Evidence Of Ancient Life On Mars?

reply to post by vze2xjjk

---

It looks more like a rock than a cave.

If it was a cave entrance, and considering that the light comes from the right, the right side should be dark and the left side should be bright.

As it is, it has the right side bright and the left side dark, like all rocks on the image, so I think it's just another rock (or other object), but not a cave.

What on earth landed on page 9? I've just seen 3 long posts of images illustrating who knows what? Kaleidoscopic images with outlines that don't outline anything. I read and re-read and have no idea if they are being satirical or really believe they prove something. Are they joking? Potato head creatures with spindly legs? Fanged heads? I've had many a WTF!? moment on ATS. I appreciate that we see different things in pixellated images. I respect the poster's interpretation, but they represent one of the biggest WTF?! moments for me.

[edit on 1-3-2009 by Kandinsky]

reply to post by ArMaP

---

3D isn't the easiest to see,but I did nothing but enlarge this set from the Spirit Panoramas page.I did no enhancement. I'll try enhancements later. This is strictly enlargement. The very lucky angle of this cave opening shot will be illustrated later. A more direct angle may have been achieved at an attempted escarpment climb where the tracks show too steep and high for the Spirit rover. The rover could have tipped over had it not stopped climbing in time.That's my worst nightmare,an overturned helpless rover. That's why I drew it with a low and central center of gravity in 1987. The second 2 pics above are NEGATIVE IMAGES,so I seem to be the only one presenting NEGATIVE IMAGES and don't want to scare anyone from them.Nasa masking is usually NOT done on NEGATIVE images,so they are somewhat more reliable and representative.Nasa just doesn't bother the NEGATIVE images,because no-one cares about them. No-one.

reply to post by vze2xjjk

---

I see you didn't talked about the direction of the light that I talked about in my post, don't you see that there is a brighter are on the right of the "cave", making it look like any other boulder? I don't see why you call it a cave.

And this is not just on that photo, in all photos that I have found that I think show that area, in none of those photos it looks like a cave.

Here's the trade-off with 3D images. It helps see LIVE FACES because of OVERLAP. Yet the fuzziness is a little annoying. I compressed image Horizontally. While the cave aspect is reduced to highlight the LIVE faces,there will be more clarity for dead rock in normal B&W pics.No-one touches NEGATIVE images,so this would be missed by 99% of other researchers. The details of faces interest me more than conformity. I crave to see them looking at my rovers.

reply to post by vze2xjjk

---

I will ask it again, don't you see that the "cave" is brighter on the side of the Sun, like the boulders?

A cave should be darker on the side from which the light is coming.

Also, did you saw the other photos I posted as "External Image"?

And don't you understand that a negative image has exactly the same data as a positive, only the interpretation from our brains see it different.

This is a reconstruction of a Mars Face.By using the right side of the face to use a similar to mirror image on the left side of face I worked to get around the interfering obstruction.I horizontally compressed to knock out secondary head shift overlap.

reply to post by vze2xjjk

---

I see you keep on ignoring my posts, maybe I am on your "Ignore list".

That's OK, you can post all you want and return to your thread flooding habits.

reply to post by ArMaP

---

Yes I see your point about the large rock looking like a Cave opening ,but not sure yet. I like the Face pic though.Fossil Head.Spirit rover.

reply to post by ArMaP

---

Ignore doesn't exist for me,so I find more. The live ones are hard to see in the second pic.

Why are the LIVE ones so hard to find,when they are "everywhere"? They are fuzzed out or blurred.

Female Foreground Face Mars in front of head. the body seems CATERPILAR with sharp spike "arms".

reply to post by mikesingh

---

Great pic mate..I believe that all of them could possibly be relics of an alien past on Mars..I say possibly because they all could also be nothing...EXCEPT the "ammo box".

I'm sure I read somewhere that mother nature does not work in right angles....90 degrees is a man made phenomena...nature works in circles and spheres...so to see an object with more than one 90 degree angle to me is definitve proof that there was something happening on Mars that we are not aware of!

Good work!

[edit on 1-3-2009 by kiwifoot]

[edit on 15-3-2009 by 12m8keall2c]

Here is what NASA wants you to believe: that there is water on Mars that can support single cell life, nothing more. That goes along with evolutionary theory. Anything else they find that suggests intelligent beings were on Mars discredits that theory and the scientists' world view.

These bones that are seen on Mars are spewn about all over the surface. If you were to walk around on Mars, you would think it was one vast graveyard. And you would be right. There was a great flood on Mars in the past that covered its whole surface and killed all life on Mars. Sound familiar? Well it should. The same type of global flood happened here on Earth at aproximately the same time Mars was flooding.

Or probably a great war on Mars many thousands of years ago?

With so much what looks like 'unnatural' stuff seen on Mars, it cannot be coincidence like natural rock formations etc formed by tectonic movement and weather conditions or even due to 'Marsquake' activity millions of years ago. That's what the common explanations of the 'experts' are!

Now these images, especially the ones shown below, don't seem to conform to the explanations of the 'experts'. Or they must explain how such geometric shapes with hollows etc can form in small stones....I've highlighted the word 'small' so that some don't come up with pics of hillocks and stone formations hundreds of feet high consisting of hollows and caves!





Cheers! The truth is out there!

reply to post by mikesingh

---

I don't see any geometric shapes in those two images. Perhaps if you could provide the ID's we could get a better idea of what you're talking about (scale for example). But lacking that information, those look like examples of wind abraded vesicular basalt. Very common in the Columbia Hills region.





www.lpi.usra.edu...

reply to post by Phage

---

The original refs/links are in the opening post. Do you suggest that the geological processes on Mars are similar to those on Earth? That makes it more interesting, though I doubt this is so. We therefore cannot apply the same templates.

Those images shown in the previous post are approx the size of a deer's head and rib cage.

And here's something to keep you in good humor (From the same Rover images. I've colored it in for a better look-see!).....





Cheers!

[edit on 20-4-2009 by mikesingh]

Nice thread and "amazing" pics! Thanks Mike for posting here together.

I also was amazed by the ESA images. European Space Agency I suppose? Are they at odds with NASA at all?

My questions are (and not directed at Mike entirely).

1. Given that these shapes and rocks and anomalies are so amazingly different then anything we have on earth--why doesn't NASA spend some time trying to get closer pictures of them to not only prove/disprove some of the theories floating around but to get a better understanding of the over all geology of Mars and some of the processes there such as erosion to name just one? (Hows that for a run on sentence? lol!

2. There seems to be evidence of single cell organisms on Mars or at least the possibility for them to exist either now or in the past---what are the probabilites or statistics that said organisms might have "evolved" into sentient beings like us? And why is that such a hard concept to swallow? Why is that not even a consideration to skeptics?

3. Some of these pictures defy description and although I feel compelled to believe that most of them are just rocks and shadows and dust--some of them just seem to be too unique? too artificial? I think some good geological expertise is needed here to profer those arguements and expand on the this is just a rock reply. But why and how was it shaped like that?

4. Most pics I've seen on Mars here are from NASA are there any other great ESA or Russian mission pics that are also amazing?

Cheers!