Evidence Of Ancient Life On Mars?, page 8

privacy

Pages: << 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 62 times

reply posted on 12-4-2008 @ 06:24 PM by Skyfloating

reply to post by vze2xjjk

I like the Mars-threads a lot and all the evidence for anomalies collected by Mikesingh, internos, zorgon, etc.

But I dont like how the hard evidence is watered down by nonsense like this. I can also just post a bunch of rocks and claim they are something.

No offense, but this distracts from the hard evidence.

Its almost as if...

...no, nevermind, I wont get paranoid about it.

reply posted on 13-4-2008 @ 09:13 PM by youvegotbighands

Ehh I did not read most of the replys on this thread, but there are a few reasons why these images are not valid "proof of life" on Mars.

A) A lot of the pictures were taken REALLY HIGH UP so those structures in the images we see are most likely a few miles wide. Case: that giant face on Mars, you know that really famous mound whose name escapes me, turned out to be 3 miles long

B) The human mind see faces on things that might distantly relate to that of a human/animal facial structure. Case: emotocons - =] , XD, =P, ect... and I it is the reason people may get into hentai or other types of cartoon pr0n. Also if we look at cave drawings we can see how they drew crude human/animal forms.

I'm not saying there never was/is life on Mars, but these pictures hold no validity in the argument for life.

reply posted on 13-4-2008 @ 10:47 PM by mikesingh

Originally posted by youvegotbighands
Ehh I did not read most of the replys on this thread, but there are a few reasons why these images are not valid "proof of life" on Mars.

A lot of the pictures were taken REALLY HIGH UP so those structures in the images we see are most likely a few miles wide. Case: that giant face on Mars, you know that really famous mound whose name escapes me, turned out to be 3 miles long

Hi ygbh. Which pics are you meaning? If they're the last two 'faces' in the OP, then yes. These could be huge busts carved out in the hills, like that so called 'face' on Mars. So what's odd about it? No one claimed that these two busts are life forms a couple of miles wide!!

Cheers!

reply posted on 13-4-2008 @ 10:54 PM by youvegotbighands

reply to post by mikesingh

oh! I meant pretty much all of the pictures! If there was a scaling measure, then we could talk business.

reply posted on 13-4-2008 @ 10:57 PM by mind is the universe

So If there was ancient life on mars, I'm sure NASA would know by now.

Would they tell us, They haven't yet! you see?

So when will we know?? not yet.

Thats the way we are treated by the powers of be.

reply posted on 14-4-2008 @ 01:32 PM by Grock

This may be a little off topic (atm) but I would just like to put it out there real quick because I find the current research in remote viewing mars to be extremely fascinating. I know that some would call it quackery, but its interesting nontheless.

Remote viewing of anomlies on mars www.remoteviewing.com...

I wont throw out more than one (just in case its uncalled for here lol) and you can easily research more with that one.

I DO believe in life on Mars, so ANY research that highlights what may be happening on Mars thats contrary to what NASA tells us is worth looking into.

reply posted on 14-4-2008 @ 08:53 PM by rocksarerocks

Congratulations have to go out to RikRiley and vze2xjjk for taking a perfectly interesting thread and turning it into complete garbage. vze2xjjk
is worse than RikRiley because he fabricates faces from complete nonsense. At least RikRiley doesn't try to draw what he knows isn't there.

reply posted on 14-4-2008 @ 09:47 PM by rikriley

reply to post by Grock

Hi Grock, thanks for sharing the remote viewing target feedback. What I see in photo presented narrow-angle image MO4-00291 is humanoid statues and geometric structures North East of glass domed snake ribbed structures. If you look at the word Target in the photo go up 3 inches north of the Last T in the word target you will find a perfect X this is a landing sight for spacecraft. Rik Riley

reply posted on 15-4-2008 @ 02:07 AM by Cyberbian

www.nasa.gov...

In the bottom center of this picture, near the edge of the more salmon colored area there appear to be a large turd sitting on the rock ledge.
Cylindrical with a tapered end.

I swear, I am not trying to be funny. I appreciate that it is as unlikely as it apparent.

Are there any turd experts out there?
Ok I was trying to be funny that time, I could not resist.

reply posted on 15-4-2008 @ 06:18 AM by mikesingh

reply to post by Cyberbian

I couldn't see it! Can you crop and paste it here? In this same pic, there's another interesting sharply defined rock with what looks like a bird like creature nesting inside! Now here's where I've gone a trifle overboard!!

Cheers!

reply posted on 17-4-2008 @ 11:53 AM by Grock

I would like to point out that although i DO believe in life on mars, i would think all life to be underground... I highly doubt if anything could live on the surface for very long (maybe certain types of plants, but certainly not animals or avians). If it is a creature of some sort, maybe it got out and wont have very long to live...

reply posted on 17-4-2008 @ 11:57 AM by dave420

reply to post by mind is the universe

Do you remember when they found what were possibly fossilised bacteria in that martian meteorite? President Clinton went on live TV to tell the world. That's not exactly keeping it hush-hush, is it?

If they find it, NASA will tell us, as their funding will increase thousands of percent. It's very hard to make scientists shut up, as they just want their findings to enter the common knowledge.

reply posted on 9-5-2008 @ 01:35 AM by vze2xjjk

Here's an anomaly from Op rover which I cropped and enlarged.I believe I can see symetry,two eyes,a mouth.What I observe is that like Earth with the dinosaurs,the biggest land animals are from the distant past when the atmosphere and vegetation were richer.Some animals when they die have the famous "JAW DROP" when the mouth juts open from muscle contractions/relaxations opposition.Rigor mortis.Open Mouth. Here is an unexpected evolutionary advantage on Mars.Many of these open mouth at death animals,being large,provide a "cave" opening for smaller animals. The big animal gives shelter long after death as succeeding generations dig deeper back from the "animal bones" cave. Digging animals on Mars are quite common.

reply posted on 9-5-2008 @ 02:07 AM by vze2xjjk

reply to post by mikesingh

When nasa masks images they sometimes try to misdirect viewers with cookie cutter looking false images to distract from "damagingly lifelike" finds within the frame,like a magician does misdirection slight-of-hand to con the marks. I see a live being or two and a large skull(look for eye sockets.The eye sockets could have been shown better but it would lose the detail of contrasting the LIVE ones.

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 10:03 AM by iammonkey

I have found a few pictures that have me thinking about ancient live on mars. The most interesting mars picture in my opinion is this one.

The reason is. When I look at the peaces of rock, it reminds me of rubble from statues and other bits of construction .The first set is rocks that show holes in them, are from a roman ruin. Note the holes.

I believe them to be reinforcement holes, in which reinforcement rods are placed. And here are the rocks on mars.

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 10:07 AM by iammonkey

The next pictures is what I believe is two rods that would fit into these kind of holes.

The next set remind me of statue

Why is it when we find pictures like this on earth no one questions that it’s an ancient ruin. Yet just by saying, it is on mars it is brushed off.

Keep up the great work mike.

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 10:17 AM by iammonkey

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 10:19 AM by ArMaP

Originally posted by iammonkey
Why is it when we find pictures like this on earth no one questions that it’s an ancient ruin. Yet just by saying, it is on mars it is brushed off.

Finding rocks like that on Earth does not make people think that they are from ancient ruins, the thing that distinguishes between common rocks and rocks from ruins is the fact that the ones from ruins have evidences of having been artificially altered.

Many rocks have holes on them, knowing about rocks and the tools used by people to work with rocks helps distinguish between natural and artificial holes and other rock "features", that is why archaeologists have to learn about rocks (when working in a rocky environment) or take geologists with them.

Having said that, I do not have any idea if what looks like holes in the photo you posted are holes or not, and if they are if they are artificial or natural.

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 10:34 AM by iammonkey

reply to post by ArMaP

hi ArMaP I was hoping you would show up.Here are pictures of rocks that I think have been artificially altered what do you think?

reply posted on 11-5-2008 @ 12:49 PM by ArMaP

reply to post by iammonkey

If those were artificially cut in some way I would expect them to show flat surfaces, maybe some square angles, defined edges, etc., but I don't see any of those on them.

Those rocks look like the other rocks, broken by some reason (maybe an impact from a meteor) without any clear defining shape.

For example, even the most simple neolithic tools look like they were made by some intelligent being, and for them to be part of ruins then some should have any indication of artificial shaping and they should have shapes that would fit in other rocks.