It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Carved head photographed by Mars rover

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:18 PM
Hello all,

This is my first topic to post. Ive been on ATS for quite some time and as I welcome hearty discussion on topics the debate often goes sideways , off topic or just gets plain ludacris. So I have refrained from posting anything until now. I Did what I thought was a comprehensive search on ATS looking for this same photo being discussed and please forgive me if I have posted what someone else already has. I came accross the following story ( links below) and looked into the NASA image myself and I cant help but see the same face as what is being described. Now going through all the other faces and images of Mars that appear to originate from Earth I cant help but shun the fact that this may in fact be real. If a few coincidences pop up I can move this to the side and continue to read all the doom porn but there is quite a plethora of Mars Rover images coming up that include some fascinating similarities to artifacts found here on earth. Now ATS this is where I hand this over to you. how do you feel about this image? , or am I crazy and see something just because it was first shown to me and now my brain is depicting the image differently than what it is? thank you for your time. As a side note I know alot of people dont like Jim Stone but Ive been following his tirades for some time now and there is quite a bit of truth and honesty in his posts, aside from the often crazy.

Link to the page Jim Stone
2nd link to the page:

Link to NASA picture NASA

My worries in posting the stone head on Mars were centered around absolute confirmation the original image really did come from the Mars rovers.
I was not concerned with whether or not it was in the picture (it so obviously is) and instead focused on making sure I was getting a genuine image from JPL and that Nasa does not do these types of things as a joke. They do not, and the image really is from Mars.

The carved head image now circulating the web was rendered by me over several hours from the original Nasa photo using only standard filters (not edited, only rendered) and did not come from elsewhere.

I originally thought the Mars rovers were a hoax running around the desert in Arizona. This is because there were coins, bones, an obvious animal skull and other things showing up in the Mars rover photos. I thought it was all a psy op. But there are no Aztec style carved heads in North America, especially none based on faces that look like they are white, and because one was photographed by a rover I changed my mind - the rovers really are on Mars and they are driving around the surface of a recently destroyed planet that was very much like Earth not so long ago. There are coins from whatever civilization was there showing up in the rover photos, bones, animal skulls and now this carved head. No doubt about it, Mars was inhabited and the superb condition of the relics that have turned up proves Mars was destroyed only a very short time ago.

A brief statement about the Mayan/Aztec style head on Mars: If the rovers are really on Mars, then there really is an old statue (and probably thousands) of Aztec style carved heads on Mars. Period, end of discussion. The trolls will be fools once word gets out despite their efforts, the cold hard facts are simply too obvious. NASA SCREWED UP, THEY MISSED THIS AND FAILED TO CENSOR IT.

Why were the rovers sent there anyway? Certainly not to just look at the landscape! NASA - Never A Straight Answer.
I have information and opinions regarding previous civilizations I have never discussed because there was no hard proof. Now that we have it, I will begin to say a few things over the coming days.
This information and the following report will be permanently posted HERE
Not a hoax. Mars rover photographs Mayan/Aztec style head
Trolls are going to have a tough time when ANYONE can take the original image, apply standard filters (no editing, only filters) and pull the detail out and see it is real. All it takes to get the basics and confirm this really is a stone carving is levels or curves. This is going to screw the trollage.
This is a bona fide image from the Mars rover. This came straight from JPL. It proves a civilization did indeed exist on Mars, and that Mars had to have been destroyed.
I had my doubts the rovers were ever real. I thought they were really somewhere in the desert South West. But there are no Mayan heads to be found in the U.S., and I doubt NASA would try to pull a fake rover stunt elsewhere. Obviously NASA is mum on this, stupidly stating that it is a natural rock formation (don't ya know that's a plagioclase feldspar mixed with calcite, quartz and bauxite, (the miraculous combination that always spits out a carved head) so you saw nothing there . . . . . . . RIGHT.

It is easy to prove this is real. You can do it yourself. Download the original image from JPL at: and scroll to the correct rock (middle right side, as shown in the capture to the left) and do a little image processing.

This can be done as well as the image to the left with ONLY TWO STEPS. It is not as nice as the one at the top of this page that I spent hours on using Retinax, Unsharp mask, Curves, Levels, the whole 9 yards, but in only two steps you can pull this out of the murk well enough to know this is not a hoax.

Go to the image I have linked above at JPL and crop out the section I have here to the left. Blow up the area that has this Mayan head to 400 percent on your computer screen. Capture it, then drop the capture into Gimp. Then do auto white balance and pull curves to how I have it showing above. It pops out that good in only two very coarse steps. If you are super careful about how you go through the steps (and use many steps with the various filters) and play with this for hours, you will be able to render the image at the top of this page.

The image at the top of the page was rendered using only completely standard filters. This means that if the camera that shot this picture only cared about the Mayan head and put all it's processing ability on that one rock, it would have rendered it this clearly to begin with.
This next image to the left shows what becomes visible by only using sharpen on the base image from NASA. You can, even at this level with the most basic adjustment of all more clearly see the head, and that this is not any sort of hoax.
And now I would like to rant on what IS a hoax - OUR HISTORY.
We have here an obvious artifact from a lost civilization photographed by a rover that was sent there to find it, and NASA is still puffing B.S. about it. Why would they want this buried? I am sure this will stay buried, I will be labeled a kook for mentioning it, and that all the talking heads will convince the sheep IDIOTS that this rock formation is natural. But it is not, you can see this stuff down here in Mexico and it is by no means natural. When archaeologists dig up stuff like this they do not sit there and spew stupidities about erosion

edit on 6-1-2015 by Downturn because: fixed links

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:22 PM
PS, If I posted this in the wrong forum Mods you can put it where it belongs, thank you .

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:22 PM
a reply to: Downturn

DUDE! Nice Find!


posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:25 PM
a reply to: SirKonstantin

Thank you! the phot is convincing is it not? or too convincing?

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:28 PM
a reply to: Downturn

Neat pic.

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:29 PM
I looked for the "head" before reading the article to see if my eyes could pick it up. Didn't look like much of a head until seeing the processed pictured.

Damn... nice find!!

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:29 PM
I like how he turned the JPEG artifacts (see into teeth : )

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:30 PM
It even has lower teeth too.

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:32 PM

Looks carved to me...

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:34 PM
Someone will be along shortly to tell why this is not possible, and/or isn't what you, or your source, thinks it is.

I could swear this has been posted before, but I don't remember for sure. I'm sure it has been "debunked" though. Nothing like this can exist. It will rip the fabric of ATS space-time, and we'll all be lost forever.

edit on 1/6/2015 by Klassified because: edit

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:35 PM
This is one that needs another angle, we have seen many of these looks like "something" from one angle only to be a rock when seen from a different direction.

A nice catch

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:36 PM
I am seeing a rock.

But, by all means let's extrapolate.

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:36 PM
a reply to: Downturn
Great first topic OP
S&F FOR YOU! I find it hard this could be MISinterpreted as a face as its so clearly defined and (apparently) wonderfully detailed. Good find!

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:38 PM
that actually looks pretty dang amazing...if thats the real nasa pic

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:42 PM
a reply to: Klassified

Thats what I thought too but i retraced the link backwards and it is from NASA, now I await the answer as to why the link is not possible, heh.

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:45 PM
Well. If that's a carved statue of an actuall Martian, I certainly wouldn't want to meet one in a dark alley!

Nice find, gotta be one of the better ones

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:47 PM
Finally proof of alien life!

uhmmm.... maybe not

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:48 PM
Pathetically inept unqualified people creating link-bait without the technical knowledge to know what they're really seeing.

The "head" has been ridiculously modified in Photoshop (or similar) by Jim Stone.

Original unmodified picture, zoomed-in 400%; what you're seeing is primarily the result of JPEG compression artifacts.

The red lines highlight the grid of compression artifacts.

Smells like purposeful hoax to me.
edit on 6-1-2015 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:50 PM
Same old thing.

"It looks like (---------------), so that's what it must be!"

Brilliant logic.

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 01:51 PM
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Could you please elaborate further on how it is "Link-Bait" ? and how do you know?

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in