Possible Ice On Mars Seen By Phoenix Lander Robotic Arm Camera

[Galahad78]

I agree with Qazbomber. It should be "This picture proves the existence of water-aliens-or-whatever in Mars" instead of "This picture proved that same fact".

 

Why? That past tense implies that the picture proved that fact...and that's it. The present simple, on the other hand, implies a continuity, that is, this picture proved that fact, and it still does, and it will still do it.

 

I do not know if I explain myself

 

So, you say: "Colon discover America", because he discovered it 500 years ago and he still is the discoverer, isn't it? <_<

 

Regards!!

 

I would say "Colon discovered America 500 years ago, and this written record from 1492 proves it". You are comparing two sentences that cannot be compared this way

 

 

Okay, let's put it this way:

 

"This picture taken by the Phoenix Lander proves that there is alien life in Mars".

 

"The Phoenix Lander proved that there is alien life in Mars".

 

I think that the meaning of both sentences is slightly different.

[amalahama]

Well, I really don't see the point. I said:

 

"At least *something* proved what the whole scientific community had already suspected"

 

In Spanish

"Al final algo ha probado lo que toda la comunidad científica ya había sospechado"

 

In Spanish, I wrote that IN PAST tense (well, really is a perfect tense, which refers past facts). I think even in Spanish, a present tense isn't all correct, because I'm talking about a past fact, and I usually DON'T USE present tense for past facts (I don't know if you do, however... )

 

So if you like use present tense, ok, use it. But don't say the past tense is incorrect to express a past fact, this has no sense <_<

 

Regards!!

[Hijo de Arroz con Pollo]

In Spanish

"Al final algo ha probado lo que toda la comunidad científica ya había sospechado"

 

In Spanish, I wrote that IN PAST tense (well, really is a perfect tense, which refers past facts). I think even in Spanish, a present tense isn't all correct, because I'm talking about a past fact, and I usually DON'T USE present tense for past facts (I don't know if you do, however... )

 

In Spanish, the present tense is correct, because you use the "Presente histórico".

[amalahama]

In Spanish, the present tense is correct, because you use the "Presente histórico".

 

Ok, but that doesn't exist in English

 

Regards!!

[Hijo de Arroz con Pollo]

Or, if you aren't talking about the past, it'll be the "Presente durativo".

 

In Spanish, the present tense is correct, because you use the "Presente histórico".

 

Ok, but that doesn't exist in English

 

Regards!!

 

 

You said that in spanish is incorrect, and it is correct. Tomorrow, I'll ask my teacher about this...

Edited June 3, 2008 by QazBomber

[Galahad78]

In Spanish, I wrote that IN PAST tense (well, really is a perfect tense, which refers past facts). I think even in Spanish, a present tense isn't all correct, because I'm talking about a past fact, and I usually DON'T USE present tense for past facts (I don't know if you do, however... )

 

Well, it's possible: "Colon descubre America en 1492" is a perfectly valid expression in Spanish

 

So if you like use present tense, ok, use it. But don't say the past tense is incorrect to express a past fact, this has no sense <_<

 

I apologize for having read the thread without paying much attention. The example you have put is, of course, totally valid. The risks of reading a forum and trying to work at the same time

[skyblue]

But I think is ice of CO2.

 

That´s what I said, it´s called "dry ice".

 

But CO2 is important forthe life? I thought that the most important thing was H2O

[Galahad78]

"English Grammar In Use" (Raymond Murphy, Cambridge University Press), in its second edition (1994), says the following about the Present Simple:

 

"We use the present simple to talk about things in general. We are not thinking only about now. We use it to say that something happens all the time or repeatedly, or that something is true in general. It is not important whether the action is happening at the time of speaking".

 

On the other hand, this link states the following about the past simple:

 

"Use the Simple Past to express the idea that an action started and finished at a specific time in the past. Sometimes, the speaker may not actually mention the specific time, but they do have one specific time in mind."

 

It also says the following:

 

"The Simple Past can also be used to describe past facts or generalizations which are no longer true. As in USE 4 above, this use of the Simple Past is quite similar to the expression "used to.""

 

That is, using the simple past in this sentence, "At least *something* proved what the whole scientific community had already suspected", we imply that that *something* really proved something, but that it no longer does it.

Edited June 4, 2008 by Galahad78

[amalahama]

That is, using the simple past in this sentence, "At least *something* proved what the whole scientific community had already suspected", we imply that that *something* really proved something, but that it no longer does it.

 

Yes, of course. The picture proved it; it was proved in the past, and proving's action finished so far. It's a punctual fact in the past.

 

Regards!!

[Galahad78]

That is, using the simple past in this sentence, "At least *something* proved what the whole scientific community had already suspected", we imply that that *something* really proved something, but that it no longer does it.

 

Yes, of course. The picture proved it; it was proved in the past, and proving's action finished so far. It's a punctual fact in the past.

 

So, do you mean that that picture doesn't prove anything now in the present?

[amalahama]

That is, using the simple past in this sentence, "At least *something* proved what the whole scientific community had already suspected", we imply that that *something* really proved something, but that it no longer does it.

 

Yes, of course. The picture proved it; it was proved in the past, and proving's action finished so far. It's a punctual fact in the past.

 

So, do you mean that that picture doesn't prove anything now in the present?

 

Sorry, AGAIN I don't see the point. So, Can't you say "Cristobal discovered Americas" because the past fact is true at present? There are several rules for past simple, and the last one isn't the correct here.

 

Regards!!

[Galahad78]

Sorry, AGAIN I don't see the point. So, Can't you say "Cristobal discovered Americas" because the past fact is true at present? There are several rules for past simple, and the last one isn't the correct here.

 

The fat female dog for you.

[Razgriz]

I don't understand this forum OhhHh! Already be which is the problem, the forum be in English.

It of the ice in mars, I read that they were in the poles. In 100 years we meet gathering the whole water of there