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.


Possible smoking gun Mars rodent picture - 2nd picture found - help needed

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 06:48 PM
Hi guys,

Richard Hall has spoken during his lectures about the analysis done on the 2nd picture of the rodent rock:

Starts at 16:23

posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 07:03 PM
This is the final analysis:

edit: If you want to view the info below and see the pictures straight away, you can also go here:

This is the comparison of the two larger panoramic pictures:

And this is the comparison of the zoomed in pictures:

The order in which I identified the stones is alphabetical.

I did some more comparisons to make sure we were looking at the right stones:

This is my conclusion and the rodent "stone" is missing in the 2nd picture:

Important to note is that it might look like there's a lot of sand against the back of stone 3, but don't forget you're looking downhill. What you're actually looking at is this:

Some more analysis:

To me it's quite clear that the sand is quite flat around the blue area and that it mainly follows the slope of the hill and that there is no indication whatsoever of a sudden rise in the slope that would indicate there is another rock there, not even with sand up against it. To me it's quite clear after looking at this zoomed in picture for a while, that the only rise in sand is up against the back of stone 3.

Also, because we know that Curiosity measures 2.7 meters in width and we can see the tyre tracks in panoroma 2, I've tried to determine the size of the rodent:

My measurements conclude that the rodent is probably around 20cm long, or at least within the range of 15 to 25 cm.

edit on 21-6-2016 by Neill887 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 4 2020 @ 11:38 AM
a reply to: DenyObfuscation

I'd say the "head" is more skull than actual flesh and tissue whole head. But either way, they're definitely in there! And what's more important is that if they're human earth-scale size, that's either a ginormous skull or a very tiny tent.

new topics
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in