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.

 

New Amazing Structures On Mars!! Evidence Of Advanced Alien Life??

page: 6
20
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by razor1000
nice pics i agree with what most people have said thus far in that if it was earth they wouldnt think twice before saying it was ancient ruins, the problem is that scientists dont wana get burned for stating that there was life in mars and then it turns out not to be so like the old water channels thing

If it was on Earth I would say the same things that I say when I see that kind of thing on Mars' photos, they look either like natural formations, like those "glass tubes", or they look like a Photoshop job, like in the case of the photo that started this thread.




posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 06:31 PM
link   
you know after looking at it again and because of some of the other posts i'd have to say it may be a water mark???



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Hey nice catch black sheep, I wouldve never thought of that.. I am an Aquarius and have no clue what my astrological symbol is.


Originally posted by Black_Sheep_Squadron
Has to be fake cause i cant see any signs on th original scan, (awesome photo by the way) i can confirm this symbol is the symbol for leo, which i noticed straight away because im a leo... duno about the 1 next to it... anyway its fake.










[edit on 19-2-2007 by Black_Sheep_Squadron]



posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Oh this is just kind of for fun but has anyone else ever noticed this and if so mentioned it on here. Just below one of the cydonia pyramids and to the left of the "FACE" i see what appears to be a rough image of a human skull on its side with the "head" part to the right and the "jaw" part to the left.
Not saying it is evidence of anything, im just saying that it looks like a skull and it looks pretty cool



Oh and also something about the "face" that ive noticed that I havent really heard mentioned before but...
If you turn the FACE image upside-down it actually resembles an alien type face, even more so than the right side up image resembles a human type face. Just an observation on my part

www.gameznetwork.com...

here is the larger sized image, its to big to post here, so im just putting it as an external link.






[edit on 24-2-2007 by Kr0n0s]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pic too large... stetching page

[edit on 3/3/07 by masqua]



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 07:47 AM
link   
If you save this on your computer: esamultimedia.esa.int...

And open it at 100% zoom, at the norh-east of the Neukum credit you can see two 'mountains' standing diagonally of each other. In between these two, I see a strange formed structure, or sign. Or am I just plain hypnotised by browsing here for the first time?





posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 06:32 AM
link   
I mean this one, I've put a circle around it and enhanced the color a bit:





posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 06:39 AM
link   
they look like some greek alphabets, but due to lack of knowledge, i cnt elaborate tho



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Black_Sheep_Squadron
Has to be fake cause i cant see any signs on th original scan, (awesome photo by the way) i can confirm this symbol is the symbol for leo, which i noticed straight away because im a leo... duno about the 1 next to it... anyway its fake.










[edit on 19-2-2007 by Black_Sheep_Squadron]



I've not gone through the entire thread yet, and I am going to keep reading.

RESERVE JUDGEMENT.

"Raw Imagery" is merely a title put on what YOU, John Q Public are ALLOWED to see. PLEASE. Remember that.

WHATIF... the "raw image" were not what you have been told it is?

Not being a jerk... And sorry BSS... Pappy's the MAN! And its the CORPS in you... whether a Marine or not upon which I rely in making this statement with YOUR example. Stand WITH me. Alliances are essential.


SPout



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 08:45 AM
link   
Yeah... I am DEFINITELY not going to commit to "hoax' on this at all. To me that would merely be DENIAL.

There are NASA Smudges all over that "raw imagery". That image has been DOCTORED BIGTIME.

I'm looking at it now.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Southpaw11
There are NASA Smudges all over that "raw imagery". That image has been DOCTORED BIGTIME.

That image, at least the original, is from ESA, not NASA.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
The first image I posted was cropped from the real ESA photo of Cydonia.
Since you wanted a demonstration - I did this during a 20 minute coffee break and had time to visit the little boys room. Give me a couple of hours and I'll put the Pentagon on Mars.






THIS is how EASY it is to ADD something. Now... CHECK YOURSELVES FAST... BUS!!!!

If it's that easy to ADD something. Why would it not be JUST AS EASY to REMOVE the same?

RESERVE JUDGEMENT.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 10:19 AM
link   
so, in conclusion, there isn't any evidence of advanced alien life in this thread ?

bummer.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 05:21 PM
link   


OMG? A face?!? A big ass structure standing erect?!

Probably not, but bleh.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
so, in conclusion, there isn't any evidence of advanced alien life in this thread ?

bummer.


On page 4 I posted this little thing I found from the ESA site that Mikesingh had posted. The larger pic is there and the ESA link as well.






posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Southpaw11

Originally posted by Blaine91555
The first image I posted was cropped from the real ESA photo of Cydonia.
Since you wanted a demonstration - I did this during a 20 minute coffee break and had time to visit the little boys room. Give me a couple of hours and I'll put the Pentagon on Mars.


THIS is how EASY it is to ADD something. Now... CHECK YOURSELVES FAST... BUS!!!!

If it's that easy to ADD something. Why would it not be JUST AS EASY to REMOVE the same?

RESERVE JUDGEMENT.


Yeah Southpaw, that's exactly the point I've been making! If one can add, it's just as easy to wipe/tamper/airbrush etc. So what's being dished out as 'raw' images by NASA and Co may well have been thoroughly 'ripened' before we get to see them! So what's the truth? Will we ever get to know what the heck is happening?

So as I quote from Rik, 'What you think is, isn't, and what you think isn't, is'!!!

Cheers to NASA and ESA! Here's to mud in their eyes!!



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 06:06 AM
link   
That is something I do not understand.

Why keep on using NASA and ESA data if you do not trust them?

Or are you expecting that they "forgot" to hide something and you will be the one that will spot it?

In that case, do you think that agencies that have millions of dollars to spend and have the capability of sending probes to Mars are not capable of implementing a quality control on their published data?



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Southpaw11
If it's that easy to ADD something. Why would it not be JUST AS EASY to REMOVE the same?


This is the quintessential example of conspiracy-minded thinking, as opposed to ordinary logical thinking. This is like, upon finding a statue of a virgin mary with liquid-pumps hooked up in back leading to the eyes and tubes filled with red food coloring, you might say, "This is not evidence of a hoax, this is evidence that there IS a real blood-crying statue of the virgin mary somewhere around here, and someone is trying to throw us off the scent. Besides, they probably got to the crying statue already and modified it to NOT cry, considering how skillful these conspirators are with hydraulics... MY FAITH IS EVER DEEPENED !!"

I'm not buying it.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 11:29 AM
link   
When making extraordinary claims, such as artificial structures on Mars, the burden of proof is on those claims, and not on proving that they don't exist. I see this often on ATS, where individuals shout out for us to prove something extraordinary doesn't exist. That logic is backwards. I could show you a picture of a flying Kangaroo and then demand that you prove that it didn't exist. The real burden of proof would be for me to offer data that proves that kangaroos can indeed fly.

When I first saw the original picture I was intrigued. I assumed that the original poster had verified the data and wouldn't simply post an undocumented photo. Alas, this was not the case. Sadly far to many people post incomplete, corrupted or altered data and then make wild speculative claims. On ATS there is a higher standard and every member should fully verify any data presented before making any speculation. To ask that people prove that NASA and the ESA didn't remove the "amazing symbols" is sheer nonsense. The burden of proof is to demonstrate that they existed in the first place. At the very least Occams Razor should be kept in mind.

It is far too easy to make unsupported claims that NASA and the ESA hide data. If one wishes to make such statements they then must offer evidence to support it. There is a huge amount of data made available to the public coming down from Mars. The amount of data grows daily and comes from separate sources. Several instruments are sending back data from orbit and the surface. Thus far I have only seen wild speculative claims in these forums, with little scientific reasoning. While I love science fiction, it would be far better to work in the scientific method when making claims about photos of other planets.

"Any photo requiring equal parts interpretation and imagination (photos sometimes characterized as ‘blobsquatches’) should be discounted."*



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Terapin

To ask that people prove that NASA and the ESA didn't remove the "amazing symbols" is sheer nonsense. The burden of proof is to demonstrate that they existed in the first place. At the very least Occams Razor should be kept in mind.

It is far too easy to make unsupported claims that NASA and the ESA hide data. If one wishes to make such statements they then must offer evidence to support it. Thus far I have only seen wild speculative claims in these forums, with little scientific reasoning.


Terapin, unfortunately, I feel you're not entirely correct. So where and how is one to get evidence of NASA or ESA fudging photos? Are you aware of the procedure how these are released to the public? Since you seem to be unaware of the channels the photographs go through before release, it's better not to make such comments.

Anyway, take a peek at these pics from the Moon. In your opinion, these could be unintended smudges. Others have a strong feeling that anomalies have been deliberately airbrushed/tampered with. Is NASA so incompetent as to deface innumerable pics by 'mistake'? One or two screw ups are acceptable, but so many?

So do I think NASA is bull#ting the public? Yes. Considering the evidence at hand...






All pics reproduced with permission of JP Skipper

And these are only a few of the many photographs with evidence of tampering. In your opinion, what NASA dishes out is the truth, and nothing but the truth! Many others feel otherwise.

Cheers!

Here



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dulcimer
As a photoshop this would be very easy to produce. In fact here is a tutorial on producing such a "3D" effect.

www.worth1000.com...


Thanks alot for that awesome tutorial! It is a shame that hoaxers seem to find a home here.



new topics




 
20
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join