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.

 

The Bonneville Crater

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by rwatkins

Originally posted by sensfan
What exactly other than a rock are you seeing in your latest examples? Examples of what? Rocks?


It sort of looks like a face, laying on it's side? The highlights are the eyes, and a mouth? There is no reference of size, so some of these could be only a few inches in size.

I have to agree with the others, there is not enough evidence there to claim they are ruins. But the pictures are very interesting.

Regards.


That head of statue of black color, measures 1 meter in length in its part but it releases. The previous one, the one that seems of bird, is but small, about 70 cm. The foot is the great figure but: 3'5/4 meters of length. I recommend a detailed inspection of the original panoramic image, to have a clear idea as large as the figures and of the position of around the crater, the Link to unload it is in my Web.
Greetings




posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 06:17 AM
link   
But forms of artificial appearance in the Bonneville crater:















posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 09:29 AM
link   
You keep posting pictures of rocks without any evidence to back it up other than your opinion. Do you not think that archeologists and mineralists would be in a better place to "see" artificially created objects in these pictures? Surely there are some out there that have seen these pictures, but have they come out stating that the pictures show the scientific find of the century? Nope...you know why? Cause they are just rocks. It takes a very big stretch of the imagination to think that these rocks are parts of statues and/or buildings.

Maybe you and extrasense should get together, you both seem to be seeing things that aren't there.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing you or anything, but I just think that you've got it in your head that you are seeing these things because your REALLY WANT to see these things. Everyone else that looks at it objectively doesn't see them.



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 11:09 AM
link   
I see what I expose, so that I have dedicated long time to him, and because I have studied those same figures often, with different filters from color and other adjustments. I recognize that it is not easy to realize of which I affirm, need to be used to its eyes to be able to do it, and that requires time. You will not be able to deny that any valid reasoning, part of a concise analysis of the facts, tests and indications, my study requires east treatment, like any other. Observe with attention, and not only my images, mainly the original one, that pueen to unload in this Link:

Bonneville crater

When they know that crater better, it will not be so difficult to realize correction to them of my affirmations.

Thanks for its participation



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
All of this discussion, still leads me to one point. What about the straight lines?? Not semi-straight, as in errosion, but precisely straight..I can also see just a heap of rocks as well, but those with the straight lines cut into them and intersecting, really grab my attention.

Perhaps there was life there a few million years ago. Perhaps it was blown to bits by a meteor or something. Hell, maybe we all loaded into a shuttle and landed here, like the pilgrims did in Jamestown. Who knows..But this definitly has gotten me thinkin now...



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 11:37 AM
link   
straight lines occure naturally in nature here on earth, so why not mars?

Here are some examples on earth...straigh lines all over the place.









posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 11:42 AM
link   
interesting pics. The one with the car though looks man-made. it looks to be cut into a hill.. The other ones arent really "straight". Im talking about these lines, that intersect eact other...




they actually intersect each other. I find that strange...



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 12:13 PM
link   
I don't see intersecting lines on this picture, are you refering to a previous one? And if this is a giant foot, where is the rest of the statue? It certainly would have been huge.

Straight lines do occur in nature, including geometric shapes. Here is a link to the Giant’s Causeway which have octagonal vertical shapes.

I also did a thread on the Japanese Underwater Pyramids which I believe are mostly natural horizontal and vertical formations, but show some signs of being worked on by man.

BTW, there is a thread on How to resize an image.



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by spliff4020
Perhaps there was life there a few million years ago. Perhaps it was blown to bits by a meteor or something. Hell, maybe we all loaded into a shuttle and landed here, like the pilgrims did in Jamestown. Who knows..But this definitly has gotten me thinkin now...


Indeed spliff4020, the place where are these artificial rest, is the border
of a crater of 200 meters, the Bonneville, that is located within the one
but much great Gusev. Imagine you it energy developed in that type of
meteoric impacts? The rare thing is that there is something whole...
And they consider an erosion by Martian winds, during whatever?
five thousand years, one hundred thousands? it is normal that
everything is deteriorated, do not create? See like example,
these photos that attached. They are the "bulls of Guisando",
an important sample of the Iberian sculpture in Spain.
Observe his state. They do not think that work costs to see its characteristics?
if they did not have legs, anyone would say that stones are single.







[edit on 19-3-2005 by jogava]

[edit on 19-3-2005 by jogava]



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by rwatkins
I don't see intersecting lines on this picture, are you refering to a previous one? And if this is a giant foot, where is the rest of the statue? It certainly would have been huge.

Straight lines do occur in nature, including geometric shapes. Here is a link to the Giant’s Causeway which have octagonal vertical shapes.

I also did a thread on the Japanese Underwater Pyramids which I believe are mostly natural horizontal and vertical formations, but show some signs of being worked on by man.

BTW, there is a thread on How to resize an image.



It is that there are natural forms that are resembled the artificial ones, is something that is outside all discussion. Of the same form, I reiterate, the things that seem artificial, which normally are, he is artificial, pués what you expose you are a peculiar exception that happens sometimes, and is nothing demonstrates that this happens here. Observe the "bulls of Guisando" and will include/understand.

I will consider the size of the images in the successive thing, thanks for the advice.



posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 02:09 PM
link   
these are the lines in question..





posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by spliff4020
these are the lines in question..


... and this a detail of it:




posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Different filters to perceive the indicated thing by spliff4020:






[edit on 20-3-2005 by jogava]



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 11:55 AM
link   
I WANT TO BELIEVE. I really do. I keep reading that nature does not do straight lines, but she does for small distances. You will not see a straight line hundreds of miles long, but you will see rock formations with straight sides of several meters length. Having said that, I certainly DO see broken statuary depicted in some of these pictures. You can also use a dowsing pendulum to scientifically analyze the objects in the photos.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   
I am really torn on this issue. One part of me wants to dismiss it as just "rocks" but the when I see those lines, it makes me wonder. There doesnt appear to be anything laying next to it that could have made the impression over 1000s of years, and if it was natural, what from?

Of all the pics, this one really gets to me.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by spliff4020
all could be dismissed as "rocks" yet, those stright lines really bother me. Ya just dont see straight lines in nature..


Actually, you do.

I'm not sure where you live, but do a search for geological formations in your area. We were on a trip throughout West Texas last week and I have samples of rocks (sandstones and limestones from the Boquillas formation and from various Permian formations) that are straight-edge layers that look as though they were chiseled out.

Remeber that "material which will form rock eventually" tends to settle according to gravity and without any slopes or subcrustal deformation will lay stuff down rather flat. These appear to be sandstones, and they would have been layered by the wind (making them flat.)

Mars did, in the past, have some tektonic activity and volcanic activity. If the rock layer is deformed and shattered (which happens, by the way) and then eroded by the wind (and scraped/sandblasted by sand particles driven by the wind), you get some unusual shapes.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by spliff4020
... and this a detail of it:



It's in a meteor crater, and yes, you get faults and splits in the rock like that. When a meteor slams into hard rock, it shatters the material into pieces.

Here's a similar structure here on Earth:
www.utpb.edu...

www.utpb.edu...


Now, this crater (Bonneville) is very old. So after the meteor hit, the broken stones were lying all around the crater and inside the creator. Martian sandstorms (with lots of wind and sand) blew against the rocks and ground them down.

The shapes and splits are caused from the meteor strike and are smoothed up by the wind over a million years or more.


Here are some references to craters in Spain. You can probably find papers on this in a Spanish language Google which will explain the technical things for you:
www.impact-structures.com...



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Gentlemen, are consequent, or is deduced of all the spoken one,
that the formation of artificial appearance, can or they cannot be it,
this is not the question. It is evident that tests of both realities could be
contributed, because both are logics. The question is if the figures that
I propose in my study, are it in fact. I return to advise to them the same
whatever it doubts. The solution to its doubts, is in a prisoner study by you
yourself of the crater, but it will take long time to them, I make sure it,
is much to see in, not only the figures that I have shown to them.
They do not think that it is worth the effort to verify it?

Thank you very much by its participation.

By the way Byrd, I am Spanish, and alive in Valencia (Spain).

[edit on 20-3-2005 by jogava]



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Are you trying to say that the idea that your pictures show ancient ruins and statues is as logical as them just being rocks? You've got to be kidding?

As spock would say, highly illogical.

p.s. You need a better translation program. hard to make sense of what you are stating.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by sensfan
Are you trying to say that the idea that your pictures show ancient ruins and statues is as logical as them just being rocks? You've got to be kidding?

As spock would say, highly illogical.

p.s. You need a better translation program. hard to make sense of what you are stating.


I am not joking, which attempt that understands is that the statues are destroyed and eroded, that are normal that well they are not defined, that that also happens here with real and verified archaeological rest. That is absolutely coherent, you understand you already to it?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join