Mysterious ‘Tracks’ On Mars And The Moon!, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times


reply posted on 2-4-2007 @ 08:10 AM by David2012
one question before I read the rest. How can you say the tracks are going up or down? they might just all be going down
Just a question.

Very interesting images.

Reminds me of the rocks on earth that seem to move around (old story)

About the bright reflection isn't it common that even stuff like rocks can reflect like that in places where light isn't hindered by a thick atmosphere like ours?

I'm downing the big original images atm.. will take a look tonight I think

[edit]in light of trying to refrain from quick conclusions, that long shadow on your moon crop does not necessarily mean it's a high object depending how low on the horizon the sun is. my cats have shadows i'd estimate 1 m at sunset and they are 20 cm high I haven't compared it at all to other shadows yet so again.. i'm just writing what came to mind glancing at your post. To be honest i always have a hard time with the moon shots, bad quailty camera's? I don't know.. find it hard to make sense of them even without possible anomalies.. the marsian ones are always great though.[/edit]

[edit]Ok think I found your boulder/long shadow and track on the moon. I've downloaded the highest res image of your link but that area's is almost just pixels. did you soften it? and rotated? cuz mine isn't showing the same direction as yours... seems identical though. Ah well I got to go. Will check back when i'm back home again[/edit]

last edit before I go..just noticed.. either the "rock" isn't the origin of the shadow or that shadow magicly goes into the opposite direction of all the other shadows in my image?? really weird.

Like I said most lunar photo's don't make much sense to me. Have a hard time seeing a landscape in them at all so the direction I think the light is coming from might be all wrong but here:

the arrows show the direction of the light / shadows.

What I mean with having a hard time with the old black and white lunar pics is. I have a hard time discerning elevations and depressions.

might just be seeing things.. staring at the screen too long..
really off now

[edit on 2-4-2007 by David2012]

[edit on 2-4-2007 by David2012]


reply posted on 2-4-2007 @ 08:57 AM by Doc Velocity
Originally posted by David2012
Reminds me of the rocks on earth that seem to move around (old story)

Ah, the sliding rocks of Racetrack Playa in Death Valley.

The major difference being that the Racetrack Playa phenomenon is dependent on atmospheric conditions (precipitation and strong winds)... That's according to the "best theories" that Science has to offer, anyway. After many decades of study, researchers still don't know what forces are at work at Racetrack Playa — nobody has ever seen the rocks move. But move they do.

On the moon, of course, the lack of atmosphere precludes any such convenient meteorological explanations. While Mars does have something of an arid atmosphere, as well as sizable dust storms, it would seem to me that any winds strong enough to move boulders around would also wipe clean any tracks. So, the comparison to Racetrack Playa doesn't quite stand up — but, then, we don't actually know what creates the Racetrack Playa phenomenon, either.

I'd be interested to know more about the actual topography in these Moon and Mars landscapes — long-distance telephoto doesn't always provide a fair representation of topographical subtilties; for all we know, we're looking at moderately steep inclines. Without leaping to the conclusion that ET is roving around up there, the only forces that might naturally move large boulders around and leave tracks on Mars or the Moon would be gravity, seismic disturbances, and meteoritic impacts.

So, if these photos show anything at all, I wonder if we're seeing the tracks of boulders tumbling downhill, or large ejecta from a meteor impact nearby?

— Doc Velocity



reply posted on 2-4-2007 @ 09:03 AM by David2012
Originally posted by Doc Velocity
Originally posted by David2012
Reminds me of the rocks on earth that seem to move around (old story)

Ah, the sliding rocks of Racetrack Playa in Death Valley.

The major difference being that the Racetrack Playa phenomenon is dependent on atmospheric conditions (precipitation and strong winds)... That's according to the "best theories" that Science has to offer, anyway.


I know, I was just reminded of them, didn't say it worked the same way and never offered it as a serious comparison to this in the slightest sense (obviously without the dynamics that are working on this planet)

they still are strange though, but let's stick to mike's topic
we can always open a thread about the playa rocks

A rock sititng on a ledge and maybe not in the most stable of positions could be sent on a roll by a small tremor, also rocks tumble along the shape of the terrain in curves all the time, depending on the shape of the terrain and the shape and imperfections of the rock itself will make it deviate from a strict straight line.

Personally I don't find these pics all that strange.. the shadow inconsistency is likely just me. I have a really hard time discerning elevations from depressions on those "crappy" moon shots.

My quest is more trying to find out what lead mikey to believe these images are odd

[edit on 2-4-2007 by David2012]


reply posted on 2-4-2007 @ 09:10 AM by Doc Velocity
Originally posted by David2012
either the "rock" isn't the origin of the shadow or that shadow magicly goes into the opposite direction of all the other shadows in my image?? ...Have a hard time seeing a landscape in them at all so the direction I think the light is coming from might be all wrong but here:

the arrows show the direction of the light / shadows.

Your light source in this photo is roughly the lower center, not the upper center. This image shows typically cratered lunar surface, with at least one prominent formation (center) protruding above the surface. Granted, that's a pretty tall formation relative to the rest of the landscape, but nothing that can't be naturally explained.

Especially in this photo, if the right side of the photo is uphill and the left side is downhill, it's not so difficult to visualize a good-sized boulder rolling downhill and leaving that trail. Just requires a little tremor to jar it loose, and gravity does the rest.

— Doc Velocity

[edit on 4/2/2007 by Doc Velocity]


reply posted on 3-4-2007 @ 03:01 AM by Doc Velocity
Originally posted by mikesingh
Right on Doc! Lets look for that elusive fresh impact crater. But you'll not find it 'cause it ain't there!!

Well, where are the other photos covering the landscape all around your suspect photo? I'd like to see photos of a good 800 mile radius all around the "tracks"... Do those photos exist? Are we supposed to just take your word that a fresh impact crater isn't there?

Originally posted by mikesingh
And then, only a three-rock ejecta?? Funny meteorite! Where have all the other 'ejecta rocks' been tossed?

Well, again, let's see a much larger area of the landscape. Perhaps there are other "tracks" radiating away from an impact, and perhaps what you're showing us is just one of the remote splatters from such an impact.

Originally posted by mikesingh
And oh yeah, I didn't know that ejecta rocks produce some amazing near perfect arcs when flung away after a violent impact from ground zero!! The theory of ballistics has really taken a hit here!!

Not really. Say a good-sized chunk of meteor splatters off of an impact, comes back down a kilometer or so away, and goes tumbling across the landscape — where a fragment of it breaks away and starts tumbling on its own trajectory, perhaps following a shallow depression in the surface. It could describe an arc quite easily.

I mean, what I'm proposing is entirely reasonable, I don't understand your hysterical incredulity. I mean, you're going to guffaw at the meteoritic ejecta theory (although we know that meteors strike Mars and the Moon, producing all sorts of cratering and ejecta patterns).

Take a look at this:
Fresh Martian Meteor Impact & Ejecta Pattern



A fresh meteor impact crater in southeast Arabia Terra acquired in August 2003. The crater is inferred to be young because it still has a finely-detailed pattern of rays associated with its ejecta. These rays formed in a dusty mantle that covers the other craters and rocky terrain at this locale. The crater is young enough that there has not been sufficient time for new dust to cover the rays, or for winds to erase them. The small dark dots associated with the crater are boulders. The boulders were ejected by the impact event. [NASA/JPL/MSSS]

As you can see from this photo of a "fresh" impact crater on Mars in 2003, there is very little of the ejecta pattern that is straight as an arrow. Debris is ejected in all directions, and the radiating spokes are seldom straight — look, they even curve and arc away from the main impact.

Why would you find my theory so laughable, when you're the one leaping straight for the completely unsubstantiated ET explanation?

— Doc Velocity
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Did Carl Sagan know something?
  Posted 13 days ago with 274 member flags
Earthly coincidences...or not.
  Posted 9 days ago with 122 member flags
STOP....Take a STEP BACK....and look at the BIG PICTURE!!
  Posted 15 days ago with 115 member flags
Was this the real reason why Megaupload was closed down?
  Posted 13 days ago with 96 member flags
The Mysterious Death of Marilyn Monroe
  Posted 11 days ago with 85 member flags
Denver Airport Allows Camera Crew in Underground Facility
  Posted 11 days ago with 83 member flags