Talk:Ore resources on Mars

Valuable?
At least twice in the article the word valuable is used to describe Martian resources. There are probably equivalent resources here on Earth, under the ocean or deeper than we currently mine. Those are not regarded as valuable because the cost of extraction outweighs the real value of the minerals. The same or worse costs would obviously apply to ANY Martian resource. Firstly, we would have to get there, then... The word valuable is misplaced. HiLo48 (talk) 12:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Heat from impacts
"The many cracks made in and around craters seem to promote the development of natural resources, as 30% of the roughly 180 on Earth contain minerals or oil and gas. [28]"

Specifically:


 * 1) "seem to promote"
 * 2) "30% of the roughly 180 on Earth"
 * Is this in regards to a quantity of 180 martian origin meteoroids found on Earth?

I really hate this sentence, it is weasley and non-coherent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isysdamn (talk • contribs) 23:24, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Minerals maps Mars
there are Raman spectroscopies etc and Esa "Mars Mineral global" maps on Minerals.

seen K distribution. Si content. Iron distribution  Chloride concentration on mars.

https://grs.lpl.arizona.edu/resultsimages/Cl_Concentration_Map_web.jpg

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/spaceimages/details.php?id=PIA04253 https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/spaceimages/images/largesize/PIA04253_hires.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64Ka6Q-Ki1Q esa mineral atlas Mars

Can s.o. include those data ? science publication licence applies.

Wikistallion (talk) 17:24, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Duplicated scope
Do you have any idea what the "duplicates the scope of other articles" is about? If not, I suggest we remove it. I see nothing on the talk page referring to it.  Kees08  (Talk)   08:35, 14 November 2018 (UTC)  I do not understand why that was put on the article. I suggest it be deleated.Jimmarsmars (talk) 16:20, 15 November 2018 (UTC)