It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mechanical object spotted on Mars Sol 790

page: 9
49
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 12:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

So you are saying the second image shows the opposing hidden view? No it doesn't, the rover didn't head straight for that and go away from it and turn around and get the exact opposing side. That's an even bigger crock of shet and you know it...
BUT: Let's say it did do that. Then if it did, we would still see some details of both ends that can be seen in the first image. But we don't. All we see is something nothing at all in common with the first. For the angle to occlude all of those things would be extremely unlikely, not probable.

< SNIP > Manners and decorum please. Go after the ball and not the player. Thank you.


edit on 3-11-2014 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/3/14 by Hefficide because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 12:39 AM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed



So you are saying the second image shows the opposing hidden view? No it doesn't, the rover didn't head straight for that and go away from it and turn around and get the exact opposing side.

No. I'm saying that you are making a number of assumptions based on a rather poor quality image taken from a single angle.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:21 AM
link   
Here is the another colour picture, taken this time by MAHLI on SOL794:

Source: mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Here it is rotated. Object/s of interest is in the foreground:



I'm edging toward saying, yeah, this does look like a rock. But on close examination it still looks suspiciously non-natural. I am undecided.

See the rotated image in full: files.abovetopsecret.com...

Navcam images from this location:

Right:-

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Left:-
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

FYI: Curiosity took this picture looking toward where it had come from and had taken several earlier pictures of the area looking toward where it (later) stopped for this view:

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Finally, here was the location of Curiosity on SOL794, including its route thus far:

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
edit on 3-11-2014 by Blister because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 04:43 AM
link   
How did 'it' get there without making a crater? even a soft a landing would show a little bit of ejecta around it, so much fine dust about on Mars.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 05:36 AM
link   
For all those who still believe this might be another artificial object after showing multiple images from different angles .As much as I would like to see that the original image that I presented as was mechanical and had hoped to point out something as extraordinary in the field of view . I had to conclude that after seeing other angled positions that is merely a ROCK! I would be very stubborn if I withhold this information to lead this thread into another pareidolian phantasy. .

I really do believe after seeing many objects from the Martian surface presented here from time to time. That Mars had a stable environment in the past with maybe great civilizations . But I have to say that as I said before this isn't it and will be for probably decades from now until we set foot on Mars to investigate that particular rock...

So come to your senses don't make a fool out of yourself and give credit to NASA that they at least investigated this rock from up close . They probably also got curious about it otherwise they would photograph it and put it online. So for them this one was save present to the public domain. And I don't believe they would photoshop this because then they wouldn't even come close to it...

I will keep searching for other mysterious objects and anomalies on Mars or elsewhere because it's fun to do but I will always accept the the truth as it may come forward by members here and there are allot of high educated people around here who know allot about geology and other sciences that can come in handy when you want to present something out of the ordinary . Not that they always right lol but I wouldn't want to discredit them in such an open discussion..

peace

edit on 0b43America/ChicagoMon, 03 Nov 2014 05:53:43 -0600vAmerica/ChicagoMon, 03 Nov 2014 05:53:43 -06001 by 0bserver1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 05:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Blister




I'm edging toward saying, yeah, this does look like a rock


After this phrase, you should have.stopped typing and say to yourself I've seen this new picture from another angel AGAIN and it's really pointing out a rock .. I'm not stubborn and acknowledge the facts ..

I'm happy because I can say yes I can change my point of view on things I'm flexible within open discussions

peace




posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 07:46 AM
link   
a reply to: pikestaff

The rock is quite small...how big do you think it is? Also, you don't know how long it has been there.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 07:55 AM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

You've already made up your mind based on your faulty assumptions, yet you're attempting to denigrate Phage because you think he isn't being open minded?

Irony wins again.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: lambros56

And on this rock they did move closer, whether internationally or not, and there are now two more pictures of it.

What has happened? Now people are saying they switched the object, or that the new pics clearly show an artificial construction completely different from the first one they saw even though the images clearly show a rock. We can find similar ones on earth.

It's a no win situation for NASA.



I saw the second picture and immediately recognized that it's
the same object, and it still looks like a mechanical device to me,
it's harder to see because its in the shadows.

Just my two cents.

Rebel5



posted on Nov, 4 2014 @ 03:24 AM
link   
After looking at the new image of the object from behind im ready to accept it to be a rock. But the important thing here is that we have had this discussion and studied every possible aspect. Furthermore for those so quickly to dismiss it you only have to look at the many images taken of it to know it struck up some interest and required more investigation just as we did.

Good job all round (even to those useless "its a rock" posts due to irritation drove people on to prove them wrong/or right :p)



posted on Nov, 4 2014 @ 08:46 AM
link   
a reply to: liteonit6969

I didn't just say "It's a rock". I actually uploaded an image that shows how it is the same type of rock as others in the image. Eventually, more images of the rock were taken, and it turned out to be what I said it was.



posted on Nov, 4 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

You must have read something i didnt write because i dint name you. Were you feeling left out that i didnt reply to you :p.
Like i said its the right thing to do to discuss things like these and without opposing sides offering some evidence (like you did) we would all just be agreeing on anything. That wouldnt get us very far.

But ultimately you were right about it being a rock


While im on could i ask you what you think of this, i was looking through the sol pictures when looking at the OP image and a strange triangle shape caught my eye on the ground. I dont want to post a thread because its probably nothing.



Any ideas? probably breaks in the surface, but strange the breaks go against the cracks around it.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: liteonit6969

Not feeling left out at all, but some people dismiss it so quickly because it does obviously jump out as a rock. It would be nice however if those people used image references to add more depth to the discussion.

Your image looks like cracked clay.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

Yeh but the question is WHO cracked the clay
:p

Agree with what you say, on to the next thread. There should be an ATS internal law of anything like this abides by "ts a rock until proven otherwise". Would take away any "its a rock" club jumping in and filling the thread with useless contributions. If anyone thinks its something otherwise than a rock provide the evidence and them discuss. No messing around and follows a set protocol.

Will see you about the threads, and dont worry if you feel left out il be about to argue with you, even if im wrong (which is most of the time)





posted on Dec, 5 2014 @ 12:23 AM
link   
So it looks like Curiosity is following the previous route around Pahrump Hills allowing for specific pre-planned science sites to be visited, and we may get a scientific analysis of the "Engine Rock" area.

Here's the route thus far, @SOL826:


Source: www.unmannedspaceflight.com...
To view in full: files.abovetopsecret.com...

Or here is a full color (very large size) image from NASA, @SOL817:


Source: mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Not sure if drilling will take place, or even close photography of our Objects of Interest, but getting excited. Hopefully some prolonged study of the area can take place. MSL Curiosity is about to traverse the Chinle-Whale Rock sector of the journey, the previous dog-leg visible in the above map effectively avoided "Engine Rock":

Source: www.americaspace.com...
To view in full: files.abovetopsecret.com...
Pics are coming through. Here is the latest reverse view @SOL827:

Source: mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
Curiosity seems to be very close to the objects...

edit on 5-12-2014 by Blister because: Add latest SOL827 picture from Whale Rock approach



posted on Dec, 7 2014 @ 11:07 PM
link   
First pics from Curiosity (on its current science circuit of the Pahrump Hills) of "Engine Rock" area - highlighted - and Whale Rock beyond have arrived. Here is the Right NavCam view:

Source: mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
And the Left Navcam view:

Source: mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

You may be able to see the wheel tracks from Curiosity's previous route, to the right of the rocks we are interested in.
Whilst I think most of us tend to accept the "rocks" explanation, as I said earlier, I would really like to study the rock closely - even if that means only photographic evidence.
edit on 7-12-2014 by Blister because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2014 @ 11:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Blister
There are an awful lot of rocks to study.



posted on Dec, 7 2014 @ 11:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Blister
There are an awful lot of rocks to study.

Yes there are. It may only take one to change a paradigm. That will be our Rosetta Stone moment. It may never happen on Mars, alas.
edit on 7-12-2014 by Blister because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2014 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Blister
It could. With boots on.
But with amateurs looking for "anomalies", probably not.




edit on 12/7/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2014 @ 11:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Blister
It could. With boots on.
But with amateurs looking for "anomalies", probably not.




Agree.

However, I would hesitate to disparage the efforts of "amateurs" as popular beliefs (such as that aliens do exist, or that life exists elsewhere in the universe) can have major impact upon political and financial issues.



new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join