I Found A Smoking Gun On Mars!!!!!!

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jeffrey
One of them is a fake if not both. Compare Junglejake's photo on this page to the original on page one. Like Junglejake pointed out, one of the grooves in the dirt ARE missing from the 2nd picture. Photoshop job? Damn good chance.


As I stated earlier they look like the same pic BUT THEY'RE NOT. It's not on my end, I merely made an observation and am sharing with people. If you think I photoshopped these I don't care. I provide links to the websites and that's all I can do.




posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
The image from Viking which did not land near any probes, or crash sites, and was before the time of rovers.


Thank god, I was terrified I'd see 3 pages of people rambling without noticing this obvious point


As far as the picture, the grooves look like they've been made by the Robot arm of the lander taking soil samples. As far as whatever is on the ground. Its part of the mission. Its even present in this mock-up of the lander:



Would be interesting to know what purpose it served?



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Robot arm in action, with object present again, in display on earth.




posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zzub
My god, there's some paranoid freaks here. Can't you guys just relax and enjoy the thrill of discovering something new, without dirtying it with your paranoid theories?


Seriously though, I'm sure somebody has mentioned that those pics were from the viking missions in the 70's. 4 billion dollars, that venture cost. The lines you see are the marks where the lander scooped up some dirt to analyze it.

But I'm sure somebody has pointed this out already.



I tried......



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zzub
My god, there's some paranoid freaks here. Can't you guys just relax and enjoy the thrill of discovering something new, without dirtying it with your paranoid theories?


Seriously though, I'm sure somebody has mentioned that those pics were from the viking missions in the 70's. 4 billion dollars, that venture cost. The lines you see are the marks where the lander scooped up some dirt to analyze it.

But I'm sure somebody has pointed this out already.




No i believe your the first to point this out lol. Isn't that obvious.



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by 29MV29

Originally posted by Jeffrey
One of them is a fake if not both. Compare Junglejake's photo on this page to the original on page one. Like Junglejake pointed out, one of the grooves in the dirt ARE missing from the 2nd picture. Photoshop job? Damn good chance.


As I stated earlier they look like the same pic BUT THEY'RE NOT. It's not on my end, I merely made an observation and am sharing with people. If you think I photoshopped these I don't care. I provide links to the websites and that's all I can do.


I KNOW THEY ARE NOT THE SAME PIC. That's only what I pointed out on my previous reply. And I never stated that YOU in general fondled with the pic n' I could really care less. I was just givin' my two cents nothing more.



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 01:44 PM
link   
He he, I know. I was just being light-hearted. I don't think any of you are paranoid freaks at all!


I'm not sure what 4 billion dollars in the 70's is equivalent to today, but boy were the mars missions expensive back then.

Still, at least they got there. I fear for the second lander. The odds are against it.




[Edited on 13-1-2004 by Zzub]



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 02:31 PM
link   
now i am really really confused...

OKay the grooves in the ground are from the Viking Digging right??

So what is the silver can thingy that is in the pictures? If it is part of the Viking? what purpose does it serve?



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 02:49 PM
link   
It's part of the soil pick up system. I can't find any exact details on it, but I've seen it before.

Interestingly, one of the landers from the 70's mission carried on working for 6.5 years and carried on sending back data and pictures.



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Not saying its this thing, but it looks mighty similar. Its a camera that watches the atmosphere, so maybe its a camera in that picture. I'm sure its a part of the mission equipment, and not alien. Here's a link.
www.umich.edu...




[Edited on 13-1-2004 by MrDead]



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Howdy folks... the metal cylinder is the shroud for the surface sampler instrument, which was ejected after landing.

See here...

nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...



[Edited on 13-1-2004 by Yoda]



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yoda
Howdy the metal cylinder is the shroud for the surface sampler instrument, which was ejected after landing.

See here...

nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...



THANK YOU FOR UNCONFUSING ME ON THIS ONE, GREAT YODA. YOUR LINK HAS BEEN MOST INSIGHTFUL TO ME.



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Hm..doesn't look like much, because that would have obviously been found by NASA officials, and covered up. Probably a piece from the Spirit probe, or maybe a piece from the Beagle 2


-wD



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 05:41 PM
link   
No problem worldwatcher...



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by NetStorm
A piece from a crashed probe?

How bout the 3 indentations right in front of it?


[Edited on 13-1-2004 by NetStorm]



those indentations are from where a rover scooped up the soil.



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
how much fuel and thrust would be required for the weight of the craft?


Well, in space is it not true that gravity has nearly no effect? Wouldnt that make the craft nearly weightless? Isnt space nearly friction free? Didnt Newton say "An object in motion tends to stay in motion, unless acted upon by an outside force."? If that is true, then with no friction, what would oppose the initial thrust of say, a couple little booster rockets? All you would have to do is speed it up, and it would stay at the same speed. So, a fairly small amount of fuel would be needed to get a weightless craft up to speed, and no fuel would be needed to sustain that speed. So, to answer your question, not much.



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeBDeviL
Hm..doesn't look like much, because that would have obviously been found by NASA officials, and covered up. Probably a piece from the Spirit probe, or maybe a piece from the Beagle 2


-wD


Lol, webDevil, I think you need to read the rest of the thread!



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by darklanser
Ok, some of you think that finding stuff on Mars is so far out, and that "we" are looking too hard to see stuff. Check out this guys site. Talk about seeing thing where they do not exist. I like looking for anomalies as well as the rest of ATS, but his stuff is ridiculous. It's stuff supposedly seen in Mars Viking observer.

www.mufor.org...

I had to laugh at this one...


Wow. I can almost see something....yes...yes...I see...
I see that he's a knucklehead.


How could they possibly say it is the staff of Ra......it looks more like the gingerbread man.



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 09:13 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 13 2004 @ 09:40 PM
link   
wow, they're multiplying at an incredible rate!!!! stop them before they take control of the planet!!!





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join