Is this a huge structure on Mars?

a reply to: BestinShow

Get lost. If you had read my post, i said it would be difficult to find any 'original articles or discussions' on it. You know, the picture originates much further back than 2007, and you were hassling the OP for posting an article and claiming that it was the source of the find. Well guess what? Your link isn't the source either. I'm sure we could go further back, but as i was saying, it would be difficult to uncover the original article discussing the anomaly presented in the picture, given it is over 10 years old.

a reply to: BestinShow

Stop rewarding bad behavior...

What bad behavior? Posting without searching or pointing out that one should search before posting?

a reply to: DJW001
Thank you.

I was just about to post the same link. Your ability to hunt through that site is better than mine.

For anyone who's still uncertain, that image is definitively from Mars.
ETA: From the main data/browse page (linked by DJW, last post on p.1 here), we have the following:

Sorry Mods, this thread should be in The Gray Area, I have picked the wrong forum, I blame it on myself, and the boogie!

originally posted by: skyblueworld
a reply to: DJW001

It's in Skunkworks, I don't have to do anything that I don't have time for, cheers anyway!

It should be in The Gray Area, I have posted it in the wrong forum!

It is an awesome photo! Definitely not a natural structure. I always thought Mars got grazed by something big that knocked its water off the planet and caused that big gash on the one side of the planet. The water then rained down on Earth during the Noah's flood of 40 days and nights. Maybe God put people on different planets and this is how it went.... Well this is how my imagination works.

It is an awesome photo! Definitely not a natural structure. I always thought Mars got grazed by something big that knocked its water off the planet and caused that big gash on the one side of the planet. The water then rained down on Earth during the Noah's flood of 40 days and nights. Maybe God put people on different planets and this is how it went.... Well this is how my imagination works.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: skyblueworld

You should do a little bit of due diligence before starting a thread. You can use google image search to track down the original.

Edit to add: It's not Mars, it's Iran!

Above image) Infa red sattelite image of an ancient building structure in Iran, buried in sand.
(Enhanced version)

(Right image) 
Uninhanced version of above image.
The kind of thing to look for on Mars.
Squares & rectangles.

Scroll down!

This is why you need to do due diligence. [HOAX!]

originally posted by: BestinShow
a reply to: daaskapital

Settle down. These things have always been a huge topic in alternative circles, and it would be almost impossible to track down any original articles or discussions pertaining to the anomaly in the picture as a result.

Weak...it took me 15 seconds to find this.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Stop rewarding bad behavior...

Internos and MikeS discuss it as well. I'll have to look thru their threads.

After all that crap, you could of just posted that in your first post, without being a ****?

Thanks for the find, ATS is well know for it's search bar fails! But you're new, I'll let you off with your arrogance.

a reply to: skyblueworld

Don't worry, that's been resolved. DJW withdrew the hoax allegation in his post at the end of page one here.

ETA: Also a reply to: skyblueworld (ie, another post).
I've asked staff to discuss a possible thread move. The Gray Area, though, is for personal experiences, which this isn't. But we'll see what they decide. END ETA

Re the image: as we now know that the resolution is 6.08 metres/pixel and we know the image size is 537px × 2,017px, someone with the time and patience to do the measuring can tell us the rough size of that (apparent) rectangular shape. At a very rough guess I'd put it at around 1 km on its long axis but that's just by eye, without accurate measuring.

a reply to: skyblueworld

Size would be interesting, if you look down the frame directly beneath it at about mid frame there is a possible second buried face on mars or a very eroded structure similar in form to the face.
Personally I would say it is a good contender for a structure and has been touted as one for several years so yes in my heart think it may very well be a structure, the face in the sand is interesting too and that is why I would like to see size estimates as we know the scale of the sidonia structure so is this second face like structure of similar size.

Just an afterthought, this may be old as some say but many people have not seen it before and this is fresh thread on it, old threads are often buried and forgotten so if all interesting subjects like this one are treated so then do you not think ATS would lose a lot of clicks as people would lose interest in the site.

It would be nice if someone could do a transparency of the sidonia face and overlay the face like structure on this to show similarity's and dissimilarity by making them the same orientation and factoring in relative angles of the camera at the time of the shot, then both sites with possible ruin's may be shown to have a similar face like structure - this one badle degraded or buried though.

a reply to: JustMike

Thanks for that, i have also alerted this thread to be moved, just so people don't have to go all crazy because it's in the wrong forum

a reply to: JustMike

Quoted from Internos in the other thread:

In according to the Ancillary data for MOC narrow-angle image E10-00462,
the width of the image is 3,27 Km (= 2.031 miles)

originally posted by: longy9999
a reply to: JustMike

Quoted from Internos in the other thread:

In according to the Ancillary data for MOC narrow-angle image E10-00462,
the width of the image is 3,27 Km (= 2.031 miles)

If it is artificial, it would be a large city perched on the rim of a crater.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: longy9999
a reply to: JustMike

Quoted from Internos in the other thread:

In according to the Ancillary data for MOC narrow-angle image E10-00462,
the width of the image is 3,27 Km (= 2.031 miles)

If it is artificial, it would be a large city perched on the rim of a crater.

So, are you saying this is now not a hoax?, because your other posts don't seem to, just curious, because if it is a hoax, then the thread can be trashed.

a reply to: longy9999

Thank you that scale would certainly bring the face like structure centre of the image below the possible ruin's as near to the approximate same size as the sidonia face formation which is interesting to say the least.

It's absolutely intriguing, and I agree with the comment that says if this was found in the deserts of Iraq on Google Earth, archaeologist would deem it worthy of investigation.

Sadly, though, since it's on Mars, it's probably written off as completely natural and no further official investigation will be conducted.

originally posted by: skyblueworld

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: longy9999
a reply to: JustMike

Quoted from Internos in the other thread:

In according to the Ancillary data for MOC narrow-angle image E10-00462,
the width of the image is 3,27 Km (= 2.031 miles)

If it is artificial, it would be a large city perched on the rim of a crater.

So, are you saying this is now not a hoax?, because your other posts don't seem to, just curious, because if it is a hoax, then the thread can be trashed.

He retracted his statement in this post here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

How about we drop that as it is now Off Topic, and stick to the discussion of the image itself.

Poor ol' Op is getting a bad time, perhaps Scot Waring's treatment of the picture is mostly the blame.
He decribes the image as if it is done and dusted that it is some kind of building, and goes on to say how it's been eroded over millions of years as if.

a reply to: skyblueworld

If a move is needed then we can leave that to staff. Meanwhile we'll just stick to the subject.

What I'm think is highly speculative, but then, that's what this forum is for...

An impact crater presupposes an object hit there. That's clear. (As distinct from craters caused by eg volcanoes.) But seeing as some objects that impact can have useful properties -- like they are high in iron content or other useful materials -- then if there were any sentient beings around that could give them reasons to prefer the site over others. After all, the crater could be very old and if there were sentient beings they might have come along later.

Also, if assumptions that Mars' surface once had water on it are correct, then a crater is a great place for water to collect. This could also have advantages.

What fascinates me is that the perceived (possible) rectangular shape is not too huge to be considered as the outlines of a settlement, especially if it were a walled citadel.