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.

 

Are the Mars Rovers actually in Canada?

page: 7
78
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 01:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Neill887

Oh boy, this thread made me laugh.
Obviously, I think the theory is beyond ridiculous, but I did appreciate the effort you went to.
I gave you s&f because it made me literally 'laugh out loud', which is rare on here.
Thank you


edit on 4-12-2015 by Iamnotadoctor because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 06:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I'm confused. How is that science proving that nothing can get past the radiation belts around Earth?


You certainly seem to be, since I never said anything about radiation belts. I think you may have responded to the wrong post.


More likely YOU responded to the wrong post. The only reason I responded to your post was because I got a message in my replied to message box which linked to a post you replied to me on, but it had nothing to do with what I had said in that post. Hence my confusion.
edit on 4-12-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Neill887

originally posted by: fleabit
People that make claims such as "There is a rodent on Mars" (or even "there is a rodent on the Earth where the rover actually is located), don't bother to actually check details of photos they are making claims about. The rodent for example - the most damning (non)evidence is the fact that the "leg" and "paw" are actually solidly connected to the "body." There is no separation.. unless it's a slug-rodent of some type, it's not a rodent. There is lighter color on the underside of the rock behind and in front of your "rodent." There is an angular horizontal line along the side of the "rodent" that doesn't look at all rodent-like. It is whiskerless. Its mouth and ears are deformed. The tail if you bother to zoom in, is clearly just a bit of rock above a shadow.

Well, when you zoom in on the lemming-rock, you can't say with certainty that it's a lemming. I fully agree with you. There's not enough detail. Let's assume that it is a lemming, then you should expect not seeing certain details with the resolution we have. If you look at some low res pics of lemmings on google, you can't see the whiskers for instance. And in a low res image, certain things might appear to be off (like how the limb connects to the body) because you're not seeing enough detail.

The fur together with shadows, might cause the limb-body connection to look a bit weird. Also, lemmings have a tiny tail at the bottom of their bums. If this is a lemming in this picture, you should not be seeing any tail since the large rock is in front of it.



Out of the however many 10s of thousands of pictures.. no plant life.. no other life.. nothing.. other than a single rodent? No lichen, nada..

If this mission was a smokescreen, the pictures released to the public will be scrutinized first. But that doesn't mean they can miss things. In the larger full size picture you don't see the lemming rock at all. And when releasing landscape pictures, they would obviously keep away from areas with plant life.



If you are going to claim pictures are rodents.. do some serious study. Not a cursory glance and claim you've discovered a space gerbil or something. Even a basic zooming in on the pictures makes it clear the thing is a rock. Zoom in on the other rodent posted. It becomes even more clear it's an animal, and even when more fuzzy, claws, whispers, the eye, and so on, are easily identifiable. Zooming in on the Mars rodent has the opposite effect. Clear sign we are not looking at a space gerbil, nor looking at Canada.

You're now comparing the high resolution image to low resolution image. There's not a lot of low res image of lemmings to be found, but here is one:



If you did not know you were looking at lemmings in the picture above, could you then say with confidence you were clearly looking at a group of lemmings?


Are you kidding? I could see the lemmings instantly. And upon zooming in, I can still clearly see separation between the legs and body, etc. The Mars "lemming" looks less like one, the closer you zoom in.

In fact.. do this.. zoom in a bit, and cover the "eye" with the tip of your pinky. Close your eyes for about 10 seconds. Then look at the image again.. and tell me what you see.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 05:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: fleabit
Are you kidding? I could see the lemmings instantly.


This comes out of the original, you can't say this is clearly a lemming. Some are more recognizable than others maybe, but the resolution is too poor to say anything with certainty if you zoom in on a single lemming:





And upon zooming in, I can still clearly see separation between the legs and body, etc. The Mars "lemming" looks less like one, the closer you zoom in.




You don't see any clear separation here between the legs and the body. Better tell this lemming he's most likely not a lemming.




In fact.. do this.. zoom in a bit, and cover the "eye" with the tip of your pinky. Close your eyes for about 10 seconds. Then look at the image again.. and tell me what you see.


Yes let's do tricks to determine what we're seeing in a pixelated picture. That will give us definitive proof of whether it's a stone or a lemming.

There's not enough detail to say there's definitely no lemming. Right now we have enough detail to say it looks like a lemming and we don't have enough detail to be commenting on details like whiskers and body-leg connections.


edit on 4-12-2015 by Neill887 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 05:34 PM
link   
If the rovers are a scam, I don't think it's because they're doing something else on Mars, but rather just that there's a ton of money that would be going to other pursuits, or into people's pockets, if they had a budget to send those things to Mars and didn't. Or is that so simple it's crazy?



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I'm confused. How is that science proving that nothing can get past the radiation belts around Earth?


You certainly seem to be, since I never said anything about radiation belts. I think you may have responded to the wrong post.


More likely YOU responded to the wrong post. The only reason I responded to your post was because I got a message in my replied to message box which linked to a post you replied to me on, but it had nothing to do with what I had said in that post. Hence my confusion.


I didn't say anything about radiation belts in any of my replies. You were discussing that here:


originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: dreamfox1
You do know they are on earth right?


Nothing can get passed the radiation belts around earth without failing or plain just falling apart.


According to what science makes this statement true?
...in a response to dreamfox1

There is one post that was intended for the OP, with a picture in it, that somehow posted to you, but no radiation belts. Seems we either both posted something to the wrong person, or the thread has gremlins.
edit on 4-12-2015 by LadyGreenEyes because: quote issue



posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Very strange... I instantly thought of this guys story from the old spirit rover. astroengineer.wordpress.com...

He worked at Jpl and thought that he had discovered a faster than light data transmission going from the rover to the nsa, well before nasa would receive the data stream. His conclusion was that the gov was secretly testing ftl communication aboard the spirit rover. What if his findings were correct, but it wasn't because the nsa were testing ftl communication? What if the rover was just in their backyard of Canada, and the US gov was just faking the data stream making it look like the stream was coming from Mars?

How deep does this go? Lol



posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: theMediator




Unless this is all untrue, which I doubt, this is exactly what Deny Ignorance is all about.



No it isn't.

Just showing places on Earth that look like Mars isn't Denying Ignorance...proving for a fact we aren't using rovers on Mars would be, something this thread doesn't do.



posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Neill887




And we also have the testimony of sergeant Karl Wolfe, who claims to have seen photo's of structures on the moon:




And Donna Hare, who says she has seen evidence of Nasa photoshopping pictures before releasing them to the public:



And both of them as reliable as their buddy Steven Greer.


According to Carl Wolfe and Donna Hare, who both testified as part of Dr. Steven Greer’s Disclosure Project – a research project aimed at disclosing the facts about UFOs and extraterrestrial intelligence – NASA founded a base on the dark side of the moon, but regularly airbrush the evidence out of their images.


www.topsecretwriters.com...

Sorry but those aren't the best sources to help back a claim.



posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: SheepDipped
Very strange... I instantly thought of this guys story from the old spirit rover. astroengineer.wordpress.com...

He worked at Jpl and thought that he had discovered a faster than light data transmission going from the rover to the nsa, well before nasa would receive the data stream. His conclusion was that the gov was secretly testing ftl communication aboard the spirit rover. What if his findings were correct, but it wasn't because the nsa were testing ftl communication? What if the rover was just in their backyard of Canada, and the US gov was just faking the data stream making it look like the stream was coming from Mars?

How deep does this go? Lol


Wow, that's an interesting read. Thanks for that.

Yeah wouldn't it be funny and sad at the same time, that these guys were fooled into thinking the rovers are on Mars? All this thinking about faster than light communication and maybe the answer was staring them in the face all the time: maybe they're on Devon Island and Utah.



posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Neill887




And we also have the testimony of sergeant Karl Wolfe, who claims to have seen photo's of structures on the moon:




And Donna Hare, who says she has seen evidence of Nasa photoshopping pictures before releasing them to the public:



And both of them as reliable as their buddy Steven Greer.


According to Carl Wolfe and Donna Hare, who both testified as part of Dr. Steven Greer’s Disclosure Project – a research project aimed at disclosing the facts about UFOs and extraterrestrial intelligence – NASA founded a base on the dark side of the moon, but regularly airbrush the evidence out of their images.


www.topsecretwriters.com...

Sorry but those aren't the best sources to help back a claim.


I watched the whole 20 min video of Karl Wolfe again yesterday and I find him to be very believable. There's too many details he's mentioning to just say he's some random liar.

Obvioulsy, anecdotal evidence is not the same as definitive scientific proof. And since Wolfe is the only one telling this story, he doens't really have any corroboration from other witnesses. But it's still an interesting story.



posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 05:43 PM
link   
So the people signing up for the one-way ticket to Mars are actually going to live in Canada for the rest of their lives?
Hmmm, I could live with that.

Seriously, OP, I think they are in the Atacama desert but if that was the case, each photo brings added risk of being found out, don't you think Rover would have had a malfunction by now and NASA terminate the project?



posted on Dec, 5 2015 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I think that instead of debating about your point of view, you should post something like:
"You know my point of view."

With not even an ounce of openness, for every subject you have the same stance of disbelief no matter what. I see your picture and I just scroll down because you hardly ever bring forth anything interesting other than calming the sheep.

Nasa are shady enough to plan something like this.
edit on 5-12-2015 by theMediator because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 01:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: theMediator

Nasa are shady enough to plan something like this.


In your opinion, which is based on...?

In the absence of any actual support for that view, maybe you should just post "you know what my opinion is."



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Is this a piece of plastic found on Mars?



More info: www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

Original: mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
edit on 6-12-2015 by Neill887 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 12:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Neill887
Is this a piece of plastic found on Mars?



No. It is your over active imagination running wild again! You know very well that it is the dried up remains of a corn husk leaf. Obviously those pesky rodents up to no good again!
edit on 7/12/2015 by tommyjo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2015 @ 01:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Neill887
Is this a piece of plastic found on Mars?



More info: www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

Original: mars.jpl.nasa.gov...


If this is not a smoking gun, what the heck is?



posted on Dec, 8 2015 @ 03:57 PM
link   
After looking at pics of Devon Island I do not believe the mars rovers are there. They may be somewhere on Earth but not there. It may be that the rovers are on Mars but selected pics are from Earth. Just like the moon landings. I thought we went to the moon but some of the pics were taken from the Earth



posted on Dec, 8 2015 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: theMediator





With not even an ounce of openness, for every subject you have the same stance of disbelief no matter what. I see your picture and I just scroll down because you hardly ever bring forth anything interesting other than calming the sheep.


Of course because I don't blindly believe everything on a conspiracy theory site I have nothing of interest for you...well I am not here to keep you interested...but you were interested enough in what I said that you replied to me...imagine that.



posted on Dec, 8 2015 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: anonentity




If this is not a smoking gun, what the heck is?



Debris from the landing.

www.cnn.com...



new topics

top topics



 
78
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join