Egyptian statue on mars?, page 34

privacy

Pages: << 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 184 times

reply posted on 19-9-2008 @ 10:20 AM by marsrocks

Let's not forget that scientists jumped on NASA with both feet when they announced that structures resembling bacteria were found in Mars meteorite ALH84001. Later findings concluded magnetite existed within the structures, further adding weight to the idea that these structures were once living. Scientists have still not backed off their attack on NASA, saying their announcement was premature, as other abiotic possibilities still can not be ruled out. I don't see NASA jumping 50 steps ahead and announcing civilization on Mars, considering the backlash they would receive from the science community.

Their approach is a much simpler, follow the water approach, which seems to carefully map out what they will find with slow and steady progress. 1. Evidence of ice water. 2. Evidence of past liquid water. ... 25. Evidence of bacterial fossils. ... 45. Evidence of larger fossils. ... 75. Evidence of past civilization. 135. Evidence of extant civilization underground.

Here's a funny thought. Let's call the NASA public relations office and ask if they can give us the names of their Mars anomaly researchers for a possible interview. Ask how many employees they have dedicated to the visual search for extra-terrestrial artifacts, and a list (with pictures) of their best findings to date. I think we'd be laughed at, and they'd hang up on us.

I've actually tried to determine this kind of thing by googling. I did find out that they have only one aerial archeaologist in all of NASA. Guess what he's studying? Ancient Mayan civilization.

reply posted on 19-9-2008 @ 03:35 PM by ArMaP

Originally posted by Lee_K
What I mean is this is a picture that borderlines between rock and statue.

Not in my opinion.

As I said before, I do not see anything that looks artificial there, nothing that makes me think that it may be a statue, it looks only as a coincidence of a rock somewhat shaped like a head resting on top of a flat surface.

So what we have is something that 'could' be an alien artifact.

It could, but I thing that is extremely unlikely, maybe 99.99% rocks, 0.01% statue, or even less.

Nasa would be totally stupid to look into this with more detail. Unless they actually do know a lot more than their letting on.

That I do not understand.

reply posted on 19-9-2008 @ 05:29 PM by MarsFanMag

reply to post by ArMaP

Obviously LEE_K did a mistake in the end and omitted to type "NOT" in his/her sentence.

My view is that it's 99,9 % a STATUE and 0.1 % possiblitity as 'just rock'. --anyway if it's a statue it would still be 100% rock, when you think about it,

Outstanding shape that well has precise features when of course you shed more light to it. NASA has forgotten to put an opaque black circle over it

Unique shape in the site. Smoothness. Shape of a male alien with shorter arm than us (proportionally), as pointing to something. EYES. MOUTH. TEETH. LONG head. --> but no, all this is VERY usual for any ROCK, there are lots of them everywhere aren't there? It's well known,

All rocks have teeth.

Yet on its right (left of the photo) and a bit under its level I think, if I remember OK, 2 remnants of possible statues are there too. (like 'guarding' a cave entrance)

Above it and leading to it is a PATH that has, partly, a MADE WALL (like cut to this shape in the rock). All around are traces and for some not just traces or ornaments. Skulls or skull-figures like scupltures(? or REAL things!!!) can be found all over the site.

Similar "FLAGGING" as on Cape St. Mary (which also presents evidence pointing to artificiality) can be seen at the bottom terrain, rest of it being now covered in dust/ soil and other rocks and other remnants. "Flagging" can also be found elsewhere around the same VICTORIA crater 'walls', as they call it, --natural? Old remnants of civilisation JUST like on Earth, in this Portuguese beach you pointed out for example? too smooth to be 'honest', I'd say, I refer on Mars to near Cabo Frio.)

What do you think of what's next to it? (see my edits and first finding by LEE_K, I won't refer you to my video since you hate videos.)--> JUST BONES?

"JUST BONES"

soz--it JUST reminds me of a certain poster here...

Ah ah.

Did you watch MarsRocks999 video? (same poster as above) I know you hate vids but please take a look, it will only take 2 minutes of your time, after all I'm sure you watch adds when you see a movie, that wastes your time much more. It's just on previous page.
+I'm glad he's here now, you can tell it directly to him.

The big 'black' crack on top left (RIGHT of the photo) doesn't look very natural to me but loke some unfinished work.

TO ME THIS Cape St. VINCENT SITE IS AN ANCIENT CEMETERY WHICH PERHAPS IS KEPT AS SUCH.

[edit on 19-9-2008 by MarsFanMag]

reply posted on 19-9-2008 @ 05:38 PM by MarsFanMag

reply to post by marsrocks

Very interesting post MarsRocks. Especially in the end, how curious. What a guided choice from NASA, only one areal archeologist with solid knowledge of Earth ancient civilisations.

Eh eh so the scientist jump at NASa's throats for giving premature conclusions?

I jump too, and for having thought of something so Earth-boxed like a... big fat ugly pretty useless ROVER...ah ah ah! Not funny for what it could destroy though, perhaps next time they'll send a war tank with big reserves of ...petrol

reply posted on 19-9-2008 @ 05:55 PM by Lee_K

Thanks for pointing that out MarsFanMag. I had forgot to type NOT into my last post at the end. Sorry about the confusion...

Everyone's entitled to an opinion. If you think its a statue or a rock thats up to you. Personally I think its more than just a rock. Its too easy to just dismiss this as 'just a rock' without looking at a more detailed image, or an image from another angle. So I guess we'll never know...

What you do have to remember though is if this is a statue then how long has it been there for. I know things are a lot different here on Earth on the element side of things and the way rocks erode, but if you looked at some of the ancient ruins on Earth using the same camera, you probably wouldnt even know they were ruins... You'd just think they were rocks aswell... So I like to keep an open mind when something like this comes along.

reply posted on 20-9-2008 @ 10:18 AM by ArMaP

Originally posted by MarsFanMag
Outstanding shape that well has precise features when of course you shed more light to it.

What outstanding shape are you talking about? I don't see anything with an outstanding shape in that photo.

Shape of a male alien with shorter arm than us (proportionally), as pointing to something.

Are you talking about the "Egyptian statue" or about the other "statue"?

EYES. MOUTH. TEETH. LONG head. --> but no, all this is VERY usual for any ROCK, there are lots of them everywhere aren't there? It's well known, All rocks have teeth.

If you are talking about the "Egyptian statue" I can understand how you see eyes and mouth, but where do you see the teeth? Could you point it? Thanks.

Above it and leading to it is a PATH that has, partly, a MADE WALL (like cut to this shape in the rock).

Or just a rock that broke a long time ago.

All around are traces and for some not just traces or ornaments. Skulls or skull-figures like scupltures(? or REAL things!!!) can be found all over the site.

Skulls? What we can see of those "skulls" they look more like groups of different objects than one piece, like a skull.

Similar "FLAGGING" as on Cape St. Mary (which also presents evidence pointing to artificiality) can be seen at the bottom terrain, rest of it being now covered in dust/ soil and other rocks and other remnants.

The "flagging" is all over the place, not just on that site. If you look at other photos from the rovers you will see that many photos (maybe near 25% of the photos of the ground) show those rocks that you call "flagging".

"Flagging" can also be found elsewhere around the same VICTORIA crater 'walls', as they call it, --natural? Old remnants of civilisation JUST like on Earth, in this Portuguese beach you pointed out for example? too smooth to be 'honest', I'd say, I refer on Mars to near Cabo Frio.)

Yes, those rocks are natural and not just on Victoria crater, all that area is covered with those rocks.

The rocks on that beach are not from any civilisation, that is a natural formation that extends for some kilometres on that area. Also, the coast on that area (as in most areas of Portuguese coast) has been gaining on the ocean, not the other way, so any ancient civilisation would be found farther from the coast, even if they were just besides the ocean at their time, that is why I have found a Carcharodon Megalodon tooth some 150 metres from where I live.

Did you watch MarsRocks999 video? (same poster as above) I know you hate vids but please take a look, it will only take 2 minutes of your time,

... and it was a waste of 2 minutes of my time, there was nothing new in the video (obviously, it's based on just that image).

after all I'm sure you watch adds when you see a movie, that wastes your time much more.

I do not, you should not be sure about the behaviour of people you do not really know.

The big 'black' crack on top left (RIGHT of the photo) doesn't look very natural to me but loke some unfinished work.

That is the problem, it looks perfectly natural to me, and as we have only those photos we can keep on this for the rest of our lives, one saying it looks artificial, the other that it looks natural.

TO ME THIS Cape St. VINCENT SITE IS AN ANCIENT CEMETERY WHICH PERHAPS IS KEPT AS SUCH.

To me is just part of a crater wall, like the other parts of other craters' walls.

[edit on 20/9/2008 by ArMaP]

reply posted on 20-9-2008 @ 11:50 AM by ArMaP

About the "flagging".

As you can see, the whole area is covered in those slab-like rocks, it's not something that is just "paving" the entrance to Victoria crater.

Site 2 - Sol 2

Site 25 - Sol 110 (some 750 metres away from site 2)

Site 47 - Sol 389 (some 1100 metres from site 2)

(You can see that small craters also have that "flagging", as they should if this is just a thin layer of that slab-like rock that is broken by the impacts that make the craters)

Site 52 - Sol 422 (some 2500 metres from site 2)

Site 60 - Sol 580 (some 3500 metres from site 2)

Site 71 - Sol 823 (some 4800 metres from site 2)

Site 76 - Sol 947 (some 5800 metres from site 2 and near Victoria crater)

Those white rocks are also visible from above, as you can see in this photo.

reply posted on 20-9-2008 @ 09:44 PM by MarsFanMag

reply to post by ArMaP

No. I mean THIS 'statue' here which is the topic of this thread. I do NOT mix up with West Valley "Humanoid Figure". ArMaP you need to use your eyes to SEE. Just re-read this thread when you have a moment, by just paying attention to all the edits in light etc.
Somewhere on this thread, only a few pages ago or previous one just, there's a link for my video, the edits I did for it light-sheds some truth on this arm of the ' EGYPTIAN statue', St.VINCENT.
Same for eyes, head, TEETH.

Now like I commented in the comments-section on my video, I dug even deeper since, (see EDIT I previously posted here on this thread) and it seems that the 'being' isn't a little girl but BONES, a SKULL with eyes- orbits and perhaps (very likely) a jaw.
Perhaps the area is too dark to say it IS this and that, but I don't agree with you when you say that all we find in edits is added or distorted by the edition process.

If you look at THEMIS websites you can see for yourself that even THEM do EDIT Mars photos, and explain how and why, just like we do.

I still haven't got the Alzeimer's disease.

You must be right about many things but are you right about everything?

reply posted on 21-9-2008 @ 11:49 AM by ArMaP

Originally posted by MarsFanMag
No. I mean THIS 'statue' here which is the topic of this thread. I do NOT mix up with West Valley "Humanoid Figure".

As you wrote about a "shorter arm than us (proportionally), as pointing to something" I thought it may be the other statue, I did not saw anything resembling an arm on the photos or on your video.

Same for eyes, head, TEETH.

I can only see the teeth that you draw, I can not see anything like teeth on the original photos or on the super-resolution image.

Perhaps the area is too dark to say it IS this and that, but I don't agree with you when you say that all we find in edits is added or distorted by the edition process.

I don't agree with that either, that is why I never said it.

What I say is that some editing operations may destroy (or create) data.

I still haven't got the Alzeimer's disease.

Great, I hope you never get it.

You must be right about many things but are you right about everything?

Once more, where did you get that idea that I think I am always right?

Is it in the way I write? Was it some specific post or sentence I wrote?

I know that I am not always right (and being a programmer, my mistakes come back to me for me to correct them), but I like to know when I am not right, so I can correct my knowledge.

reply posted on 21-9-2008 @ 02:15 PM by MarsFanMag

reply to post by ArMaP

Hi ArMaP, yes it's in the way you write as I personally (that's only in my view as everything I post) perceive it. Still I see you are a good soul

. No-one is supposed to be perfect in anyone else's eyes, we just have to be tolerant and take the best of what Others offer, this works for me too, for you, for everyone, well it would be nice.

I know I DREW TEETH

but just because I saw them on my edits. The funny intentionally cartoonish pic was to draw attention to them. If you pause at some pics in my vid, you can see them. Now of course, like the arm and everything, it could just be patterns in the rocks that do this effect. I don't think so, but I haven't been there, perhaps I'm wrong!

Your job: it's OK when you don't have to use your other senses (but your brilliant faculty of logic) to get from A to B, and Z via this rational, patient, intelligent but specific work of programming. Errors get straight back to you, in term of programming: lucky you, in some other jobs, errors can come back in the form of point of no-return, like in medical professions. Don't get me wrong, we ALL do errors! (just think of my 'alien' 'finding' on this thread, !!! Completely uh-uh!

And I said it a few posts after)

But I think that when you come onto the board, you should leave some aspects of your profession aside...When I make a video, I also allow part of my brain float away to artistic and imaginative flows, cause I'm not doing this thing for any rigorously scientific profession. Perhaps it's why I disagree with many scientists, it seems that there is often something valuable they blank out.

I believe in our human brain senses, if we try and suppress this we can bar the route to a tiny percentage of possibilities, and it's often that percentage that reveals important further points of interest.

I'd love to see humans sent to Mars with all space-suits and equipment necessary, to study these elements, for, I suggested robots (and even some scientists do), yet, a robot could go totally past a point that WE would flair, sense as interesting, and go taking photos or samples of the point ...right next to it.

reply posted on 21-9-2008 @ 02:45 PM by zorgon

Originally posted by ArMaP
About the "flagging".

Your fighting a losing battle my friend...

I mean even NASA calls the 'flagging' a ROAD

The Road to Victoria Crater on Mars

Here is a road never traveled. To get to Victoria Crater on Mars, the rolling robotic rover Opportunity must traverse the landscape shown above. Victoria Crater lies about one kilometer ahead. The intervening terrain shows a series of light rock outcrops that appears like some sort of cobblestone road.

Ahhhhh ya gotta love NASA... the art of obfuscation at it's finest

apod.nasa.gov...

On Earth after only a few years...

[edit on 21-9-2008 by zorgon]

reply posted on 21-9-2008 @ 06:34 PM by MarsFanMag

duplicate-post

[edit on 21-9-2008 by MarsFanMag]

reply posted on 21-9-2008 @ 06:39 PM by MarsFanMag

reply to post by zorgon

Hi King!

Do you know,(as we French say) (please don't mix us all up, I've just been wasting my time on a YT- 'UFO' vid in South France, as I had witnessed quite a very interesting thing there myself in 2003, but an English-accent guy in the end gets p-d-off with the efforts of the French-madame/ well..a total hoax as I suspected, I commented "C'est nul", which means 'It's ZERO"), I'm glad you post this and I ddn't dare coming back to this thread before long, as I thought it could be another sarcastic comment...but I'm in awe, Zorgon!

If you see the photo ArMaP gave, of a PT beach, 150 yards/meters away from he lives, and that is composed with flat 'flagged' rocks, and stretches for a few km or so, this is exactly what I thought of, an ancient road/ else structure that is totally ignored in researches. 'Bly me', if I was a paid researcher I CERTAINLY wouldn't consider, just by fist glance, that these things are 100% natural!!! On & by Earth, I would give it a real try.

-->(the photo by ArMaP, --Portugal beach flat&smooth rocks, 'up-mounted' -to describe it just-- can be seen on the "MARTIAN-MADE STRUCTURES..." thread, reference of it given a bit above on this thread.)

~~~~

I also gave, on my thread, the reference for this thread here by IamAMonkey, who is quoted on The Living Moon, ah,

for A.R.)

Anyway, time for me to go back and have a studied look at all this.

Yes I too get really puzzled at all this 'flagging'. Put it this way, if it was natural, I'd like to know how.

reply posted on 21-9-2008 @ 07:50 PM by ArMaP

reply to post by MarsFanMag

I may have given you a wrong idea, that photo from the beach is not where I live, it's some kilometres to the north.

What I said is that where I live we can still find fossils of marine animals, evidence that the ocean has been receding on the west coast of Portugal, so that outcropping of limestone has been inside the ocean and has becoming more and more visible.

Sorry for the confusion.

reply posted on 22-9-2008 @ 12:09 AM by zorgon