, just a day or two ago, I learned that the Spirit rover trying to work its way free from some sand had revealed sulfate deposits.  And that was quite literally just scratching the surface.</p><p>As others have pointed out, Europa missions are in the works, but are quite a bit harder to do than Mars, especially if you think the interesting stuff lies underneath the ice.  Just think about the effort that went into the Mars rovers, then imagine working out how to design a lander that can drill through the ice, maneuver underneath it, and then somehow communicate with an orbiter through the ice.  And then once you've designed and built it, it will still take a long time to actually reach Jupiter.</p><p>In the meantime we've got the Mars Science Laboratory planned for launch in 2011, and if it's half as successful at its mission as Spirit and Opportunity were at theirs, we're going to learn a ridiculous amount about the red planet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , we ca n't forget about mars , because we still have a crap-ton of stuff left to learn about it .
So much so that just about everything we do there results in us learning something new .
Hell , just a day or two ago , I learned that the Spirit rover trying to work its way free from some sand had revealed sulfate deposits .
And that was quite literally just scratching the surface.As others have pointed out , Europa missions are in the works , but are quite a bit harder to do than Mars , especially if you think the interesting stuff lies underneath the ice .
Just think about the effort that went into the Mars rovers , then imagine working out how to design a lander that can drill through the ice , maneuver underneath it , and then somehow communicate with an orbiter through the ice .
And then once you 've designed and built it , it will still take a long time to actually reach Jupiter.In the meantime we 've got the Mars Science Laboratory planned for launch in 2011 , and if it 's half as successful at its mission as Spirit and Opportunity were at theirs , we 're going to learn a ridiculous amount about the red planet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, we can't forget about mars, because we still have a crap-ton of stuff left to learn about it.
So much so that just about everything we do there results in us learning something new.
Hell, just a day or two ago, I learned that the Spirit rover trying to work its way free from some sand had revealed sulfate deposits.
And that was quite literally just scratching the surface.As others have pointed out, Europa missions are in the works, but are quite a bit harder to do than Mars, especially if you think the interesting stuff lies underneath the ice.
Just think about the effort that went into the Mars rovers, then imagine working out how to design a lander that can drill through the ice, maneuver underneath it, and then somehow communicate with an orbiter through the ice.
And then once you've designed and built it, it will still take a long time to actually reach Jupiter.In the meantime we've got the Mars Science Laboratory planned for launch in 2011, and if it's half as successful at its mission as Spirit and Opportunity were at theirs, we're going to learn a ridiculous amount about the red planet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656660</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262714280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what is wrong with wanting to send people into space? When you take a vacation from work, why do you travel? You could stay home and look at pictures of the places that you want to see. It is human nature to want to explore and do it first hand. It is the same reason that people climb Everest, go to the north or south pole, dive deeper &amp; deeper into the oceans and travel to all the most remote locations on the earth. Yes, we could just send robotic planes &amp; subs to those locations, but then we would miss out on so much. I think that the day that the human race loses that urge to explore what is around the next corner is the day that the human race will start the decline to extinction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what is wrong with wanting to send people into space ?
When you take a vacation from work , why do you travel ?
You could stay home and look at pictures of the places that you want to see .
It is human nature to want to explore and do it first hand .
It is the same reason that people climb Everest , go to the north or south pole , dive deeper &amp; deeper into the oceans and travel to all the most remote locations on the earth .
Yes , we could just send robotic planes &amp; subs to those locations , but then we would miss out on so much .
I think that the day that the human race loses that urge to explore what is around the next corner is the day that the human race will start the decline to extinction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what is wrong with wanting to send people into space?
When you take a vacation from work, why do you travel?
You could stay home and look at pictures of the places that you want to see.
It is human nature to want to explore and do it first hand.
It is the same reason that people climb Everest, go to the north or south pole, dive deeper &amp; deeper into the oceans and travel to all the most remote locations on the earth.
Yes, we could just send robotic planes &amp; subs to those locations, but then we would miss out on so much.
I think that the day that the human race loses that urge to explore what is around the next corner is the day that the human race will start the decline to extinction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30667494</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262777760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Contrary to what the "internet" likes to tell you, many people question what scientists say because they want to see actual proof to support the claims rather than just additional layers of theories and educated "guesses".</p></div><p>If you were actually interested in those questions instead of perfecting your Giordano Bruno impersonation, you might have found the following information a single click beyond TFA:<br><i><br>For further information please contact:<br>Colin Smith<br>Press Officer<br>Imperial College London<br>Email: cd.smith@imperial.ac.uk<br></i></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Contrary to what the " internet " likes to tell you , many people question what scientists say because they want to see actual proof to support the claims rather than just additional layers of theories and educated " guesses " .If you were actually interested in those questions instead of perfecting your Giordano Bruno impersonation , you might have found the following information a single click beyond TFA : For further information please contact : Colin SmithPress OfficerImperial College LondonEmail : cd.smith @ imperial.ac.uk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Contrary to what the "internet" likes to tell you, many people question what scientists say because they want to see actual proof to support the claims rather than just additional layers of theories and educated "guesses".If you were actually interested in those questions instead of perfecting your Giordano Bruno impersonation, you might have found the following information a single click beyond TFA:For further information please contact:Colin SmithPress OfficerImperial College LondonEmail: cd.smith@imperial.ac.uk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657674</id>
	<title>liquid exchange between craters?</title>
	<author>kj\_kabaje</author>
	<datestamp>1262717460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the photo shows liquid exchange between craters.  Couldn't this be something apart from water?</htmltext>
<tokenext>the photo shows liquid exchange between craters .
Could n't this be something apart from water ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the photo shows liquid exchange between craters.
Couldn't this be something apart from water?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30661664</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1262690340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A) Most people question scientists because the conclusion from studies are different them the sacred cows.</p><p>B) Most people wouldn't understand the data</p><p>C) " based on supposition to support a hypothesis?" this seldom lasts long.</p><p>D) Your question are all good one, the type of questions a 5 year old asks. That's not an insult, 5 year olds ask the best questions.</p><p>Unlike  a 5 eyar old, you could easily get the answers to those question, so I won't hold your hand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A ) Most people question scientists because the conclusion from studies are different them the sacred cows.B ) Most people would n't understand the dataC ) " based on supposition to support a hypothesis ?
" this seldom lasts long.D ) Your question are all good one , the type of questions a 5 year old asks .
That 's not an insult , 5 year olds ask the best questions.Unlike a 5 eyar old , you could easily get the answers to those question , so I wo n't hold your hand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A) Most people question scientists because the conclusion from studies are different them the sacred cows.B) Most people wouldn't understand the dataC) " based on supposition to support a hypothesis?
" this seldom lasts long.D) Your question are all good one, the type of questions a 5 year old asks.
That's not an insult, 5 year olds ask the best questions.Unlike  a 5 eyar old, you could easily get the answers to those question, so I won't hold your hand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656308</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262713020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA:</p><p>"The researchers determined the age of the lakes by counting crater impacts, a method originally developed by NASA scientists to determine the age of geological features on the moon. More craters around a geological feature indicate that an area is older than a region with fewer meteorite impacts. In the study, the scientists counted more than 35,000 crater impacts in the region around the lakes, and determined that the lakes formed approximately three billion years ago."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : " The researchers determined the age of the lakes by counting crater impacts , a method originally developed by NASA scientists to determine the age of geological features on the moon .
More craters around a geological feature indicate that an area is older than a region with fewer meteorite impacts .
In the study , the scientists counted more than 35,000 crater impacts in the region around the lakes , and determined that the lakes formed approximately three billion years ago .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:"The researchers determined the age of the lakes by counting crater impacts, a method originally developed by NASA scientists to determine the age of geological features on the moon.
More craters around a geological feature indicate that an area is older than a region with fewer meteorite impacts.
In the study, the scientists counted more than 35,000 crater impacts in the region around the lakes, and determined that the lakes formed approximately three billion years ago.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657766</id>
	<title>This nerd's theory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262717700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Our ancestors were the original inhabitants of the Red Planet who seeded life here after determining their home world was doomed to destruction (massive asteroid impact is my guess).<br> <br>Sorry, too much Clarke and Heinlein as a kid I suppose.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our ancestors were the original inhabitants of the Red Planet who seeded life here after determining their home world was doomed to destruction ( massive asteroid impact is my guess ) .
Sorry , too much Clarke and Heinlein as a kid I suppose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our ancestors were the original inhabitants of the Red Planet who seeded life here after determining their home world was doomed to destruction (massive asteroid impact is my guess).
Sorry, too much Clarke and Heinlein as a kid I suppose.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655424</id>
	<title>Yeah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262709720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but how is dis gonna help get me my free healthcare?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but how is dis gon na help get me my free healthcare ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but how is dis gonna help get me my free healthcare?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655432</id>
	<title>We'll Never Know For Sure</title>
	<author>Dr\_Ken</author>
	<datestamp>1262709720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Until we go there and see. Interesting idea though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Until we go there and see .
Interesting idea though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until we go there and see.
Interesting idea though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30660644</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>hesaigo999ca</author>
	<datestamp>1262686140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree, it's not because you have an engineering degree that you know so much about something that you have never had contact with, as well they are using earth type examples to template off of, thinking there could never be any similar thing that would cause water like patterns in the sand, so it must be water, what about liquid gasses...they are liquid too, but not water...anyways, I lost interest in what they were doing a long time ago....when I saw some of the presumptions they made about so many space things. Try asking about dark matter!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , it 's not because you have an engineering degree that you know so much about something that you have never had contact with , as well they are using earth type examples to template off of , thinking there could never be any similar thing that would cause water like patterns in the sand , so it must be water , what about liquid gasses...they are liquid too , but not water...anyways , I lost interest in what they were doing a long time ago....when I saw some of the presumptions they made about so many space things .
Try asking about dark matter !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, it's not because you have an engineering degree that you know so much about something that you have never had contact with, as well they are using earth type examples to template off of, thinking there could never be any similar thing that would cause water like patterns in the sand, so it must be water, what about liquid gasses...they are liquid too, but not water...anyways, I lost interest in what they were doing a long time ago....when I saw some of the presumptions they made about so many space things.
Try asking about dark matter!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656930</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>Ephemeriis</author>
	<datestamp>1262715000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How are these dates determined?</p></div><p>Basically, they're counting craters.</p><p>The idea is that everything in the solar system is being steadily bombarded by random bits of debris.  More craters means that something has been exposed to the elements for a longer amount of time.</p><p>In this case...  If you have a once-lakebed that's now covered with craters, it must have been a while since there was water in it.</p><p>No, it isn't perfect.  But it isn't too horrible either.</p><p>And, of course, the numbers will be refined as more/better data and measurements become available.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How are these dates determined ? Basically , they 're counting craters.The idea is that everything in the solar system is being steadily bombarded by random bits of debris .
More craters means that something has been exposed to the elements for a longer amount of time.In this case... If you have a once-lakebed that 's now covered with craters , it must have been a while since there was water in it.No , it is n't perfect .
But it is n't too horrible either.And , of course , the numbers will be refined as more/better data and measurements become available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How are these dates determined?Basically, they're counting craters.The idea is that everything in the solar system is being steadily bombarded by random bits of debris.
More craters means that something has been exposed to the elements for a longer amount of time.In this case...  If you have a once-lakebed that's now covered with craters, it must have been a while since there was water in it.No, it isn't perfect.
But it isn't too horrible either.And, of course, the numbers will be refined as more/better data and measurements become available.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30661562</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>ITJC68</author>
	<datestamp>1262689740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That is what they are. Educated guesses. The scientist gets some information and builds a consensus on a rough time frame. They could be off by a million years but close enough when you are talking billion years. Carbon dating probably couldn't work either because of the differences in atmosphere. It would be cool to send humans to Mars to say we did it and bring back tangible proof like we did for the moon in the 60's. NASA has been wasting alot of money on the shuttle these days and needs to get the next vehicle ready now. Relying on the Russians to transit to and from the ISS is inexcusable for this country. Then on to the moon and build a station on the moon. At first unmanned but eventually setup to be manned like we currently do with the ISS. The only issues would be meteor strikes or significant failure that would prevent astronauts from escaping if there was a life threatening issue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is what they are .
Educated guesses .
The scientist gets some information and builds a consensus on a rough time frame .
They could be off by a million years but close enough when you are talking billion years .
Carbon dating probably could n't work either because of the differences in atmosphere .
It would be cool to send humans to Mars to say we did it and bring back tangible proof like we did for the moon in the 60 's .
NASA has been wasting alot of money on the shuttle these days and needs to get the next vehicle ready now .
Relying on the Russians to transit to and from the ISS is inexcusable for this country .
Then on to the moon and build a station on the moon .
At first unmanned but eventually setup to be manned like we currently do with the ISS .
The only issues would be meteor strikes or significant failure that would prevent astronauts from escaping if there was a life threatening issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is what they are.
Educated guesses.
The scientist gets some information and builds a consensus on a rough time frame.
They could be off by a million years but close enough when you are talking billion years.
Carbon dating probably couldn't work either because of the differences in atmosphere.
It would be cool to send humans to Mars to say we did it and bring back tangible proof like we did for the moon in the 60's.
NASA has been wasting alot of money on the shuttle these days and needs to get the next vehicle ready now.
Relying on the Russians to transit to and from the ISS is inexcusable for this country.
Then on to the moon and build a station on the moon.
At first unmanned but eventually setup to be manned like we currently do with the ISS.
The only issues would be meteor strikes or significant failure that would prevent astronauts from escaping if there was a life threatening issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30659700</id>
	<title>I love the way scientists talk...</title>
	<author>osu-neko</author>
	<datestamp>1262682600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Channel connecting depressions in bottom right providing clear evidence of liquid exchange between depressions."</p><p>Around here, we call that a "river"... XD  Most lakes have one or two connecting them to other bodies of water.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Channel connecting depressions in bottom right providing clear evidence of liquid exchange between depressions .
" Around here , we call that a " river " ... XD Most lakes have one or two connecting them to other bodies of water .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Channel connecting depressions in bottom right providing clear evidence of liquid exchange between depressions.
"Around here, we call that a "river"... XD  Most lakes have one or two connecting them to other bodies of water.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656056</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262712060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is so special about humans manipulating measuring equipment versus robots? This notion that we must send people into space is just romantic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is so special about humans manipulating measuring equipment versus robots ?
This notion that we must send people into space is just romantic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is so special about humans manipulating measuring equipment versus robots?
This notion that we must send people into space is just romantic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657240</id>
	<title>ama8e</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262715960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">so that you don't lost its ea8lYier</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>so that you do n't lost its ea8lYier [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so that you don't lost its ea8lYier [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656172</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>mcatrage</author>
	<datestamp>1262712420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Um questioning science honestly is something people like. Denying science or questioning science via misinformation would make you a heretic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um questioning science honestly is something people like .
Denying science or questioning science via misinformation would make you a heretic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um questioning science honestly is something people like.
Denying science or questioning science via misinformation would make you a heretic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656472</id>
	<title>Re:At the risk of being serious...</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1262713560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And we can't explore both...why exactly? (plus mission to Europa is being worked on; though it will be not an easy feat)</p><p>As a matter of fact, why do you want to limit us to Europa? Why do you dismiss Mars outright? (there are still those weird methane emissions we have to sort out; and possibility of subsurface water) Also, what makes you think Europa is more likely to harbor life than Ganymede, Callisto, high atmosphere of Venus or even Enceladus?</p><p>Mars has one big advantage of being relatively easy to get there too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And we ca n't explore both...why exactly ?
( plus mission to Europa is being worked on ; though it will be not an easy feat ) As a matter of fact , why do you want to limit us to Europa ?
Why do you dismiss Mars outright ?
( there are still those weird methane emissions we have to sort out ; and possibility of subsurface water ) Also , what makes you think Europa is more likely to harbor life than Ganymede , Callisto , high atmosphere of Venus or even Enceladus ? Mars has one big advantage of being relatively easy to get there too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And we can't explore both...why exactly?
(plus mission to Europa is being worked on; though it will be not an easy feat)As a matter of fact, why do you want to limit us to Europa?
Why do you dismiss Mars outright?
(there are still those weird methane emissions we have to sort out; and possibility of subsurface water) Also, what makes you think Europa is more likely to harbor life than Ganymede, Callisto, high atmosphere of Venus or even Enceladus?Mars has one big advantage of being relatively easy to get there too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657706</id>
	<title>Are we next</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1262717520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, the aliens have successfully stolen all of the water from Mars (as reported in thousands of lousy science fiction movies and TV dramas). Is the Earth next on their list of planets to steal the water from? I mean, it's not like you could possibly manufacture your own water by taking a couple of common elements in the universe, like hydrogen and oxygen, and combine them using a stupid trick like fire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , the aliens have successfully stolen all of the water from Mars ( as reported in thousands of lousy science fiction movies and TV dramas ) .
Is the Earth next on their list of planets to steal the water from ?
I mean , it 's not like you could possibly manufacture your own water by taking a couple of common elements in the universe , like hydrogen and oxygen , and combine them using a stupid trick like fire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, the aliens have successfully stolen all of the water from Mars (as reported in thousands of lousy science fiction movies and TV dramas).
Is the Earth next on their list of planets to steal the water from?
I mean, it's not like you could possibly manufacture your own water by taking a couple of common elements in the universe, like hydrogen and oxygen, and combine them using a stupid trick like fire.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30658082</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262718780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because people can wander around navigating the terrain a lot better and quicker. Now imagine the person is in fact a geologist. They can immediate analyze what they are seeing, move around looking for interesting things, all the time E.g. "Ooh, that's an interesting rock". WHACK. "Hmm, look at that...". Now compare that to an incredibly slow robot that has to inch around, take a picture, send data home, have it processed here, wait, wait, wait. Experts here decide to move the robot 2 feet to the left. wait wait... Robots can't jump into craters or climb hills without massive planning, analysis and Earth based simulations. That takes weeks. Geo Joe can just wander off and start his science work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because people can wander around navigating the terrain a lot better and quicker .
Now imagine the person is in fact a geologist .
They can immediate analyze what they are seeing , move around looking for interesting things , all the time E.g .
" Ooh , that 's an interesting rock " .
WHACK. " Hmm , look at that... " .
Now compare that to an incredibly slow robot that has to inch around , take a picture , send data home , have it processed here , wait , wait , wait .
Experts here decide to move the robot 2 feet to the left .
wait wait... Robots ca n't jump into craters or climb hills without massive planning , analysis and Earth based simulations .
That takes weeks .
Geo Joe can just wander off and start his science work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because people can wander around navigating the terrain a lot better and quicker.
Now imagine the person is in fact a geologist.
They can immediate analyze what they are seeing, move around looking for interesting things, all the time E.g.
"Ooh, that's an interesting rock".
WHACK. "Hmm, look at that...".
Now compare that to an incredibly slow robot that has to inch around, take a picture, send data home, have it processed here, wait, wait, wait.
Experts here decide to move the robot 2 feet to the left.
wait wait... Robots can't jump into craters or climb hills without massive planning, analysis and Earth based simulations.
That takes weeks.
Geo Joe can just wander off and start his science work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657646</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>Daniel Dvorkin</author>
	<datestamp>1262717400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I'm probably going to get modded down or flamed for being a heretic for daring to question modern scientific orthodoxy</i></p><p>Ah, the classic cry of the rebel without a clue.</p><p>Listen up, kid:  you are not an iconoclast.  You are not boldly speaking truth to power.  You are not Martin Luther nailing his theses to the cathedral door.  You are not a special snowflake.</p><p>Everyone who has ever worked in this project has thought of, and answered, every single one of your questions long ago.  And those answers are easily available with a small amount of digging, which you would do if you had any interest in the actual answers instead of just self-aggrandizing puffery.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm probably going to get modded down or flamed for being a heretic for daring to question modern scientific orthodoxyAh , the classic cry of the rebel without a clue.Listen up , kid : you are not an iconoclast .
You are not boldly speaking truth to power .
You are not Martin Luther nailing his theses to the cathedral door .
You are not a special snowflake.Everyone who has ever worked in this project has thought of , and answered , every single one of your questions long ago .
And those answers are easily available with a small amount of digging , which you would do if you had any interest in the actual answers instead of just self-aggrandizing puffery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm probably going to get modded down or flamed for being a heretic for daring to question modern scientific orthodoxyAh, the classic cry of the rebel without a clue.Listen up, kid:  you are not an iconoclast.
You are not boldly speaking truth to power.
You are not Martin Luther nailing his theses to the cathedral door.
You are not a special snowflake.Everyone who has ever worked in this project has thought of, and answered, every single one of your questions long ago.
And those answers are easily available with a small amount of digging, which you would do if you had any interest in the actual answers instead of just self-aggrandizing puffery.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655918</id>
	<title>Confusing headline</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262711640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At first I thought it was another one of those "AMAZING NEWS! MARS HAD WATER!" which I've been reading for years now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At first I thought it was another one of those " AMAZING NEWS !
MARS HAD WATER !
" which I 've been reading for years now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At first I thought it was another one of those "AMAZING NEWS!
MARS HAD WATER!
" which I've been reading for years now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656158</id>
	<title>Global Warming?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262712420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So would 'global warming' have prevented this type of disaster?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So would 'global warming ' have prevented this type of disaster ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So would 'global warming' have prevented this type of disaster?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656656</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262714220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Contrary to what the "internet" likes to tell you, many people question what scientists say..."</p><p>It's just that many people are to lazy to go look for answers to those questions, and in many cases understanding the answers requires an education in science, or at least requires a lot of time spend reading background material (meaning the answers don't fit in the forum).</p><p>Now if only many people would be so skeptical about politics as they are about science.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Contrary to what the " internet " likes to tell you , many people question what scientists say... " It 's just that many people are to lazy to go look for answers to those questions , and in many cases understanding the answers requires an education in science , or at least requires a lot of time spend reading background material ( meaning the answers do n't fit in the forum ) .Now if only many people would be so skeptical about politics as they are about science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Contrary to what the "internet" likes to tell you, many people question what scientists say..."It's just that many people are to lazy to go look for answers to those questions, and in many cases understanding the answers requires an education in science, or at least requires a lot of time spend reading background material (meaning the answers don't fit in the forum).Now if only many people would be so skeptical about politics as they are about science.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30658872</id>
	<title>Re:We'll Never Know For Sure</title>
	<author>FreeFull</author>
	<datestamp>1262722020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Sun is actually outputting more energy right now than it was back then</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Sun is actually outputting more energy right now than it was back then</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Sun is actually outputting more energy right now than it was back then</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</id>
	<title>How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>aristotle-dude</author>
	<datestamp>1262711640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm probably going to get modded down or flamed for being a heretic for daring to question modern scientific orthodoxy but here is goes. How are these dates determined? What the the reference point? In the classic scientific method, you have to have a known value as a reference or control. What is this reference or control used to calculate these date? Has this reference point/control been verified through the scientific method or is it based on supposition to support a hypothesis?
<p>
Contrary to what the "internet" likes to tell you, many people question what scientists say because they want to see actual proof to support the claims rather than just additional layers of theories and educated "guesses".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm probably going to get modded down or flamed for being a heretic for daring to question modern scientific orthodoxy but here is goes .
How are these dates determined ?
What the the reference point ?
In the classic scientific method , you have to have a known value as a reference or control .
What is this reference or control used to calculate these date ?
Has this reference point/control been verified through the scientific method or is it based on supposition to support a hypothesis ?
Contrary to what the " internet " likes to tell you , many people question what scientists say because they want to see actual proof to support the claims rather than just additional layers of theories and educated " guesses " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm probably going to get modded down or flamed for being a heretic for daring to question modern scientific orthodoxy but here is goes.
How are these dates determined?
What the the reference point?
In the classic scientific method, you have to have a known value as a reference or control.
What is this reference or control used to calculate these date?
Has this reference point/control been verified through the scientific method or is it based on supposition to support a hypothesis?
Contrary to what the "internet" likes to tell you, many people question what scientists say because they want to see actual proof to support the claims rather than just additional layers of theories and educated "guesses".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656250</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>locallyunscene</author>
	<datestamp>1262712780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>FTFA:<p><div class="quote"><p>The researchers determined the age of the lakes by counting crater impacts, a method originally developed by NASA scientists to determine the age of geological features on the moon. More craters around a geological feature indicate that an area is older than a region with fewer meteorite impacts. In the study, the scientists counted more than 35,000 crater impacts in the region around the lakes, and determined that the lakes formed approximately three billion years ago. The scientists are unsure how long the warm and wet periods lasted during the Hesperian epoch or how long the lakes sustained liquid water in them.</p></div><p>So to answer your question the moon is the reference point.
<br> <br>
It has large error bars, but it's the best we have until we can send radiometric dating to these areas. [<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crater\_counting" title="wikipedia.org">Crater Counting</a> [wikipedia.org]]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA : The researchers determined the age of the lakes by counting crater impacts , a method originally developed by NASA scientists to determine the age of geological features on the moon .
More craters around a geological feature indicate that an area is older than a region with fewer meteorite impacts .
In the study , the scientists counted more than 35,000 crater impacts in the region around the lakes , and determined that the lakes formed approximately three billion years ago .
The scientists are unsure how long the warm and wet periods lasted during the Hesperian epoch or how long the lakes sustained liquid water in them.So to answer your question the moon is the reference point .
It has large error bars , but it 's the best we have until we can send radiometric dating to these areas .
[ Crater Counting [ wikipedia.org ] ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA:The researchers determined the age of the lakes by counting crater impacts, a method originally developed by NASA scientists to determine the age of geological features on the moon.
More craters around a geological feature indicate that an area is older than a region with fewer meteorite impacts.
In the study, the scientists counted more than 35,000 crater impacts in the region around the lakes, and determined that the lakes formed approximately three billion years ago.
The scientists are unsure how long the warm and wet periods lasted during the Hesperian epoch or how long the lakes sustained liquid water in them.So to answer your question the moon is the reference point.
It has large error bars, but it's the best we have until we can send radiometric dating to these areas.
[Crater Counting [wikipedia.org]]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657480</id>
	<title>Re:Global Warming?</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1262716800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>So would 'global warming' have prevented this type of disaster?</i></p><p>Uh, no.  Or do you really believe global warming would've magically allowed Mars to hold on to its atmosphere?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So would 'global warming ' have prevented this type of disaster ? Uh , no .
Or do you really believe global warming would 've magically allowed Mars to hold on to its atmosphere ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So would 'global warming' have prevented this type of disaster?Uh, no.
Or do you really believe global warming would've magically allowed Mars to hold on to its atmosphere?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656158</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30660880</id>
	<title>I can see your boobs...</title>
	<author>prometx42</author>
	<datestamp>1262686920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...aaaaaaand...now we're safe from terror...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...aaaaaaand...now we 're safe from terror.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...aaaaaaand...now we're safe from terror...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657620</id>
	<title>Re:Global Warming?</title>
	<author>frith01</author>
	<datestamp>1262717280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.  The problem with mars is that it lacks the gravity to keep gaseous particles bound to it's atmosphere, such that the solar wind removes a really small \% of it's atmosphere annually.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
The problem with mars is that it lacks the gravity to keep gaseous particles bound to it 's atmosphere , such that the solar wind removes a really small \ % of it 's atmosphere annually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
The problem with mars is that it lacks the gravity to keep gaseous particles bound to it's atmosphere, such that the solar wind removes a really small \% of it's atmosphere annually.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656158</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656110</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262712300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, you seem terribly defensive over what is a pretty reasonable question.  This is slashdot, you are allowed to ask things here...</p><p>Anyways, from what I understand (and this is in no way my field), they usually date these sorts of things by observing what kind of geological features are on top.  If a crater has numerous smaller craters in it, then you know the larger crater is older.  With the crater distribution they can make pretty reasonable estimates about the age of something.  Similar methods techniques could use other forms of erosion.</p><p>Dating like this obviously isn't <i>exact</i>, and you'd have to ask a geologist for more details on the accuracy and techniques.  For that matter, I haven't read TFA so I don't know that this is exactly how it was done.  If you are really curious, I suggest you RTFA, and read any papers these scientists have/will release on their findings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , you seem terribly defensive over what is a pretty reasonable question .
This is slashdot , you are allowed to ask things here...Anyways , from what I understand ( and this is in no way my field ) , they usually date these sorts of things by observing what kind of geological features are on top .
If a crater has numerous smaller craters in it , then you know the larger crater is older .
With the crater distribution they can make pretty reasonable estimates about the age of something .
Similar methods techniques could use other forms of erosion.Dating like this obviously is n't exact , and you 'd have to ask a geologist for more details on the accuracy and techniques .
For that matter , I have n't read TFA so I do n't know that this is exactly how it was done .
If you are really curious , I suggest you RTFA , and read any papers these scientists have/will release on their findings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, you seem terribly defensive over what is a pretty reasonable question.
This is slashdot, you are allowed to ask things here...Anyways, from what I understand (and this is in no way my field), they usually date these sorts of things by observing what kind of geological features are on top.
If a crater has numerous smaller craters in it, then you know the larger crater is older.
With the crater distribution they can make pretty reasonable estimates about the age of something.
Similar methods techniques could use other forms of erosion.Dating like this obviously isn't exact, and you'd have to ask a geologist for more details on the accuracy and techniques.
For that matter, I haven't read TFA so I don't know that this is exactly how it was done.
If you are really curious, I suggest you RTFA, and read any papers these scientists have/will release on their findings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30662072</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>dscaife</author>
	<datestamp>1262692200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is slashdot, you are allowed to ask things here...</p></div></blockquote><p>

Aha! No, you want room 12A, next door.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is slashdot , you are allowed to ask things here.. . Aha ! No , you want room 12A , next door .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is slashdot, you are allowed to ask things here...

Aha! No, you want room 12A, next door.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30658842</id>
	<title>Noah says...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262721840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everyone knows that all the water came from Mars to Earth - that's why it rained for 40 days and 40 nights.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone knows that all the water came from Mars to Earth - that 's why it rained for 40 days and 40 nights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone knows that all the water came from Mars to Earth - that's why it rained for 40 days and 40 nights.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30658020</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1262718540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What is so special about humans manipulating measuring equipment versus robots?</p></div><p>We do it better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is so special about humans manipulating measuring equipment versus robots ? We do it better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is so special about humans manipulating measuring equipment versus robots?We do it better.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655426</id>
	<title>Ohh so</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262709720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mars is just like my ex?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mars is just like my ex ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mars is just like my ex?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656770</id>
	<title>Re:Ohh so</title>
	<author>BESTouff</author>
	<datestamp>1262714580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't think so. But maybe the Earth will be like Mars once we have completed our "pollute-everything-you-can" task.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't think so .
But maybe the Earth will be like Mars once we have completed our " pollute-everything-you-can " task .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't think so.
But maybe the Earth will be like Mars once we have completed our "pollute-everything-you-can" task.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655934</id>
	<title>At the risk of being serious...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262711640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Europa may well be warm and wet under the layer of ice. In fact Europa probably is, and might in fact harbor life. Can we please forget about Mars? Mars sucks because we keep going there and not really finding anything of importance. I am tired of Mars, there are other, more interesting places to explore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Europa may well be warm and wet under the layer of ice .
In fact Europa probably is , and might in fact harbor life .
Can we please forget about Mars ?
Mars sucks because we keep going there and not really finding anything of importance .
I am tired of Mars , there are other , more interesting places to explore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Europa may well be warm and wet under the layer of ice.
In fact Europa probably is, and might in fact harbor life.
Can we please forget about Mars?
Mars sucks because we keep going there and not really finding anything of importance.
I am tired of Mars, there are other, more interesting places to explore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656434</id>
	<title>Re:At the risk of being serious...</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1262713380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even if Europa does contain such life (and that is still a VERY big "if"), the effort to pinpoint it and drill down to it would be a helluva lot more trouble than sending any little probe to Mars. That's *way* beyond NASA's budget or ambitions. Admittedly, it would be no more or less pointless than any of their other money-sinks, but don't hold your breath.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if Europa does contain such life ( and that is still a VERY big " if " ) , the effort to pinpoint it and drill down to it would be a helluva lot more trouble than sending any little probe to Mars .
That 's * way * beyond NASA 's budget or ambitions .
Admittedly , it would be no more or less pointless than any of their other money-sinks , but do n't hold your breath .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if Europa does contain such life (and that is still a VERY big "if"), the effort to pinpoint it and drill down to it would be a helluva lot more trouble than sending any little probe to Mars.
That's *way* beyond NASA's budget or ambitions.
Admittedly, it would be no more or less pointless than any of their other money-sinks, but don't hold your breath.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656904</id>
	<title>Re:Ohh so</title>
	<author>CRCulver</author>
	<datestamp>1262714940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Don't think so. But maybe the Earth will be like Mars once we have completed our "pollute-everything-you-can" task.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Or Mars will become more like the Earth once terraforming is initiated, even if it's just local changes under domes instead of the complete transformation of the planet portrayed in science-fiction like Kim Stanley Robinson's <i> <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0553560735?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=3636363-20&amp;linkCode=xm2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creativeASIN=0553560735" title="amazon.com">Red Mars</a> [amazon.com] </i>. Now we can present to environmentalist-minding people a conundrum: what's better, an arid lifeless planet, or a planet that's polluted but life-sustaining?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't think so .
But maybe the Earth will be like Mars once we have completed our " pollute-everything-you-can " task .
Or Mars will become more like the Earth once terraforming is initiated , even if it 's just local changes under domes instead of the complete transformation of the planet portrayed in science-fiction like Kim Stanley Robinson 's Red Mars [ amazon.com ] .
Now we can present to environmentalist-minding people a conundrum : what 's better , an arid lifeless planet , or a planet that 's polluted but life-sustaining ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't think so.
But maybe the Earth will be like Mars once we have completed our "pollute-everything-you-can" task.
Or Mars will become more like the Earth once terraforming is initiated, even if it's just local changes under domes instead of the complete transformation of the planet portrayed in science-fiction like Kim Stanley Robinson's  Red Mars [amazon.com] .
Now we can present to environmentalist-minding people a conundrum: what's better, an arid lifeless planet, or a planet that's polluted but life-sustaining?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655514</id>
	<title>Images of mars</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262710080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Taking images of Mars is fine, but if they start taking pictures of Uranus you should call the police.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Taking images of Mars is fine , but if they start taking pictures of Uranus you should call the police .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Taking images of Mars is fine, but if they start taking pictures of Uranus you should call the police.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657212</id>
	<title>the planet lost most of its atmosphere ...</title>
	<author>oldwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1262715900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>KHAN!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>KHAN !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>KHAN!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656468</id>
	<title>Yeah, that's great Mars</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1262713560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But what have you done for us LATELY?</htmltext>
<tokenext>But what have you done for us LATELY ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But what have you done for us LATELY?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30661148</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Fluffeh</author>
	<datestamp>1262688240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now compare that to an incredibly slow robot that has to inch around, take a picture, send data home, have it processed here, wait, wait, wait.</p></div><p>Yeah, but if you sent a human with enough food and resources for a 3 month mission, what do you reckon the chances are that they will still be around doing the same thing six years later?<br> <br>

Robots might indeed be slower, but on a cost and support basis, they utterly hands down smash any human in a support scenario. Also, the rovers touched down in a module around the size of a small car from memory. Also the support habitat didn't need to move with the robot.<br> <br>

Lastly, why do you think really makes something better just because it's faster? A lot of things take many sets of eyes to notice. The slow "move left, move left" scenario you mentioned allows a multitude of people to look at data while it's moving left. That gives a lot of time for a lot of people to say "No, wait, what's that?". With one person rushing around like a crazed excited scientist, just how much of that do you think will be missed?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now compare that to an incredibly slow robot that has to inch around , take a picture , send data home , have it processed here , wait , wait , wait.Yeah , but if you sent a human with enough food and resources for a 3 month mission , what do you reckon the chances are that they will still be around doing the same thing six years later ?
Robots might indeed be slower , but on a cost and support basis , they utterly hands down smash any human in a support scenario .
Also , the rovers touched down in a module around the size of a small car from memory .
Also the support habitat did n't need to move with the robot .
Lastly , why do you think really makes something better just because it 's faster ?
A lot of things take many sets of eyes to notice .
The slow " move left , move left " scenario you mentioned allows a multitude of people to look at data while it 's moving left .
That gives a lot of time for a lot of people to say " No , wait , what 's that ? " .
With one person rushing around like a crazed excited scientist , just how much of that do you think will be missed ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now compare that to an incredibly slow robot that has to inch around, take a picture, send data home, have it processed here, wait, wait, wait.Yeah, but if you sent a human with enough food and resources for a 3 month mission, what do you reckon the chances are that they will still be around doing the same thing six years later?
Robots might indeed be slower, but on a cost and support basis, they utterly hands down smash any human in a support scenario.
Also, the rovers touched down in a module around the size of a small car from memory.
Also the support habitat didn't need to move with the robot.
Lastly, why do you think really makes something better just because it's faster?
A lot of things take many sets of eyes to notice.
The slow "move left, move left" scenario you mentioned allows a multitude of people to look at data while it's moving left.
That gives a lot of time for a lot of people to say "No, wait, what's that?".
With one person rushing around like a crazed excited scientist, just how much of that do you think will be missed?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30658082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656346</id>
	<title>Re:We'll Never Know For Sure</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1262713080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>3.8 billion years is a long ways for humans to time travel and see.  guess we'll just have to continue to make educated guesses off the data provided by the rovers and current orbital observers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>3.8 billion years is a long ways for humans to time travel and see .
guess we 'll just have to continue to make educated guesses off the data provided by the rovers and current orbital observers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3.8 billion years is a long ways for humans to time travel and see.
guess we'll just have to continue to make educated guesses off the data provided by the rovers and current orbital observers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656418</id>
	<title>Re:How do they determine those dates?</title>
	<author>Bruce Dawson</author>
	<datestamp>1262713320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This question got modded as insightful? I think the poster should have to read the article before having comments modded as insightful. From the article:

&gt; The researchers determined the age of the lakes by counting crater impacts

They don't go into a lot more detail than that -- it's not a scientific paper -- but that at least answers your first question. Asking for more details is reasonable but asking those questions actually requires some effort. Questioning scientists intelligently is more than just speculating about their possible failures without reading what they've said.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This question got modded as insightful ?
I think the poster should have to read the article before having comments modded as insightful .
From the article : &gt; The researchers determined the age of the lakes by counting crater impacts They do n't go into a lot more detail than that -- it 's not a scientific paper -- but that at least answers your first question .
Asking for more details is reasonable but asking those questions actually requires some effort .
Questioning scientists intelligently is more than just speculating about their possible failures without reading what they 've said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This question got modded as insightful?
I think the poster should have to read the article before having comments modded as insightful.
From the article:

&gt; The researchers determined the age of the lakes by counting crater impacts

They don't go into a lot more detail than that -- it's not a scientific paper -- but that at least answers your first question.
Asking for more details is reasonable but asking those questions actually requires some effort.
Questioning scientists intelligently is more than just speculating about their possible failures without reading what they've said.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30661562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30658872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30659552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30662072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30658020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30661664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30661148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30658082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30660644
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_05_1514241_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30667494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_1514241.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657620
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_1514241.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30661562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30661664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656418
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656588
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30659552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30667494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30662072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30660644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656250
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_1514241.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656056
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656660
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30658082
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30661148
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30658020
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656636
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30658872
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_1514241.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656770
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656904
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_1514241.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657212
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_1514241.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_1514241.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30656148
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_1514241.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_1514241.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30657766
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_05_1514241.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_05_1514241.30655514
</commentlist>
</conversation>
