Da notare la cautela con cui viene viene descritta la fotografia
A closer look still leaves room for interpretation. The material in the holes observed with MAHLI could be pebbles that blew into pre-existing holes, but it seems unlikely that the same type of pebble would blow into every hole. They might be pebbles that were part of the rock all along, as would be expected if Point Lake is sandstone with a few coarser pebbles (and therefore supporting the sedimentary interpretation). If Point Lake is igneous, the material in the holes might be individual, larger crystals within an otherwise finer-crystalline rock. Such crystals are called phenocrysts, and indicate that they got a head start on cooling before the rest of the rock was erupted onto the surface. Finally, the material in the holes could be secondary - having been deposited at a later time in pre-existing holes of the rock from percolating fluids or gases. This last scenario could fit either the sedimentary or igneous interpretation, without favoring one over the other.
Sembrerebbe che la NASA cerchi opinioni ?