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.

 

Anomaly in Cydonia - The Fortress

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 08:37 AM
link   
I had recently purchased a book titled Extraterrestrial Archaeology by David Hatcher Childress(1994). The book itself summarizes the history of the moon, material composition, and the enigmas involved. Such as the various astronomers through the past couple centuries who have studied the moon and noted the various 'stuctures' and anomalies that could be viewed as well as the some of the changes that were occurring in the craters through their various telescopes and observatories. Also, it details some of the photographs you would find in such publications as "We Discovered Alien Bases on the Moon" and "Somebody Else is on the Moon". As well as countless others. I havn't read the book in its entirety yet, but it is a very a handy piece of information as I dont have to wait for for my computer to start up, or wait for my turn to get on and to look and study some pics of the moon.
It even highlights a Russian photograph which is supposedly to be that of an "Alien Runway" right on our moon, as well as a detailed picture/diagram of the Blair Cuspids and the monuments located there. Probably one of the best used books I've bought on a whim in a long time.

So anyways, I'm thumbing through the pictures before I start to actually read it.... It has a few chapters where it delves into the enigmas of the moons that belong to the other planets and it even has a chapter dedicated to the anomalies on Mars. Which brings me to the point...finally right?

The day prior to me recieving the book, I find this pic on the net...



Not much I can really do about it, as it is copyrighted to another site and I dont want to infringe on anyones rights. However, opening the book - it happens to be one of the first pics I open up to. It is dubbed "the Fortress" and followed by this caption:

"The "fortress", located at the northeast corner of the city. It appears to have three straight walls and an enclosed interior space. Its long wall points precisely at the head of the D & M Pyramid. Photo courtesy of Dr. Mark J. Carlotto, The Analytytic Sciences Corporation."

Now, granted, I'm sure this is not the first time some of you may have seen this anomaly, but it is the first for me. Oddly enuff, I've never noticed it. I dont even know why. But I say, lets discuss it. Other than a "fortress", what does it look like to you?


fusionanomaly.net...


[edit on 4-1-2008 by spikedmilk]




posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Another thing is the Cydonia face, to the
EAST about 15 miles, and then 70 miles deep that is where
the 4 billion year old (Lu Egh E) Marsian Black Spiders are.

They can go maybe 5th-6th physical density, and they are hostile to
humans.

These Black Marsian Spiders were put there by Anubis.

We Americans should check them out and control them.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by alextron
 


Joke?

Sometimes I can't tell



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Back during the summer of 1997 those same images where being circulated around the net. Unfortunately my computer was destroyed by an unknown virus attack leaving me to ponder if it was related to Mars anomalies.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by spikedmilk
 


There appears to be a plethora of imagery from Mars at the moment that depicts squares, or at least part of a square, on its surface. Whilst there is every chance that these "anomalies" are natural formations (the square is not unkonwn in nature), they do demand discussion.

Personally, I am of the opinion that Mars was inhabited, many millenia ago, and all of the anomalous images we see are the heavily weather beaten remnants of a long dead civilisation. I can't prove this, but the more I see, the more I get the feeling I could well be right.

If I'm proven wrong, however, I will accept it as a lesson well learnt.

Considering the supposedly atrocious weather and meteoric bombardment Mars suffers from, and assuming my theory is right, then maybe the Martians were either excellent builders, or they didn't die out until relatively recently (millenia X ? as opposed to millions of years). Considering the remnants of their stuctures are still extant, either scenario is possible.

Nice find spikedmilk. Flagged.

P.S. alextron; you are my new favourite subject of annoyance. (Oh Lord, please stop me feeding the trolls...)

Ok, how exactly do you know about these Marsian (sic) Black Spiders?

What is 5th-6th physical density?

Who is Anubis? And why is it just down to the Americans to save the entire Earth from this fearsome arachnid force.

And do you realise that Marsian (sic) is spelt with a t and not an s?

I'm only asking you these questions out of politeness, btw.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 02:47 PM
link   
This is a newer high resolution image of the same object. Doesn't look much like a "fortress," does it? The low resolution of the old Viking images leave much to be desired.




posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by yuefo
 


Thank you. yuefo.

As I stated above, if I were proven wrong, then it would be a lesson learnt. I consider myself enlightened.

I still think Mars was inhabited, though,




posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beamish

There appears to be a plethora of imagery from Mars at the moment that depicts squares, or at least part of a square, on its surface. Whilst there is every chance that these "anomalies" are natural formations (the square is not unkonwn in nature), they do demand discussion.

Personally, I am of the opinion that Mars was inhabited, many millenia ago, and all of the anomalous images we see are the heavily weather beaten remnants of a long dead civilisation. I can't prove this, but the more I see, the more I get the feeling I could well be right.

If I'm proven wrong, however, I will accept it as a lesson well learnt.

Considering the supposedly atrocious weather and meteoric bombardment Mars suffers from, and assuming my theory is right, then maybe the Martians were either excellent builders, or they didn't die out until relatively recently (millenia X ? as opposed to millions of years). Considering the remnants of their stuctures are still extant, either scenario is possible.



Hey there Beamish, thanks for the post...how do I put this without mincing words...hmmm, I'm with ya all the way.
I am certain there was life on Mars. It has nothing to do with any so called 'Gore Report' or some of the other stories we're hearing these days. (to the readers, thats not meant to be disrespectful to your views on such topics..) But for the artifacts alone I believe represent a culture that may have once held some type of presence on the planet. Yeah, they're potmarked with craters the size of cars and small buildings and much of everything is probably eradicated...but some of the things we're seeing....I believe its there and its a matter of time.
Now, as far as life existing currently on Mars... I dont want to dismiss that cuz that would be interesting.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by yuefo
This is a newer high resolution image of the same object. Doesn't look much like a "fortress," does it? The low resolution of the old Viking images leave much to be desired.



Hey there Yuefo, thanks for the pic (as disheartening as it may be),
however, upon closer inspection of our crater filled anomaly. In the first inset, it would look as if the erosion or impact had deteriated enough of the structural layer to reveal some type of 'tube'. Perhaps somebody has some better editing software than myself to get a better/clearer pic.

The second inset, it would almost appear as if despite the numerous impacts and the erosion, it wasnt enough to take down what might be housing a rectangular structure underneath it all.

These are just my opinions, I do appreciate the lo-res pic tho. I/We been having a heck of time finding additional info on this area.

spikeD.




posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Do you have the link to original image?

Th rectangular structure definitely looks out of place.

rohn



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by yuefo
This is a newer high resolution image of the same object. Doesn't look much like a "fortress," does it? The low resolution of the old Viking images leave much to be desired.



Wow, that looks like a bird-head!!
Does anyone else see it?



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 09:13 PM
link   
hey again Yuefo, you know what? I changed my mind. There is nothing disheartening about the updated pic you provided at all. After staring at it side by side, ya grow an appreciation for it. Thank you again!


spikeD.




posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   
I found some more info on the fort, its kind of old and I guess I'm out of touch with some of this stuff...oh well....

www.mactonnies.com...

"The Fort: More Evidence of Structure

Along the eastern "wall" of the Fort is an isolated teardrop-shaped formation. Contextual and morphological clues suggest that the Fort, though badly eroded, is consistent with archaeological interpretations. If this is the case, then the "teardrop" may have once played a significant structural role. "

"This teardrop-shaped feature runs parallel with the Fort's eastern "wall" and shows intriguing internal shape. The "teardrop" is a symmetrical feature similar to others found in Cydonia, although not necessarily of the same scale. It appears to have a central spine or wall (see photo above). "

more to follow.......


[edit on 5-1-2008 by spikedmilk]

[edit on 5-1-2008 by spikedmilk]



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 12:47 PM
link   
hmmmm, as usual the editing function is not functioning. grrrrr.

anyways
, check out these goodies....
www.mactonnies.com...
"This new animation by Mark Carlotto depicts the Fort "morphing" from its confusing 1970s incarnation to the even more perplexing formation we see now:
The vanishing "courtyard." Animation courtesy Mark Carlotto.

The "enclosure" predicted by the earlier images is in fact a shadow; there is no "courtyard" and unfortunately no other single feature that can be positively identified as artificial. Yet the Fort is still interesting. It shares its alignment with the Face, Cliff and at least one other as-yet unreimaged formation in the City.

The prevailing hypothesis among advocates of the Artificiality Hypothesis is that the Fort is a collapsed pyramid (or other similarly shaped structure). The supposed "courtyard" was assumed to be a gaping hole in a once-surfaced structure. This hypothesis still deserves attention; while viewing Carlotto's rotation, I was struck by the Fort's odd, sunken quality -- "courtyard" or not, it's not terribly difficult to envision the Fort as an imploded megascale structure.

Concluding, I don't think the Fort is out of the running as a candidate artificial structure. But any hopes of it being the "smoking gun" for artificiality have been dashed by its obvious degradation."
Taking the Fort for a spin. Observe angular features along "foundation" and sunken, concave appearance. Animation courtesy Mark Carlotto.




top topics



 
5

log in

join