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.

 

Mars-Gate!!??

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 11:48 AM
link   
More updates have been added. Come see the continuing investigation.

Is getting interesting.

jb




posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 11:48 AM
link   
More updates have been added. Come see the continuing investigation.

Is getting interesting.

jb



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 11:48 AM
link   
More updates have been added. Come see the continuing investigation.

Is getting interesting.

jb



posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 03:38 PM
link   
I always felt like there was life on Mars. I mean real life. Civilizations. But that they died away a long time ago due to the same thing we'll probably die from - nuclear war (or something equivalent to it).

Something my old science teacher said to me with me half-paying attention helped formulate this theory.

You have the sun. Every hundred million years or so, the sun spits out some giant burning ball of fire. It cools down but is still close to the sun so it stays hot... whatever. Then 100 (500?) million years later, the sun pushes out ANOTHER burning ball of fire. This ball pushes the other ball (planet) further out and takes over its orbit. This has happened eight (nine?) times. Once the planet in question gets to earth's distance, it develops life.

Mars used to be in our position. When it was, it developed life. Eventually a [probable] nuclear war happened. Regardless, it got pushed out of that "prime real estate" that's conduscent to developing life. I know this is not based on any scientific fact whatsoever, but I beleive Saturn was even hospitable to life. I believe that once a planet gets to its position, something causes it to explode/implode, turn into gas and sort of bloat up, causing its massive gassy size. Some other anomoly that occurs in that process also causes its rings. Once it gets further out still, forces that we don't know about yet, condesne the gas back into a more solid state. So I believe every planet beyond ours once had intelligent life (or at least the possibility of having it).

There is a sci-fi author whose name escapes me. But I found one of his ideas interesting. He theorized that as a species, we will gradually develop virtual reality that will be identical to reality. And further on still, we will learn how to transfer the electrical impulses of the brain into computer impulses, leading to the holy grail of downloading our brains into computers and thus being able to live forever. He believed these two worlds would collide and eventually we wouldn't even need physical bodies. We'd just live in this virtual world (the matrix) - the only difference being we'd know it. Since everything is in a computer, there would be no dying. The computer aspect would lead to us not needing natural resources. And once you don't need natural resources, what's the point of living on the surface of the planet? This would lead to us putting this computer that we lived in way way underground, so it's not subject to the sometimes turbulent nature of weather and meteors and all those other things. You would be protected from that stuff and an entire civilzation can live happily in a "real" world without having to worry about anything. And it makes me think... is this what the civilization on Mars did? I mean, after 100 million years of no activity on the surface, wouldn't earth look kind of similar (ruling out that just by its looks it was uninhabitable)? I mean wasn't it just 20 years ago that scientists were 100% sure there was never any water on Mars? If they were 100% wrong on that, why couldn't they be 100% wrong on intelligent life. And the scariest thought of all is... what if we already made it to this computer world point, and we don't even know it? Though I'm not sure what the benefit would be of keeping that from us. Other than to prevent everybody from beating the sh*t out of cops with kung-fu.

Anyway, I'm done. Hope you enjoyed reading this. I'm sure there are people far more intelligent than I who will rip it to pieces.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   
More updates have been uploaded. Now it turns it view towards an Earth / Mars connection - and beyond. If nothing else - it is an interesting anecdotal study. As so many on each side of the 'Mars debate' are now looking into it further - I say it is not a waste of time.

..



posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Im not know if is real. But cool pictures. had fun reading them.



posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Thank you, Hiro

More updates just now added.

..



posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptnCrunch
 


I believe Sleeper also wrote something of that ... search around. I think pregnant and sun were in the title, but no promises.




To the person wondering what a city on mars would be made of ... well, minerals and metals ... just like earth. You know, they mine for that stuff
There isn't a steel forest or anything




To the poster mentioning possible past life annihilating themselves with a destructive force ... the planet does almost look as though it is covered in rust ... what would earth look like after 10-20,000 years from a mutually assured destruction event? Metal rusting away, organics decay into dirt, concrete crumbled to dust ... that is, what was left after the life extinguishing event. Though there are other theories of what could have happened to a past possible civilization.


Thing is, we don't know, and science cannot disprove most things 100% ... there are lots of scientific theories that are based more on faith than fact ... more than most self-claimed logical thinkers would like to admit


The truth is out there, but we no nothing of the truths of existence, the universe, or even our own biology yet. Just scratching he surface




As far as op, stuff I have found around this site before pretty much, but don't let those with close eyes bother you ... if they don't read your captions, then, they are not as on top of things as they try to sound.

Though I may agree the cities most likely come down to pixelization and compression ... I commend your effort.

Question, what format are you keeping it in? jpegs are horrible with artifacts, compression, and 'smoothing'. I use gimp, not PS, so I usually try to keep things either in xcf, or if the native format is decent like tif.

If I get time I will try to do what you did in gimp and see if the results are similar ... and your latest page has me wanting to go back to that image and see what 'it' is pointing at.

Be honest now, did you take the face and 'fudge' it to have more classic 'alien' facial look? Looking at the original and your 'enhanced' version, I don't see how it changed so much.

I do accept the possibility someone is playing with the public ... or they are seeing just how closely we examine all of these photos.

I really need a 3D monitor setup or goggles ... I am sure checking out all the 3D panoramics from jpl would be great ... I have quite a few of the left and rights saved. Just don't have time to take on a real project at the moment, just time for a bit of play
I know some people use the .gif format and time the images to flip back and for to create the 3D effect without special equipment or crossing of the eyes ... I might check that out later



Keep doing what makes you happy, in the end, you only answer to yourself, and those you love (even if you are religious, you love your deity) ... not anonymous on the internets



posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Hi, FreeThinker.

Personally, I do not have a photoshop on my computer. The most that I can do with an image is enlarge it - and change mid-tones, contrast.. and brightness. Then I just post up the results.

The 'how do' was posted... to the best of my ability... -- and has been repeated... to see if the results came up the same. 'AK' was the person that filtered 'the face' - just the way that he did... to produce that result. I can honestly tell you that it was not 'fudged' - or we would not have posted the technique used.. and called out the challenge to repeat it. Some have come close - but none have yet to produce the same exact version. This is increasingly intriguing to me, as 'AK' couldn't draw a good stick figure. ; )

Seems... 'convenient' - that the 'pixelation' results resemble a 'grey' doesn't it?? 'Someone' could very well be 'messin' with us' - but I promise you - it did not come from us.

But you make a very good point - if viewers actually read the text on those pages... it repeatedly comments about the irony - of how the images 'resemble recognizable shapes.' Never do I personally write that this is actually 'proof of cities' on Mars. It just states that I tried to repeat the process on other parts of Mars images... and the 'pixelation' did not repeat itself.

In actuality, we are trying to produce proof... that the Mars images are not legit... from the source. There is nothing for sale - and 'AK' is retaining his anominity - so I also know that he is not trying to get attention.

I am just going to keep investigating into these things... until I get some good solid answers. Unitl then... just try to enjoy it... and be entertained. We are just trying to show others - and may some will be inspired to eventually back us up.

Thanks for your good posts. Never stop looking into mysteries

jb

,,



posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Johnbro


In actuality, we are trying to produce proof... that the Mars images are not legit... from the source. There is nothing for sale - and 'AK' is retaining his anominity - so I also know that he is not trying to get attention.





I think that is a good idea, myself. It would be easier to prove something fishy about the images in general than ever prove that something is a rock vs. a bipedal life form and vice versa.



I like the idea that some say NASA tries to prepare us for disclosure. Though, if that was the case, they are doing a poor and very slow job of it.

I personally feel, the public is ready for it, even if they would be a bit ... irked ... that they were blatantly lied to for so long. In the end, I think that part could be easily brushed aside at the overwhelming feeling of not being alone in the solar system, let alone the universe.

But, to not take it that far, just existence of past life, which they could mold into current theories if the scientists were 'smart' enough ... should be a breeze to release to the public.

I will help them ... put the end of civilization and life on Mars at the same time as the development of advanced human life on Earth. Make it that we traveled here, and that is how the ancients had such accurate calenders and charts. But, they were rushed off the planet, and couldn't bring the supplies to rebuild society the same way, and therefore after generations, things became myths and embellished, while some things lost. Generations down the line would have never saw the advancement and couldn't fathom it, especially while hunting with spears.

The could use that as an excuse for the 'missing link' as well.

I don't know, but, to me, it sounds a just as good as the big bang theory, which basically brings us all to sleeping with ourselves, our sisters, cousins, etc. Since, we all came from the same piece of matter so many random billions of years ago, that, they can't really prove as much as I cannot prove that Earth and Mars and our moons were formed from the destruction of a planet that was between these two planets, that over time has left us with just a few remnants called the asteroid belt, from other things bombarding it and slinging things off of its plane



When I was younger, I was intrigued by science, especially of space, planets, etc.

As I got older and questioned authority, I realized that most of what they say, they claim to have proof, but their proof isn't based on as hard of evidence as they make it out to be. They create computer models to verify their claims. They come up with time lines based on what they think is something steady, though, we have not been measuring it for very long, they say, trust us, we know it is so.

A bunch of hooey if you ask me. But that leads to something I plan to do on here in the near future. I intend to turn a lot of stones, and ruffle some feathers in the process, if personal life doesn't distract me again.



posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 12:49 AM
link   
Great post, Free.

I agree with your concepts of 'true' history - and science as a repressive power monger - if the 'authority' is in egotistical hands. Is sort of a 'control mechanism' - is it not?? Conventional / contemporary science does have great merit , but it is a practice, a theory - it is NOT complete and utter truth.

I, for one... am rootin' for ya... concerning your future 'ruffling of feathers' -

tally hoe. Let no one tell you what your opinion is. ( is my motto )

jb



posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 01:23 AM
link   
I really just don't understand why people can't start a new space agency and send probes to mars and present the real images. Whether the images coincide with NASA's images or contradict them... either way it would be nice to get a second perspective from an organization that isn't so secretive.



posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 02:19 PM
link   
Another update to the pages has been posted up. Am welcoming submissions. More and more... it just simply proves that we should continue to look into what 'facts' we are presented.

Maybe we could all chip in... and start our own space agency.


..



posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 07:47 PM
link   
The only thing interesting on those pages is the tracks that the rover leaves behind in what looks very much like mud (dirt + water), but that is probably just tracks in the red, iron rich dust.

All the other conclusions and analysis are biased and, even if they weren't. are baseless. You just can't draw conclusions about what is or isn't a structure if your zoomed in far enough for pixilation to be as bad as it is in most of those pictures.

Why, oh why, can't any clear picture, or even an up-close pic that's blurry, ever be taken of anything?


I'm not a skeptic, but come on.



posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Because of what aving ssaid I went back and read it again. I did not see conclusion only questions. they are trying. better than you. it is fun to think and so what? yes nasa.govern should have more better pictures. so what.



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Hirogen
 


So what? So the images and analysis on that page are interesting, and raise interesting questions, and would appear to hint at the answers to those questions, but the simple fact is that THAT evidence cannot support the conclusion that there is life on mars, or artifacts.

The most basic requirement of a theory is that it must fit the data available. We don't have sufficient data to support the theory that there are structures, artifacts, or life on mars (and that is the conclusion that site is trying to push, the questions are biased and pointed to suggest those ideas).

I'm no skeptic or debunker. I just subscribe to that one rule: the theory must fit the evidence or, in the absence or evidence, must be regarded as false until there is evidence.

I gave credit where credit is due. Like I said, the picture of the tread print is intriguing, and would appear to point towards there being some degree of water in the soil of Mars.

and 'better than you'? I would much rather have beliefs based on evidence than speculation based on nothing substantial. Don't assume you know my beliefs when i've not stated them. My comments are on the validity of that site not the validity of the ideas presented on that site.



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 05:45 AM
link   
Johnbro I especially like the overhead of the "Parking Garage"
Vehicles on Mars,you say?



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 10:04 AM
link   
ArMap,just so you know nasa masks the images...they made that photo original SO DARK I knew they were hiding something.That's why I BOTHERED to lighten it and find the anomaly/vehicle. Original "blackface" just like they did to the "statue" face.
There's nothing wrong with concealing evidence,right?Just make it darker and they'll never bother to look behind the masking. It gives you faith in Nasa,doesn't it?



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Great find, VZE. At first, I don't understand what you are looking at - but upon further observation... I am really amazed... how 'similar' that these things often are to known objects. My background is first and foremost... in military aviation. What you have posted above... has all of the correct details... including 'peto' tube... on nose cone. Seems a bit extreme to be yet another 'coincidence.' Sure is adding up.



posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnbro
 

Thanks Johnbro,I was looking at your pages and getting blown away.The shot I used from 2005 sol 105 Spirit last 2 very very dark frames. But don't stop there,because among sol 105 and some 106 are the dead Mars boy shots.Pan cam sol 105+ 106.




top topics



 
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join