Egyptian statue on mars?, page 8

privacy

Pages: << 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 183 times

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 04:46 AM by Dagar

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by ArMaP
As anyone can see in this image, those things do not appear on the original photos.

So are you saying that the 'super resolution' images thus created are invalid for looking at anomalies?

After all is that not the purpose of NASA making these images? To give better resolution to see what is there?

As long as what is there falls within the realms of what you believe then the process is a valid one. The moment it starts throwing up strange anomalies then the process becomes the skeptic's whipping boy.

It's called having your cake, and eating it.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 04:48 AM by MarktheSkepticUK

Originally posted by truthfreedomjustice
reply to post by iammonkey

Do you personally believe there is or was life on Mars?And do you think that whatever civilization that might have lived on Mars is somehow linked to the Egyptian culture.

I somtimes think something like that. The pyraminds are amazing, if there was link i wouldnt be that unsuprised.

I often think at one point in time Aliens could of had contect with us and egypt was the place.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 04:49 AM by velvet

Amazing find, I have heard conspiracies that Mars is kind of like earth and that used to be inhabited by a population. But now their is war so the population is low. I'm not sure but here is a website I found about each planet population.

www.soundcurrentrider.com...

All I can say is that maybe Mars has some connection with Earth. Maybe at that time when the Pyramids where made and all those statues they might have gotten an idea or got a message from Mars.

Plus government sometimes blurs anything that might look like anything that is inhabited on Earth. So they might know something but is hiding it from the public just like Aliens.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 04:49 AM by Skyfloating

Originally posted by iammonkey
well well well that didnt take long did it some fu####wit is putting my post and find as theirs

forums.dsstester.com...

See it as a compliment. It was here first and that can always be proven.

If it gets out of hand (people using your stuff without a source being cited), use the Complaint/Suggestions Form in your mem-center to report the stealing of your discovery.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 04:50 AM by ArMaP

reply to post by MarktheSkepticUK

This image is a "super-resolution" image created with 16 photos taken by Opportunity, one of the two Mars rovers active at this time on Mars.

Super-resolution is a way of making bigger images with many images of the same subject taken in the same conditions, it uses detail that may be seen in some images but not in other images to create a bigger image that uses all the information gathered from all the images.

Obviously, if all the images are exactly the same, the resulting image can not be any better than a common resizing of the original, but if there are many differences then the resulting image can be much better than any of the original images.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 04:57 AM by P-a-r-a-d-o-X-2

reply to post by zorgon

OMG... wtf is that one you just found

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 05:04 AM by mikesingh

Originally posted by iammonkey
well well well that didnt take long did it some fu####wit is putting my post and find as theirs
forums.dsstester.com...

Ah! That sucks! So what's new? Welcome to the club!! It happens all the time, but damn! That guy needs to be put down!

As regards the image with that 'statue', it is undoubtedly extremely remarkable. Excellent find. Starred and Flagged!

Some have mentioned that it can’t be a statue as there is a squarish block under the ‘face’. So? In art one does not need to accurately depict a figure with a chest, hands etc. It could be symbolic with the attention being paid only to the face.

As Zorgon had pointed out, why would NASA enhance the resolution of this image if they did not want to check out the details? They have, and that in itself is intriguing!

And of course, we have those unending proclamations and lectures by some that these are nothing but a case of pareidolia and seeing bunnies in the clouds! Thank you!

OK, here's an enlargement of that 'statue' which I have ‘brushed’ up a little, reducing noise and enhancing the dark and light areas. Though it's been hauled through a few filters, the result is pretty fascinating all the same! Notice also how it has been recessed into what looks like a geometrically carved cavity! Are we seeing the vestiges of a long gone civilization? We'll probably never know until we get our boots out there!

However, the issue can be put to rest if we could get hold of hi-res images of the same area but from a different angle. I’m sure internos and ArMaP are on it already!

Keep looking. The truth is out there!

Cheers!

[edit on 18-5-2008 by mikesingh]

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 05:27 AM by ArMaP

Originally posted by P-a-r-a-d-o-X-2
But my problem ultimately is this...... WHY do we trust images just because they come from NASA? Really I dont understand why so many people on ATS kinda rely on NASA pics as if we trust them, DO WE? I dont. To me its all iluminati on the 'disclosure' path.. hopefully Im wrong.

In this case we have only two options: trust the pictures from NASA or ignore them, NASA is the only organisation (as far as I know) that has a presence on Mars' surface, so we have no other way of confirming that their images are real.

I trust NASA's images unless I see signs of tampering (which I have never seen on Mars images), so I think the original images used to make the super-resolution image are real.

Ok look if they edited those tiny little blurry box areas for god knows what reason -- not that there could be much behind them....... WHY didnt they edit out the statue aswel? or anything else that 'shouldnt be there'.

What "little blurry box areas"?

And what the hell is that 'downsampled EDR' image is this our stuff?

That is part of the rover, showing, among other things, some of the elements of the solar pannels and the "sun-dial" that is used to see the height of the Sun when the photo was taken and make colour adjustments.

I am clueless with our space toys and all that but I still cannot trust NASA.

If you have any interest in these images (although you not trust the ones who make and publish them) you should take some time to know the technology behind it, it can only be good for you.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 05:31 AM by iammonkey

reply to post by truthfreedomjustice

Yes I believe that there was life on mars. And if nasa would stop fixing the photos s up, I believe we would find a lot more evidence. The best we can do is look through the bits of scrap they throw us.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 05:32 AM by P-a-r-a-d-o-X-2

reply to post by ArMaP

Thanks mate. I meant the blurry box areas in the actual OP not the other one I posted, I did admit I dont know anything about our space toys and what not.

Listen... we live in a time where hardly anybody with a thinking mind doesnt trust our government agencies... all this illuminati crap... for want of another word.... why the hell should we trust NASA? just give me ONE good reason why we SHOULD? I dont think you can... no disrespect.. course NASA are the only ones with a clue.. thats no reason to trust them is it?

Im going along with this as if nobody is lying to me.. just for the sake of it.. but Im being REAL.. I - dont - know.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 05:34 AM by gottago

Though this is one of the most convincing Egyptian faces yet to be found on Mars, two things indicate that it is actually a natural formation.

In Mike Singh's post above, look carefully at the lines of horizontal strata in the surrounding rock--the bumps and indentations of the cliff to the right can be traced across the "face" and align perfectly with its features.

The eyes fall in line with an eroded line, the nose with a jutting layer, and so on.

Further, the "body" is a simple shearing of a mass of rock in this vertical crevasse, and others are found throughout the photo.

Secondly, and more importantly, if this were a monument similar to those in Egypt, where is the context? Why would this statue be hidden in the edge of a crater wall in the midst of absolutely nothing?

In short, where are the other signs of civilization?

No roads, no plazas, no sculpted terraces--in short, no sign of context can be found at all.

Here are a few comparative views of similar monuments in Egypt. They are massive complexes. They are not isolated in the talus of a remote cliff.

Abu Simbel:

Luxor:

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 05:49 AM by iammonkey

Again I have to say thank you to every one for your input. Especially mike, internos.skyfloating and NGC2736, You know what for. And to ArMap love having you on board

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 05:52 AM by DwaynetheSpecious

I have now read through most of this thread. I find it very interesting indeed, but one thing that strikes me... is that as further we progress in this case we find more and more - I have the feeling that the rocks are cheating on us

But nonetheless the first picture is very cool... the best thing would be if we had more pictures from many different angles so we could get a different view.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 06:14 AM by Tuning Spork

It's just another trick of light and shadow, I'm sure, but here's another face in the crater:

Kinda looks like Alan Colmes.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 06:23 AM by ArMaP

Originally posted by zorgon
So are you saying that the 'super resolution' images thus created are invalid for looking at anomalies?

No, I am just saying that some things that are visible on the super-resolution image are not part of the landscape, they are artifacts created by the super-resolution algorithm.

As this method uses the difference between images to create a better image it also uses the difference in noise and the white pixels that appear in some places (unless they removed them all before) to create detail in the final image.

So, knowing this limitation, we can use these super-resolution images as well as other images.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 06:59 AM by Anonymous ATS

What about all the other features on the rock that look like human faces? Barely any of them look very accurate, but in every section of that original photo that I look at, I can see features and outlines that look like 3/4 or profile views of people, and many features that look like statues of old tribal cultures. The entire rock face, viewed from a distance, looks like a crowd of people facing to the right.

marsrovers.nasa.gov...

Does that mean there are actually statues there, or carvings from intelligent beings? Of course not. All it means is that it's an outcrop of sedimentary rock that broke apart into pieces that have similar angles to human faces.

As to why the "Egyptian statue" piece looks so perfect... there are a few other "perfect" faces there that have little to do with ancient civilisations. I can see one that looks just like a square-jawed hero from a DC Comics comic book, and right beside it there's one that looks like a profile view of a gorilla.

img247.imageshack.us...

And finally, I would like to point out that if this outcrop of rock was photographed from another angle, our precious faces and pharaos would mostly look completely different, in the same way that the stars in the sky would be in entirely different positions if you were to look up at the sky from a different part of the galaxy.

It's all patterns in static, people. You should wait until you're actually receiving a transmission before you try to decipher it.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 07:07 AM by Armin

I don't know about anyone else, but I found something strange that's inside a cave/cliff.. I don't see anything else around that resembles it, I cropped the image and edited some brightness/contrast to make it more visible.

[edit on 18-5-2008 by Armin]

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 07:34 AM by Skyfloating

All these other alleged faces dont look like faces at first sight.

The unique thing about the egyptian statue is that you dont have to strain yourself to see the obvious.

Same thing with the platform.

Perception can be grossly distorted by wanting-to-believe, wanting-to-see.

But with the statue perception is not distorted...it simply looks like an egyptian statue even to the detail of head-deco.

So what does it mean? Nothing yet. It means "keep looking". For all we know we are looking at something leftover from a forgotten civilization, or at the work of some NASA-prankster (or something more sinister like deliberate disinfo), or at a major coincidence.

The picture is good enough to make it to our growing collection of mars anomalies.

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 08:04 AM by ackers46

reply to post by iammonkey

Good find it took me ages to find it on the original pic.. even though I
knew what I was looking for .. but I really do think this is just another
rock formation ... thanks for posting though ....

Ackers...

reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 08:41 AM by BladeGlint

Thanks Spork I will use your pic because it's real close to the area that I see an impact in. (just below the pink sqare half inch/12mm measured on large pic)