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.

 

Mars. Three objects at the same distance from each other. The forgotten smoking gun?

page: 1
65
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+31 more 
posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 06:16 AM
link   
I saw this image being discussed already on ATS and not once. Of all the images taken from Mars orbiters this is the most intriguing to myself and I have no idea how to explain the visual similarity of the objects and the strict alignment (they're 800 feet from each other). I find it hard to comprehend this is a natural phenomenon.

Let me fantasize a bit here.. To me the two on the right look like some underground tubes with open hatches (same type). I assume the third one would also be the object of the same type.
This is taken in 1999 by NASA's Mars Global Surveyor.

Zoomed in:


Negative:


They look completely out of place in a more global perspective:


Original NASA image: www.msss.com...

I could not find an image with the same coordinates taken by Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter.




posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: enjoylife

Interesting. Any chance it's a stitched image and the three objects are actually just one that occur where the image is stitched? That or a possible camera glitch?

I will keep an eye on this thread as it does look really abnormal to me. How do you know they are exactly 800 feet apart?



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 06:38 AM
link   
What's the scale?

Either way, using my ruler on my monitor I can say that they are not the same distance from each other.

No smoking gun. More like a damp flannel.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 06:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi
What's the scale?

Either way, using my ruler on my monitor I can say that they are not the same distance from each other.

No smoking gun. More like a damp flannel.


Have a look at the original image on NASA website and do the maths based on the data given below there.
Even using a simple ruler the distance is the same.
edit on 5-12-2016 by enjoylife because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 06:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: enjoylife

originally posted by: paraphi
What's the scale?

Either way, using my ruler on my monitor I can say that they are not the same distance from each other.

No smoking gun. More like a damp flannel.


Have a look at the original image on NASA website and do the maths based on the data given below there.
Even using a simple ruler the distance is the same.


However, it looks like the one to left might be on a slope and just giving the impression of being the same distance as the other 2.

I'm no expert though



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Ill trust your math on this. Even if there's a variation of 50ft, 200 ft, Regardless of the distances, the geometric liniation is good enough for me. Nature doesnt make straight lines like that.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 07:29 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 07:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Danowski

what utter bollox - you have used arbritary points - to create " identical distances "



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 07:38 AM
link   
--
edit on 5-12-2016 by Danowski because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 07:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Brian4real
Ill trust your math on this. Even if there's a variation of 50ft, 200 ft, Regardless of the distances, the geometric liniation is good enough for me. Nature doesnt make straight lines like that.

Nature can make a straight line. Here's some possible ways this straight-line effect could have happened:

For example, If these are craters, then they could have formed from three pieces of one broken-up asteroid that were floating in space at roughly the same distance from each other. Similar to Earth, Mars rotates. As each piece of the asteroid hits, Mars then rotates under the asteroids a nit before the next one hits, and the rotates a little more as the third hits.


If these are geologic in origin (maybe something like volcanoes), then another possible way a straight line of geologic features could naturally develop. Mars was once more geologically active than it is today, and it had plate tectonics -- moving plates similar to the way Earth has moving plates.

As the plates move over a geologic hot spot under the crust, the hot spot creates a feature on the moving crust above. After a while, plate tectonics results in the the feature moving past the hot spot, but then the hot spot acts up again, making another feature in the crust above.

Since the crust constantly moving in one direction, that second feature moves away from the hot spot in the same direction as the first feature. Then the hot spot acts up again, causing a third feature to appear above it. The straight line effect is because the crust above the geologic hot spot moves in a straight line.

On Earth, island archipelagos (chains of islands that are often in a straight line) are formed in this manner.


edit on 2016/12/5 by Box of Rain because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: enjoylife

I sure would like to see a nighttime version of that area. Those white areas in the original image look a lot like exhaust flames from equipment. The burning of an underground fuel, a natural gas?

For what reason? I donno, maybe terra-forming of Mars, as in Total Recall?


edit on 5-12-2016 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 08:24 AM
link   
even if you do find something completely "alien" and unnatural on mars the chances are pretty good that it`s just human made space junk from one of the many failed mars missions.
google,failed mars missions, all the debris from those failed missions is scattered around somewhere on mars.
We haven`t managed to land a human on mars yet and we have already started polluting it with our junk.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 08:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi
What's the scale?

Either way, using my ruler on my monitor I can say that they are not the same distance from each other.

No smoking gun. More like a damp flannel.


What a scientific method you have used there.. That's more like the damp flannel to me..



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Box of Rain


I understand your logical comments as to the cause of the objects, but one aspect that you overlooked. Your alternate suggestions for natural causes require an incredible amount from nature, the moving of mountains in space and a just so shifting of the Earth's crust.

On any scene we find as we look outward in the cosmos, we must these days consider the possibility of intelligent action. So, given the existence of other beings on Mars and even the possibility that we have been there ourselves for a couple of decades, then technological devices/facilities cannot be just summarily dismissed as fantasy.

Give yourself a test. Imagine the year is 1900 and your grandest, newest telescope finds some mysterious structures on the surface of the Moon. Your explanation of them be limited to that era of technological development, those things must, naturally, be causes of nature. Today, with the exact same observations you would be quick to suggest that the objects are probably old Apollo hardware rather than a curious result of natural activities.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: Box of Rain

Give yourself a test. Imagine the year is 1900 and your grandest, newest telescope finds some mysterious structures on the surface of the Moon. Your explanation of them be limited to that era of technological development, those things must, naturally, be causes of nature. Today, with the exact same observations you would be quick to suggest that the objects are probably old Apollo hardware rather than a curious result of natural activities.


I never said these CANNOT be some sort of artificial alien structure; it is within the realm of possibility that they are. I was only responding to the idea that these can't possibly be natural, as in "Nature doesn't do straight lines like that". There is no reason for us to throw "natural phenomenon" out the window.

Going back to your example above, if an astronomer who didn't have knowledge of the Apollo missions were looking at the Apollo hardware with his hypothetical mega-telescope, then you have a point. However, if that astronomer were looking at a natural rille on the Moon (a subsurface lava tube that collapsed the crust above it -- such as in the image below), then they would be looking at a natural geologic structure:




edit on 2016/12/5 by Box of Rain because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Danowski

what utter bollox - you have used arbritary points - to create " identical distances "


What is an "utter bollox"???

You dont see the objects in the image provided?

How is that "arbitrary"? The things are right there in a neat row.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 09:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tardacus
even if you do find something completely "alien" and unnatural on mars the chances are pretty good that it`s just human made space junk from one of the many failed mars missions.
google,failed mars missions, all the debris from those failed missions is scattered around somewhere on mars.
We haven`t managed to land a human on mars yet and we have already started polluting it with our junk.


So your saying "space junk" fell in a straight line equidistant like that?

How are you calculating your "probability" exactly?

Show your work.



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Urantia1111

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Danowski

what utter bollox - you have used arbritary points - to create " identical distances "


What is an "utter bollox"???

You dont see the objects in the image provided?

How is that "arbitrary"? The things are right there in a neat row.


I think he meant the image (that was since taken down by the poster) that showed measurements of the number of pixels that were exactly identical between each object.

Ignorant-ape's specific claim seemed to be that the person who measured the pixels did not measure precisely to each object, but instead picked arbitrary points that were near -- but not exactly on -- each object to artificially get his "exactly the same number of pixels" measurement.

The actual measurement of the space between the objects would show that the space on the right is smaller than the space on the left. I'm not saying the difference means that it can't be an artificial alien structure (who knows?...it could be), but all I'm saying is that the spaces in between them are NOT exact, contrary to the claims of the person who showed the pixel measurement to be exactly the same.


edit on 2016/12/5 by Box of Rain because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 09:55 AM
link   
I've always thought this was a very interesting set of features that do not look natural based on my experience with cartography, photogrammetry, terrain analysis and imagery analysis in my former career; and in particular mapping the Apollo lunar landing sites.

1) The 'holes' are not a duplicate from stitching, note the surrounding terrain features are different.

2) They are obviously made in the same method.

3) They have equal spacing.

4) Possibly a tower shadow associated with each one, they may be the same height, depending on the slope of the terrain the shadow lies on.

5) They are not craters, crates have an impact rim associated with them.

6) They do not have the appearance, or features, associated with volcanic activity.

Very interesting indeed.

a reply to: enjoylife


edit on 5-12-2016 by lunarcartographer because: add

edit on 5-12-2016 by lunarcartographer because: add

edit on 5-12-2016 by lunarcartographer because: add

edit on 5-12-2016 by lunarcartographer because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-12-2016 by lunarcartographer because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-12-2016 by lunarcartographer because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 10:07 AM
link   
S&F!!

Very interesting indeed and they appear to be spaced at same lengths.
As another poster commented I would like to see night time shots of the area.
They appear to look like exhausts like from a machine spewing something out.

Keep the hunt going!!!

Don't let those people that can only see rocks deter you.
Some people will see rocks even if it's an actual alien with a flag waving that reads
"it's us the aliens"...

Here's a link I posted with some anomalies I found and i'd like your thoughts on it.
Unfortunately the thread got seriously derailed by some jerk that wanted to stop any discussion
that may have happened.

www.abovetopsecret.com...




new topics

top topics



 
65
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join