BS: Seashells found on Mars

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 12:22 AM

i

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Aug 06 - 12:22 AM

I'm right with you on that one, Don. There are plenty of trees on this property that I know darned well are going to outlive me, and it's a strange feeling sometimes to look at them and feel that. They endure quietly, while we rush around doing all the strange things humans do.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 10:29 PM

z

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 10:25 PM

There is a huge, old tree in the Hoh rain forest over on the Olympic Peninsula, just off one of the paths and not far from the parking lot. If I spend a bit of time just sitting at the base of that tree, I get a definite feeling of a Presence. Very old, very wise. To it, I'm probably as ephemeral as one of the birds that lights on one of its brances for a few moments, then flitters off.

I find that spending some time near that tree is a very calming, centering experience.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 09:41 PM

w

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 09:41 PM

You can't just talk to trees, you hafta hug 'em first.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 09:19 PM

o

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 09:18 PM

And we may be talking so fast that the tree has trouble hearing us too...so to speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 09:11 PM

Kinda like talking to a tree. Hell, it may be answering, but so slowly we can't hear it. We say "Hi" and the tree responds

"H

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 08:21 PM

Fully aware of that, Donuel.

I think that a careful reading of what I wrote above will reveal my contention that, for various reasons, we may very well not recognized extraterestrial intelligence when and if we encounter it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 06:30 PM

Interesting comments, Donuel.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Donuel
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 05:21 PM

Firth,

One need not have to have a familiar or unimaginable life form to have consciousness.

Consciousness at an extremely rapid pace may be considered to be highly intelligent to us, but intelligent consciousness can exist in space time geometry at time scales we can not fathom.

Self aware information is consciousness and should be added to our pardigm of life whether it has a perceivable form or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Donuel
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 05:14 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Donuel
Date: 18 Aug 06 - 05:12 PM

I have the JPL photos from rover that show brachnia like sea plant fossils. Also I have mars photos that show a gigantic fractal growths from central points that could possibly be something akin to a fungus/lichen forest. The largest living organism on Earth happens to reside in Michigan. It is a single fungus that has spread over 26 sq. miles.



PS
For those who expect any kind of validation here for sharing the discoveries made by their wondering minds... don't hold your breath.

There are very few fully actualized enlightened people with access to information and imagination to fully appreciate your efforts to point out the new and the obvious.

To find a few, even here, should be encouraging but not necessary for you to open doors of perception and understanding that may only be available to you at this moment in time.

Enjoy the best and bugger the rest.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 09:20 PM

" The Microbe is so very small
You cannot make him out at all,
But many sanguine people hope
To see him down a microscope.
His jointed tongue that lies beneath
A hundred curious rows of teeth;
His seven tufted tails with lots
Of lovely pink and purple spots,
On each of which a pattern stands,
Composed of forty separate bands;
His eyebrows of a tender green;
All these have never yet been seen--
But Scientists, who ought to know,
Assure us they must be so....
Oh! let us never, never doubt
What nobody is sure about!"

Neat poem from that site.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 09:17 PM

The Rule of 48
All Scientists Are Blind

... some years before [Peter Leavitt] had formulated the Rule of 48. The Rule of 48 was intended as a humorous reminder to scientists, and referred to the massive literature collected in the late 1940s and the 1950s concerning the human chromosome number.
For years it was stated that men had forty-eight chromosomes in their cells; there were pictures to prove it, and any number of careful studies. In 1953, a group of American researchers announced to the world that the human chromosome number was forty-six. Once more, there were pictures to prove it, and studies to confirm it. But these researchers also went back to reexamine the old pictures, and the old studies--and found only forty-six chromosomes not forty-eight.

That is from a neat site HERE.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 08:58 PM

I would love it if it was determined that life had (or does) exist on Mars. I would really like to know before I die, and I don't think I have all that many years left. You science guys better get on the stick here.

Of course, as LH mentioned, 'life' can and maybe does means lots of things. For all I know there are forms of life in 'dead' things--steel, salt, atoms. I really don't know how people go about defining what life is or how one can determine if something meets that definition. It was pretty cut and dried when I was in Grade 9 Biology. I think then that 'life' had to meet ten criteria. But that seems to change with time. I suppose that if we met other intelligent life one of the difficulties would be communication.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 08:36 PM

Fractal shapes. That sounds reasonable.

In fact, instead of hurling oneself at a conclusion because we would like it to be true, that's the kind of fine-tuned, reasonable speculation that is called for. It doesn't answer the question, but it opens up a possibly productive line of investigation.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 08:03 PM

I don't know about this Don, and certainly I defer to your knowledge in this area. However, I recall reading that seashells form the way they do because that's the way they have to form. (I am not making myself clear--that's my memory, not my mind.) Fractal shapes, helices that get smaller at one end (as though formed around a cone), seem to follow predictable patterns. Maybe that's why seashells would have great similarities from one world to the next. What do you think?

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 07:57 PM

I can't recall if was Nova or something on the Discovery Channel, but some months back I watched a most interesting program about the possible forms that alien physiology might take. One of the first things they zeroed in on was the depictions of aliens in science fiction movies, and particularly the stock UFO-traveling alien as depicted on the cover of Whitney Strieber's potboiler Communion some years ago and has since manifested itself all over the place, including a face on guitar picks.

Most of these depictions reveal a certain lack of imagination. They all pretty much follow a familiar pattern: two large, dark eyes more-or-less horizontally centered in the face, a nose slightly below and between the eyes, and a mouth below the nose, with ears on each side of the head. This is subject to many variations in detail, but—what gives us the idea that an intelligent (or otherwise) alien will evolve along this same pattern?

The internal organs of the dolphin are very similar to those of humans, or so I have read. The lungs are practically indistinguishable from those of human lungs, and the brain is a bit eerie: about the same size, and with the same kind of convolutions as that of a human brain. There are those who suspect that dolphins are far more intelligent than most people think, and our ideas of intelligence are prejudiced by our own predilections—and limitations. Dolphins may be highly intelligent, perhaps even more intelligent than we are (Douglas Adams had a nice riff on this in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy), but they are just not technological. They are well-suited to their environment and don't really need to be technological. They are social, and they do communicate with each other. Perhaps they are poets.

Anyway, as closely related as humans and dolphins are, and as similar as we are internally, there are many differences by which they are well-adapted for living in a marine environment. Instead of breathing through a nose as we do, they breath through a "blow-hole" at the tops of their heads. If we want to share their environment, we have to go to a sporting-goods store and buy a snorkel. They're born with one.

The octopus, to which we hardly seem related at all, has shown signs of a pretty high level of intelligence, and I know of at least one occasion where a captive octopus, kept in a tank in a laboratory for study, regularly managed to outwit his keepers, get out of his tank, and go walkabout in search of a midnight snack. The scientists first began to suspect this when they notice that the number of specimens in other tanks began to diminish. And that's not all that these bizarre creatures seem to be able to be able to surprise us with.

So if we can't seem to determine the intelligence level of many of the creatures we share a planet with, if we come face to face . . . or whatever . . . with something really alien, how are we going to know if it's intelligent or not? I doubt that it will step up, shake our hand with one of its tentacles, and say, "Hi, there! My name's Bqrftzxck, and I'm form what you folks would call Arcturus Five. What's your name?"

The physiology of any living entity is going to take a shape dictated by what is necessary to survive and thrive in the environment in which it evolved. And whether it develops intelligence or not will depend a great deal on the kinds of challenges it meets as it evolves.

Here's a thought:   in the movie "Alien" and it's sequels, the alien seems to be some sort of insect cum reptile analog. We know that the alien creatures have a reproductive biology much different from ours (more like that of asp-wasp), are endowed with a great deal of animal cunning, and are extremely dangerous. But we never learn if it's intelligent or not. Contrary to many science fictions movies, this particular alien is pretty alien, and is fairly well realized. Not just someone from central casting endowed with a lot of sponge rubber and nose-putty.

There may be life all over the Cosmos. My guess is that intelligent life may very well be out there, but it will not be all that common. For example, the shark was perfectly adapted to its environment millions of years ago. There isn't much around that could challenge it, so it didn't evolved much in all that time. It's still pretty primitive. Humanoids were weak and vulnerable compared to the other predators in their environment, so the only way they (we) managed to survive was to get smarter than those other predators, and learn to work cooperatively.   [By the way, we're still not real great at that yet.]

Can somebody give me a good reason why a Martian sea creature would evolve a shell that looks like the shell of an earth sea creature? That, just by itself, should raise questions. .

Astrobiology is absolutely fascinating.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Grab
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 05:27 PM

OK, that's fair enough, LH - none of us know categorically. Saying you don't think you have enough evidence to judge is a good statement. I guess the rest of us just differ in that whilst we know we don't know categorically that this bloke is wrong, what evidence we do have (or think we have :-) lets us make a "balance-of-probability" type judgement. We can't say it's 90% or 75% probable or anything like that, but we can say that we think it's more likely he's wrong than that he's right.

Which is a shame, in a way. Most of us would probably love it to be true - I know I would!

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 04:14 PM

that really is a scary thought!!

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 04:10 PM

Well, not quite as geeky as having William Shatner tattooed on your chest. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 04:08 PM

now that is a scary thought! Ultimate geekdom!!

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 04:08 PM

At one time, Carl Sagan referred to himself as a "xenobiologist," and commented that this was a field in which there were no subjects (so far) to study. The field has become more sophisticated since he made this remark, and has been renamed "astrobiology."

This is a pretty good article HERE.

I have a friend in the astrobiology department at the University of Washington. Good web site

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 03:57 PM

Yeah, but not as snazzy as Einstein's tattooed on one's chest . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 03:41 PM

Paige's quote looks better on a t-shirt. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 03:37 PM

The distinction between the past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.

Albert Einstein

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 03:34 PM

Don't look back, the past might be gaining on you. - Satchel Paige.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 03:12 PM

"Not everything is black and white in this world, but people need to be able to make decisions about evidence presented to them and move forward."

Or move backwards.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Stu
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 02:26 PM

Why do they have to be seashells?

This would mean that Phylum Mollusca, Class Gastropoda would have had to evolve twice on two separate planets billions of years apart (unless there were some comet-hitching super space whelks out there once).

The chances of that happening are, at best incredibly slim (but I would have to concede it could occur, however unlikely). If you apply Occam's Razor (all things being equal, the simplest answer is usually the correct one), the conclusion you would have to say is the correct one is that these objects are the product of the weathering and erosion of rocks.

This is a geology rather than a palaeontology question - and that's where I think the answer lies.

I hope they do find evidence of life on Mars or any other body in the solar system, but if they do you and it's multicellular can bet it won't look like anything on earth.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 09:54 AM

If it were really convincing that these were indeed seashells, I would expect that real scientists would have got excited by now, given all the research and excitement over possible fossil microscopic life found on Mars. So why is there only anything on paranormal websites and lay discussion sites like this? Makes me think that someone who actually knows something about the subject has seen the pics and laughed his head off because it is really obvious to someone who has real expertise in the area that these are not as they appear.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 09:48 AM

"I'm thinking there's a fairly good possibility that Mars may have had oceans at one time. If so, there's a possibility that Mars may have had marine life also. If so, there may still be some seashells...or some fossils of ancient seashells...lying about here and there on Mars."

I don't think any of us disagree with you on those points. The evidence so far has not found it, but it is a relatively big planet.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 09:45 AM

Me too. It would be wonderful.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Paul Burke
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 09:38 AM

I really hope life IS found on Mars or somewhere else... I would be even more pleased if it turned out to be based on a different chemistry, not DNA/RNA. Perhaps even with the opposite handedness.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 09:34 AM

Well, people do fall in love with their own theories, Grab, and I suspect that's what happened to the "seashell guy" in this case. People are always very enthusiastic about something that is their own idea, aren't they? ;-)

I don't know that I'm assuming seashells can appear "in isolation". No, not particularly. I'm thinking there's a fairly good possibility that Mars may have had oceans at one time. If so, there's a possibility that Mars may have had marine life also. If so, there may still be some seashells...or some fossils of ancient seashells...lying about here and there on Mars.

When I'm saying I have no final opinion on it, I am not saying it's equally probably one way or the other...I don't KNOW how probable it is one way or the other. I just don't know, period. And I doubt that anyone else on this forum does either.

I have a feeling that biological life is more widespread in the Universe than many people would think it is...but that's just a sort of personal gut feeling of mine. It's not based on any evidence, pro or con. Mars and Earth are both incredibly ancient, and what we know about them now is rather limited, specially in the case of Mars. You've got a lot of time there in which complex life may have evolved and flourished on Mars (when conditions were very different from now), but later died out. There are any number of possibilities.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Grab
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 09:24 AM

LH, since we're talking assumptions, you (and the website author) are making a bad one. The problem is that you're assuming that seashells can appear in isolation, and that just isn't logical.

OK, they could be blurry pictures of seashells. Fine - the pictures are so bad, you couldn't tell for sure.

But seashells don't come into being out of nowhere. You won't find some Martian whelk magically appearing out of nowhere. They need to evolve, which means they need an environment to evolve in. Thick exoskeletons (of whelk size) *require* a liquid environment to precipitate stuff out. A thick exoskeleton prevents you getting around fast and costs you energy, so evolution of a thick exoskeleton *requires* that there are predators which would cause other creatures to evolve thick exoskeletons (the cost of a shell is less than the cost of being something's dinner).

So saying "they might be seashells" is *exactly* the same as saying "there once was a marine ecology on Mars". The two are 100% synonymous. If there wasn't a marine ecology, then by definition they couldn't be seashells. So we have a whole new test for whether they're seashells or not - could Mars have supported oceans, and could it have done so for long enough that a marine ecology would evolve?

I guess there is another alternative though - the seashells have been collected elsewhere (possibly even from Earth) and dropped there by someone, like kids drop their shells and shiny stones after a holiday. Which postulates non-human interplanetary travel, *and* those non-humans having a reason to drop these seashells on Mars.

To say you have no opinion on it requires that you think there is a roughly equal chance of either of these being true or not being true. Well I guess it's not impossible, but regular reading of science-related media gives a reasonable kind of idea of what's currently known or hypothesised, and that gives a basis for judgement. As a sceptic, I'd have to quote the line of extraordinary claims and extraordinary evidence, and we ain't got that evidence.

That's the problem with this guy's website. If he says "this looks somewhat similar to a seashell", I'd take him seriously. If he says "this is definitely a seashell", he's talking complete crap.

If so, you can be sure the first leak will be strenuously resisted by most people. That's normal.

The first "leak" will be resisted by all rational people, saying "give us proof". Yes, that's normal - that's how we avoid getting conned by charlatans or nutjobs. But it doesn't mean this guy's right - there's a *reason* we ask for proof, and that's because the tiny number of people who make genuinely new discoveries are vastly outnumbered by the charlatans and nutjobs.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 17 Aug 06 - 09:22 AM

You make "official source" sound almost criminal. Yes, I do rely on experts who have greater knowledge of the subject for information. Yes, I do rely on my common sense to form opinions.

There are plenty of questions that cannot be answered. Scientific achievements probe for answers. Based on everything that has been discovered, those are not seashells in the pictures.

Little Hawk, I've never seen anyone flap their arms and fly. I can make an assumption that you cannot fly by doing that. Can I be certain? No. I am convinced that you cannot do it, but I cannot be certain. If you would like to prove me wrong, be my guest.

Not everything is black and white in this world, but people need to be able to make decisions about evidence presented to them and move forward.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 11:43 PM

I've never had any trouble understanding logic and common sense either, Ron. They're very easy to understand. What I find more intriguing is human nature. The average human has a whole set of assumptions that he/she takes for granted and is usually quite resistant to new information that lies outside those assumptons, unless it comes from an official source.

You say: "IF these objects could POSSIBLY be seashells, the word would have leaked."

Well, maybe it just has leaked. If so, you can be sure the first leak will be strenuously resisted by most people. That's normal.

I understand that it's your opinion those aren't seashells in the photos. Fine. It's my opinion that I don't know what they are...they do kind of look like seashells to me, but that doesn't mean they are. It means only that they might be.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 11:36 PM

Seashells are not the question. Oceans are the question.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 11:32 PM

I never, ever said that they are absolutely no seashells on Mars. It would be great to find something like that. What I said was, these pictures do not appear to be seashells, and I am certain that they are not.

First, the objects in the photos do not look like seashells, but you are right - I am not in a position to be certain based on that.

My big reasons - no one else has discussed this, and NASA has released the photos.

There have been hundreds of experts whose job it is to study these pictures that have examined them.   The evidence they are pulling from this project is not relying only on photographic evidence. IF these objects could POSSIBLY be seashells, the word would have leaked.   If they were not sure, the pictures would not have been released.   Of that, I am certain BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

You can define it as a "knee jerk reaction" if that makes you feel comfortable, but I think most people do understand logic and common sense. You are in a position to make a decision based on the evidence given to you. You don't have to, it is your perogative.   Knocking those of us who thought this through does not make you right.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 11:14 PM

Yes, Ron, I follow you. But how can you be certain, absolutely certain, that there are no seashells on Mars? And how can you be certain that the images in the picture are not, indeed, seashells (fossilized or otherwise)?

Whence cometh thy certainty on the matter? ;-) You say "common sense". I say "knee jerk assumption".

You note that I am neither assuming that they are seashells or that they are not. I don't believe I'm in a position to make such assumptions, and I don't believe you are either.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 11:12 PM

OK. Did that. NOW, how do I get my eyes uncrossed?

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: bobad
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 11:10 PM

If you look straight at the images and kinda cross your eyes until a third image comes into focus in the middle of the two, it looks like simply a play of light and shadow.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 11:09 PM

Anyway, seashells or not, I KNOW Jack Carter was there. And Dejas Thoris and the thoats. So I really don't need proof from NASA.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 11:06 PM

http://www.nationalufocenter.com/artman/uploads/32seashellsmarsrover.jpg


The thingy that is in the center seems to be a really screwed up ping pong ball.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 10:30 PM

Little Hawk - you are confusing curiosity with common sense. There should be a place for both. Please do not put words in our mouths or twist what we say.

The "curious" side of me looked at the pictures, but the "common sense" side made me realize that I was not looking at Martian sea shells.

As to why many of us can be 100% sure that we were not looking at shells, take a look again at the evidence we presented to you.

"100% sure" is a cliche, and as you very well know there is no such thing. As in the courts, there is "beyond a reasonable doubt". This is beyond a reasonable doubt.

Examining you? I don't think I would do that if you did not speak out first with your examination of us.

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 09:14 PM

I too would be delighted if signs of life were found on other planets. Regarding those pictures, I thought..."Hmmm...well, that's interesting..." and beyond that, I formed no particular opinion about it.

I just thought it was kind of interesting. I think there are many people, the majority in fact, whose standard and automatic reaction to anything unusual is to quickly debunk it, as if they knew for certain about it, which in fact they do not. They derive pleasure from debunking unusual things. I felt that some of the posters on this thread were doing that, in which case they were just indulging in an emotional habit that makes them feel smarter than "those people", whoever "those people" may be.

Looking at those images...yeah...they could be seashells...or they might be something else. But what could possibly make anyone 100% sure that they are not seashells?

I've seen fossilized seashells in rocks on this planet that are probably hundreds of thousands or millions of years old. If there were once oceans on Mars, which there may well have been, then there may well have been marine life in those oceans. If so, there would undoubtedly be fossil remains of such life.

So, it's an interesting possibility. Rather than examining me, why not examine your own tendency to deny things that don't fit your already established views?

Without curiosity, where we be? And what would we ever achieve?

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Peace
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 09:05 PM

'03-29-04 Spirals in Mars Snow Caps Unraveled (CNN News)

"Odd spiraling gorges etched deep into the polar ice caps of Mars have stumped scientists for decades. The huge arcing troughs radiate outward like arms of a pinwheel, creating an overall shape that visually and mathematically resembles hurricanes, spiral galaxies and even some seashells."'


Wonder if this is where it started?

Subject: RE: BS: Seashells found on Mars
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 16 Aug 06 - 08:57 PM

hehehe