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 and the it's just rocks skeptics

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 08:02 PM
link   
Is there or was there intelligent life on Mars? I don't know.

I have just started to get into these subjects and the things I'm seeing are very interesting.

What I have noticed is the same old pseudoskepticism.

Just like every pic or video of a U.F.O. is fake or a weather balloon, I'm noticing how skeptics speak with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY as to what's on Mars. Everything is just rocks.

They have no way of knowing. We just got up there and there has been no excavation.

Are these things made by an intelligence? I don't know but they could be.

The pseudoskeptic says these things in order to protect their pre-existing belief system.

They can't even admit they don't know.

Again, we are just getting up there and to say with absolute certainty that these are rocks is illogical.

You don't know.




posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   
This is another case (as in with UFO's and other such stuff) it doesnt matter what proof is given it will always be "debunked" by the "skeptics". Until it hits them in thier gut they won't accept it.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 09:07 PM
link   
i personally think skepticism is great. it is what keeps ppl like me w/ overly active imaginations in check. sometimes i agree w/ the skeptics, sometimes i don't........... however, i would never criticize them for their opinions and assume that i know why they have come to their conclusions. i believe that everyone has the right to form their own opinions and find it funny that on both sides there is great annoyance that the other doesn't agree w/ the other's view point.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 09:36 AM
link   
Have to agree there. I think it would be better for the whole UFO field if everyone took and angle of skepticism. When it comes to Mars, the fact is it is laden with rocks; there are rocks virtually everywhere, so logically that 'skull' that some eager theorist has just seen probably is just that - a rock; Mars is pretty much devoid of animal life as we know it, thats not to say that there isn't some kind of bacterial life up there but the fact is there are no animals running about on the surface, and if you think the 'skull' or whatever it is you see is of ancient origin thats fair enough, but it will remain a rock until science or something proves it otherwise, as this is the most logical explanation.

So skepticism on this topic is actually a good thing, a very good thing - if you don't think logically then your gonna see some weird things everywhere you go
-



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by polomontana
The pseudoskeptic says these things in order to protect their pre-existing belief system.


If you want to suggest that a rock on Mars is something other than a rock, the burden of proof is on you, not the skeptic.

It's like going to a planet with a cloudy atmosphere and saying shapes you're seeing in the clouds are spaceships and flying spaghetti monsters.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Im in agreement with a lot of comments already made on this thread, Skeptics are indeed good for Ufology, i have to disagree with the comment of the burden of proof about anomalies on mars being with those who think they are more than just rocks, the reason why is simple, skeptics are one thing , nasty debunkers are another, there has been an influx of posters recently who instantly scream FAKE the second they see a picture, that IMO is a stupid way for anyone to respond, in fact it serves to separate the boys from the men if you will.

Pictures with Anomalies are posted on ATS so others can deliberate them and help strive to find the truth, Move along comments, and screaming fake is not deliberation, its IGNORANCE.

As for the burden of proof, i dont believe it is about proof, its about sharing with ATS members, something that looks out of the ordinary, and by posting pictures and video's etc it is in a way asking members to assist in discovering what we are actually seeing, if its a fake then its a fake, if its more then we end up with cooperation and debate, debunkers just dont care whether its real or not, they just want their smarmy stupid comments in peoples faces, all that achieves is to make people not want to participate, how is that fair to anyone?

Skeptics are important to Ufology because they keep an open mind, and wish to deliberate on issues, some of them excellent, pictures of mars are a good example, there have been and still are some pictures left unexplained, and even the skeptics try to help solve the confusion, debunkers have time and time again been warned for some of the things they say on here, and some of them seem to be proud of their reputations for being nasty.

So skeptics are good and debunkers bad. i would go so far as to say i no longer respond to fools who use the move along responce, or instantly scream Fake, yeah right like they know. go and take a look at the posts of regular debunkers, you will see exactly what i mean.

If everyone asked the debunkers to explain how they know pictures and videos are fakes, and keep at it until they respond i bet you would see a change in the amount of instant screams of fake there are. ruining ats they are.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 10:28 AM
link   
I'm afraid i'll have to side with the skeptics on this one;

Sorry, but it looks like a damn rock to me.

If you're wondering about why there is so many of them or why they're so misshapen, then a plausible theory could be that they are simply the remains of the period in which mars suffered from numerous super-volcano eruptions.

I don't know why, but noticing this made me think of the volcanoes on Earth and how the magma builds up over time - i can't help but wonder how long it will take until the magma reservoirs get to the stage of which the mars surface was at before it finally went cacka.

But nevermind that - i'll admit that i don't know whether they're rocks or not, but until we have further information, i'm going to have to go with what i know.

It's small, irregularly shaped, and on the outside it seems to be made of some sort of stone-like substance.

Kinda like the several trillion rocks we have here on earth.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by polomontana
Is there or was there intelligent life on Mars? I don't know.

I have just started to get into these subjects and the things I'm seeing are very interesting.

What I have noticed is the same old pseudoskepticism.

Just like every pic or video of a U.F.O. is fake or a weather balloon, I'm noticing how skeptics speak with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY as to what's on Mars. Everything is just rocks.

They have no way of knowing. We just got up there and there has been no excavation.

Are these things made by an intelligence? I don't know but they could be.

The pseudoskeptic says these things in order to protect their pre-existing belief system.

Again, we are just getting up there and to say with absolute certainty that these are rocks is illogical.

You don't know.


What I've noticed is when the closed-minded don't like what a skeptic has to say, they fall to cries of "pseudoskepticism!" It's the new "disinformation agent!" Now, the closed-minded want to define what is and is not acceptable in skepticism, in order to protect their pre-existing belief system.

You are guilty of the same thing you accuse the skeptics of. You don't know for certain they are not rocks. Like you said nothing has been excavated; yet you want to declare them "proof" of who knows what based on the fact they look odd. You want to ignore the fact that each and every odd-looking rock thus far can be explained through nature forces and processes.

The default assumption should be "yes, it's just rocks." You have absolutely no evidence whatsoever they are shaped by any artificial processes. If you can provide evidence they are anything other than odd-looking rocks, then please do so. Otherwise, you should not jump to conclusions based on what amounts to pareidolia.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   
The default position, it's not just rocks.

We don't know with absolute certainty everything about the universe. We only know what 4% of the universe is made of.

We don't know with absolute certainty about everything on earth.

So how can we know with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY what's on Mars and we just got there?

The default position is, I don't know and neither does anyone else at this moment.

More information and evidence needs to be gathered.

There's alot of smart people that say that there's artificial structures on Mars and you can't just dismiss what they say out of hand. Everyone is not just seeing things, they are actually laying out their case in peer-reviewed journals. Like this guy.

spsr.utsi.edu...

These websites as well.

www.metaresearch.org...

www.aliendave.com...

skymonsters.com...

Like I said, there's information on both sides, so the default position this early is, we don't know.

The good thing about being on Mars this way is we all get to be explorers of a new frontier.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Erm... no, the default position is and should be "It looks like a rock".

Seriously, if we all start sitting about debating over the truth of whether or not it's a rock or not, we're never going to get to mars.




posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:08 PM
link   
The problem with Ufology and the subject of alien life is not the people that only look at Mars and see rocks, its with the ignorant folks who see animals and artifacts in EVERY picture from mars (no matter what resolution it is) and claim that NASA is hiding something. That type of complete and total ignorance is why this whole community is looked upon by the outside world as complete fools.

If you guys think the only way to get to the truth is to continue the stereotype of the crazy UFO/Alien nuts, then by all means, please continue seeing shapes in the clouds...er...I mean shapes in the Mars rocks. The rest of us are all patiently waiting for you to come to your senses for a few years and pipe down in order to help remove the stigma of idiocy from Ufology (and the like) in order to get the mainstream weight of the public behind serious investigations. If this is not your goal, then please continue to make fools out of us and yourselves, really.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by polomontana
 


I don't understand what is wrong with rocks on Mars just being rocks.

Why do they have to be something else? Made by something else, or peices of some ancient structure?

We don't know for sure, do we?

Until somebody can prove to me that rocks are anything other than rocks, I will still think they are rocks.

If they turn out to be anything different, then I will be pleasantly surprised!



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by polomontana
The default position, it's not just rocks.


No. In each and every case, the position should be that these are natural formations, unless evidence can be presented that they are something other than what they appear to be, just a bunch of rocks.


Originally posted by polomontana
We don't know with absolute certainty everything about the universe. We only know what 4% of the universe is made of.


True; however, we cannot make the assumption that just because something looks a bit off that it is anything other than natural. Because we know on Earth there are plenty of natural formations that, because of phenomena such as pareidolia, appear significant to the human eye. Examples of this include:

The Badlands Guardian
Old Man of the Mountain



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 07:55 AM
link   
reply to post by polomontana
 


Skepticism creates a balance and helps to weed out the fake from the real. It really confuses me as to why people hate skeptics so much, because skeptics are to their advantage. I don't understand why people can't see that. Without skeptics, you'd have thousands of fake "photos" of phenomenon which would contribute nothing to your knowledge except ignorance because there would be no one to sort through the real and the illusion. If you don't want your pictures criticized then don't post them to ATS...plain and simple.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 08:02 AM
link   
If there is any life on Mars its microbe only,not something thats sound out of this world like smokestacks with smoke,mushrooms,worms,animals,or human.Get real that place is so cold nothing could live there,unless its a underwater form of life.People coming on here with such rocks they claim are stuff is subject to others opinions.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mad_Hatter
It really confuses me as to why people hate skeptics so much, because skeptics are to their advantage. I don't understand why people can't see that.


It is because they are closed-minded. They do not want discussion. They want someone to confirm their beliefs, not oppose them.

[edit on 4-6-2008 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Look SOMETIMES a rock is just A ROCK!

I am the LAST person anyone would call a skeptic but in the same token I am not blind either. There are SOME formations on mars that give pause for consideration that make them seem MORE than just a rock but NOT all the things people post fall into that category.

Just because we don't agree that EVERY rock you see shadows on and think it must be something is what YOU think it is.. does not make us a blind skeptic.

It makes us a critical thinking person that takes all options into consideration before making a determination.

Saying that people that call some of these things JUST rocks makes them on the same level as those that discount EVERY ufo as a weather balloon is simplistic, linear and small minded. Not to mention stereotypical.

I fall under NO stereotypes or labels. I judge all things on a case by case basis as I see them. Any independently thinking person should do the same.

Not all things are true. Not all things are false. That is why we have critical thought and a brain to sort it all out with.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Mars has really big area of land to search for "bones" and "skulls" on the surface unlike earth with oceans and lakes scattered about full of liquid. The two rovers have covered and taken pictures of an area compared to less than a pin-head placed in China. So, its amazing that the few anomalies such as skulls, (see my avatar), and egyptian likenesses (posted Iammonkey), have been pondered upon at all. That could mean (or not) that we could find all kinds of things once man sets down on the planet.

Mars probably had life in its waters that once covered some areas of the planet, and some of it might be laying around. I think that is more likely than not.

[edit on 4-6-2008 by RUFFREADY]



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by polomontana
The default position, it's not just rocks.

Believing in ET artifacts or space critters is fine, but it requires better evidence than a blurry photo. OTOH, there is no need to prove the existence of rocks. Everyone knows that rocks exist.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Of course sometimes a rock is just a rock.

Skepticism is fine but pseudoskepticism is not.

I have made a simple and logical statement and look how much ire it has caused.

What I said was, you can't say with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that everything on Mars is just rocks.

You can't say with absolute certainty that you know everything about earth or the universe.

Any individual should be able to agree with something so simple.

There are debates and arguments on both sides of the issue.

To just dismiss what people are saying which suggest these things are other than rocks, as just seeing things is pseudoskepticism.

I have seen some elaborate analysis from Ph.D's to the amateur astronomer. These things can't be dismissed out of hand because we are just starting to explore Mars.

You don't know.

You can't say it's because some people go overboard and see a face in every rock.

There's extremes in every field of study.

Should we just negate physics because of a wild theory?

This happens in the fields of Biology, Genetics and Archeology, should we negate everything because of a few extremes?

NASA is up there looking for physical confirmation of conditions that could sustain life.

Do you think they spent all this time and money on a hunch?

They are trying to get physical confirmation to back what the data suggest.

I remember some of these just rocks skeptics saying that there was no water on Mars, now we are spending money because the data suggest otherwise.

So to say with absolute certainty that everything on Mars is just rocks is illogical.

The correct response is you don't know.

Why would anyone at this stage be adverse to saying they don't know?

I also know that the just rocks excuse will be like swamp gas and weather balloons if these things keep showing up in pictures.

This case will also get weaker if NASA confirms what they already suspect is the case about Mars and sustaining life.

I have seen things that look like just rocks and things that look like something more than just rocks and I'm comfortable with saying I don't know until more pictures and exploration.

www.nasa.gov...

www.space.com...

If NASA can look for life on Mars, why can't we do the same?

I think it's a good thing that people are exploring these pictures with an open mind. Like this paper.

spsr.utsi.edu/articles/NFS0101a.pdf



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join