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.

 

Life on mars new real evidence to prove or disprove structures on mars

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:40 AM
link   
ok i was doing some research and read a lot of old threads on mars i desided to start a new thread becase i wanted to talk about a new thing happening with mars we have a MRO heading towards the planet and its able to take very clear photos and send them back at 6mb per second thats almost video and it arives in march 2006 not only that i found this website hirise.lpl.arizona.edu... which sugests that we will beable to request specific pictures of specific areas i would like those with good scientific knowledge to request pictures of the areas that are claimed to contain intelegent life i.e the face the city etc etc and keep this thread updated
with details the MRO is also suppose to be able to use radar to look through rock so we will soon know if something that looks like a building is a solid object or a building type object also the resoloution is suppose to be good enough to see a table so this could get quite intresting any thoughts ?




posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:42 AM
link   
first of all, the face is a coincidence. just look at it. use your head, you can tell that is not made by intelligence. and as far as your post, i am not even sure what you are getting at...we'll see what they get from their mission eventually...



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:44 AM
link   
if you follow the link i supplyed and read it you will see that it says there that the public will beable to request photos via a website as well as nasa scientists so we can look at that face and make that judgement based on new hi-res video evidence



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 04:05 AM
link   
If you look at the original pictures of the "Face" on Mars, yes, it did kinda look like a face. But the camera used in that mission, although high technology at the time (either 60s or 70s, not sure when it was taken - have a feeling it was taken by the Viking Oribter in the late 70s?)

But since then, NASA (& ESA I believe) have taken high resolution images of the region using Mars Global Surveyor, and Mars Odyssey (ESA - Mars Express) - the newer MUCH higher resolution images have proved that the "Face" wasn't a face at all, just a natural geological formation that looked like a face when imaged at low resolution.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 04:21 AM
link   
what about the city with a mine and roads 90 degree angles etc ?



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by scatterp
... with details the MRO is also suppose to be able to use radar to look through rock so we will soon know if something that looks like a building is a solid object or a building type object also the resoloution is suppose to be good enough to see a table so this could get quite intresting any thoughts ?


I think its great, can't wait to see the pix and new data. Awesome tech.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 06:15 AM
link   
yeah well the odd thing is that the fastest home internet i can get here is 10mbit yet they can set up a 6mbit connection on mars and africa has trouble with 14kbs ? i mean the money it would cost to bring free internet to africa would have delayed the arival of this thing by what 30 minites ?
lol



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by scatterp
what about the city with a mine and roads 90 degree angles etc ?


Does it have a starbucks too?


Does anybody have any photos of this city with a mine and the roads? I know about the supposed pyramid structures below the face of mars, which are just dune hills, but I didnt know there were roads and a mine?



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 06:24 AM
link   



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by scatterp
sure www.truinsight.com...


It would've been nice if they had actually used some decent photo's to support their claims. The images are so pixelated you can see almost anything you want if you look long enough. Sorry but their self claimed absolute proof has more holes then a swiss cheese.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 06:54 AM
link   
yes but the important issue here is we will soon beable to post on this thread crystal clear images useing the MOR website this will clearly prove these claims of structures to be true or false and also we get to find out if and where theres water i think they proved there was liquid already not to sure on that



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by scatterp
yes but the important issue here is we will soon beable to post on this thread crystal clear images


I wouldn't count on it, unless you can download the images straigth to your PC they'll probably go through their hands first. The chance they'll be modified is quite big.

In the age of digital editing I wouldn't trust a company like that, but maybe I'm just paranoid.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 07:05 AM
link   
if they edit the image it wont match what we have already and also there are people here with more scientific skills than me that i would hope will make the request and well they cover up and we prove it is that not evidence/proof ?



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Well have you ever heard of Alternative 3. Look it up, apparently these russians went up there, and discovered a mole up there. I don't doubt it at all. After all, they landed on the moon before us anyways.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 07:09 AM
link   
let me see what i can dig up on that i havent heard of it but maybe we can get images on that too



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 07:14 AM
link   
www.sacred-texts.com...
heres some details on it if you could dig up info on where this all happened on mars then we could get images



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 09:17 AM
link   
The face on Mars is a 1998 old internet topic. It gave the common folks a first inklings on the underhand tactics of Nasa when faced with anamolous sightings, whom everyone trusted. Dig up on some old sites and you will get a group of diverse views covering intelligent analysis to disinformation bunking to outright fantasies.

The debunkers will never hesitate to scream hoax at every believer's attempt to make sense of the images. One thing though, espacially the debunkers, folks just dont realized that whatever comments offered were basically theories, no matter how august the source is, because - no one has landed physically on the soil of Mars to comfirm the theories!

This is true with every so called 'peer reviewed' research paper writtened by scientists - its only theories and not facts for conditions in a different environment may give different results. Therefore caution is advised. Remember the doc who wrote 'peer reviewed' articles on new genetic manipulative discoveries? He was discovered a fraud much later. So delusive folks are not confined solely to the common folks, so too is NASA.

Here is a sampling of Nasa's underhand works, whom once was believed 100% but now, an entirely different case.

1. This is the image first released by Nasa, who with that flat sandbox drawn-like pic , used it to ridicule the believers of a face on Mars. Debunkers had a field time laughing away. But believers felt something was wrong with the image.

1998 public media release


2. The believers then made a public outcry for the original viking mission overhead pic was definately not flat, and appealed to everyone who would listen, from the man in the street to elected representatives to get a better image. Finally, Nasa bowed to public pressure and with much reluctance, quietly released this pic from their website:-

Edit:- when this pic was released, Nasa covered up by giving all kinds of nonsensical public relations reasons for the previous 'flat' image's released, but by then, the disinformation and debunking work had already been done and most of the public not informed chosed to believe the 1st image.



So make up your own mind on what you are seeing. Do figure out how this mountain can occur in a totally flat area and the type of atmosphere that will 'carve' shapes on it to resemble a face and also take into consideration that erosion occurs to features over a period of time.

This was a first discovery of the way Nasa works with images, subsequently, several other images from them were found to be tampered, thus leading to many questioning what other images had they been manipulating. Nothing new nowadays, Nasa lies all the time, even with the latest Deep Impact Tempe1 headline press release - water ice found on comet.

What really was the full truth was that NASA's theory on comets were that they were 'dirty snowballs' ( more ice than dirt ). Results of the impact on the surface did show water, but 94% of it was dirt! A theory was wrong, and yet, they continued to spin and lie to a tax paying public who is believed by NASA to be ignorant fools.....

Have fun with your mental journey to Mars.



[edit on 14-2-2006 by SeekerofTruth101]



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Although the images Seeker posted do a lot for ironing out the myth of the face as purely geologic formation, it is still a bit mysterious to me. When I look at it the "face" isnt what catches my eye. It's the overall structure that buggers me. It seems to me that the structure has too much orginization to it. Too many long straight lines and a squareness that really shouldnt exist geologically.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 09:54 AM
link   
was ats offline for a while just now if so how comes ?



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 11:05 AM
link   
I believe the government controls the information we receive,
therefor we will never know for sure.
but thats just my opinion




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join