AboveTopSecret.com Video and Media Portal.Books, posters, and more.T-shirts, mouse pads, cups, and bags.Member podcasts.Conspiracy theory wiki.Alternative news headlinesBelowTopSecret.com - off topic and general chit chat.AboveTopSecret.com - conspiracy theories and


 

 

This topic is in the Space Exploration discussion forum.  (rss)


Mars Image: Building (Pics)


<<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>



reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 04:47 PM by LonelyWolf


Ok, I have studied the same photograph a bit closer and found this. I have no idea what this means but these traces seems interesting to me. Any suggestions ?




[edit on 8-7-2008 by LonelyWolf]



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 04:55 PM by prionace glauca


I agree ArMap that with your statement and affirm to you to that geology is not my field. All the experts in their respected field gain knowledge through work and experiences. I geologists and other Terra researchers/scientists who have worked in this field for a long time and have gained experiences of witnessing some unique formations doesn't really have to necessarily mean that these formations are natural.

All I am saying if a scientist sees a rectangular rock in China and then sees another rectangular rock in Canada whose dimensions are similar. This scientist after careful research might form the notion of these formations being natural and who knows his research will make it into studying materials and future scientists will refer to such formations as natural.

Natures does have mystique qualities about its formations some of which are still not understood and can never be duplicated by nature again. I am just offering another side of what some find natural could have been made a long long time ago. Obviously I have no proof to back my opinion as it is only an opinion.



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 05:02 PM by prionace glauca


Originally posted by LonelyWolf
Ok, I have studied the same photograph a bit closer and found this. I have no idea what this means but these traces seems interesting to me. Any suggestions ?




[edit on 8-7-2008 by LonelyWolf]


MikeSingh has a thread started on the above photographs of the tracks. Quite interesting theories on that. Mars Tracks



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 05:54 PM by sos37


reply to post by prionace glauca



I knew I had heard of this before.

Stone movement on hillslopes in the Mojave Desert, California: A 16-year record

Previous research has shown that either hydraulic action or creep may be the dominant process transporting coarse debris down hillslopes in the American Southwest. This study analyses the movement over 16 years of painted stones on two hillslopes in the central Mojave Desert to ascertain which of these two processes dominate in this region. The distance moved (M) is found to be directly related to length of overland flow (X) and hillslope gradient (S), and inversely related to particle size (D). The fact that M is more highly correlated with X than with S suggests that hydraulic action rather than creep is the dominant process. It is concluded that this is probably the case over most of the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts on slopes up to at least 24°, and that it is only at higher elevations where winters are more severe that creep may become dominant


Source: www3.interscience.wiley.com...

and

www.anomalies-unlimited.com...

[edit on 8-7-2008 by sos37]



   copyright & usage 
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 06:08 PM by zorgon


Originally posted by Ferengi
Your talking about earth, not mars.
Not everything is like earth.


So you are saying that geology would be different on Mars than on Earth? Interesting theory perhaps you could share...

Maybe we can find some of these on Mars?



Those are granite... but on occasion granite 'breaks' into regular rectangular blocks... I see a few other ones in ArMap's pick... so they probably fell off the higher cliffs

The Basalt columns people keep posting are not crystals, just the way that basalt fractures when cooling in rare cases.... and pyrite and diamond crystal are minerals not rocks and the difference IS important Its like comparing apples and oranges



[edit on 8-7-2008 by zorgon]



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 06:13 PM by zorgon


The Mysterious Wandering Rocks of Death Valley










No one has ever seen one actually move but they THINK the wind did it



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 06:45 PM by Anonymous ATS





   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 07:32 PM by Anonymous ATS


that pic that started this topic is obviously a fake. why else would the only object vastly more pixalized in the picture be the very object of interest. please....



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 07:32 PM by LonelyWolf


I'd like to share some more parts of the initial bigger image which I have found interesting:




could be an alien ship.



old and rusty underground ventilation system or tunnels.



big house or village in ruins. some stuff is still standing outside.



maybe a plant ? who knows..



this thing just looks out of place to me.



I don't know who that guy is. It could be Chuck Norris.

[edit on 8-7-2008 by LonelyWolf]



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 07:39 PM by rhw007


Originally posted by prionace glauca
(snip)

All I am saying if a scientist sees a rectangular rock in China and then sees another rectangular rock in Canada whose dimensions are similar. This scientist after careful research might form the notion of these formations being natural and who knows his research will make it into studying materials and future scientists will refer to such formations as natural.
(snip)



And show the same two "rocks" to archelogosits and they would say that the same form of "building material" was used in both areas.

Depends upons one's "research starting point".

If you are a geologist then everything is just "rocks" like the Giza Pyramids...after all are just "rocks"

If you are an archelogists...then one looks at the "context" around the rocks and their arangement...something the "rock hounds" of the Rovers are and NASA/JPL et al are NOT doing...especially with this image of a piece of petrified wood the rover rolled right over...took some NavCam images of it...but NEVER...according to the PDS data dase...put the PanCam suuite of instruments on it to determine color, minerologic spectrum, nor the 3D meshes to re-create the scene in 3D:

marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...

Bob...
commonsensecentral.net...



   copyright & usage 
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 07:48 PM by ArMaP


Originally posted by rhw007
If you are an archelogists...then one looks at the "context" around the rocks and their arangement...something the "rock hounds" of the Rovers are and NASA/JPL et al are NOT doing...especially with this image of a piece of petrified wood the rover rolled right over...took some NavCam images of it...but NEVER...according to the PDS data dase...put the PanCam suuite of instruments on it to determine color, minerologic spectrum, nor the 3D meshes to re-create the scene in 3D
Why are you insisting on bringing this subject (used in at least two previous threads) to this thread? I hate it when people mix other subjects in the middle of the threads, it only makes the signal to noise ration worse.

That rock (and yes, I think it is a rock, it looks like all the other flat rocks around it) is not similar to these (as far as I can see) and that area is only related to this one because it is on the same planet and more or less at the same latitude (I think . )



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 08:49 PM by Rockpuck


reply to post by super70



Dude, thats a Mars Barn. They grow corn and stuff in that area.. few moo cows and sum po-tot-oes ..



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 09:03 PM by xweaponx


who thinks NASA just got caught with there hand in the cookie jar?

I believe the truth is already coming out!


We've finally got the proof we've been waiting for, for a very long time.

The proof is not LIFE is out there and or did exist.


Because we didn't build that house or building!


WE NOW FINALLY KNOW THE ANSWERS!



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 09:49 PM by Sansego


I've seen things that look very similar to this in minerals. Could be , may be... are cause for more scrutiny.






Anyone that tells you he knows it all, run don't walk in the other direction.



   copyright & usage 
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 10:30 PM by Quazga


Originally posted by Ferengi
reply to post by Quazga



Your talking about earth, not mars.
Not everything is like earth.



Oh do crystals somehow form differently on Mars?


I suppose all the elements are different on Mars eh?

God what *Morons* we have on the boards these days.



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 10:33 PM by Quazga


Originally posted by sos37
reply to post by Quazga



Totally agree with you. I've got some of these crystal formations at home. But check all these images out. These are naturally forming rocks.

Iron Pyrite Cube


Odd naturally formed causeway


Naturally formed Octahedral Diamond




Amazing Links! Thanks for all of the pictures of *incredibly* squared crystals.

When I originally posted I googled for a few minutes and didn't find any good specimens, but you've hit the nail on the head with these pictures.

Ahh... ok so anyone else out there think the square shape doesn't appear naturally?



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 8-7-2008 @ 10:39 PM by rhw007


Originally posted by ArMaP
Originally posted by rhw007
If you are an archelogists...then one looks at the "context" around the rocks and their arangement...something the "rock hounds" of the Rovers are and NASA/JPL et al are NOT doing...especially with this image of a piece of petrified wood the rover rolled right over...took some NavCam images of it...but NEVER...according to the PDS data dase...put the PanCam suuite of instruments on it to determine color, minerologic spectrum, nor the 3D meshes to re-create the scene in 3D
Why are you insisting on bringing this subject (used in at least two previous threads) to this thread? I hate it when people mix other subjects in the middle of the threads, it only makes the signal to noise ration worse.

That rock (and yes, I think it is a rock, it looks like all the other flat rocks around it) is not similar to these (as far as I can see) and that area is only related to this one because it is on the same planet and more or less at the same latitude (I think . )


Noooo it does NOT look like any other rock in the area at least according to the PDS person I spoke to and as can be seen when looking at the object and other navcam 115 for oppie.

bob



   copyright & usage 


<<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>





























































ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Powered by AboveTop:Board v2.3
Header data processed in 0.002 seconds
Page processed in 0.169 seconds
6 total database queries (1)









The Above Top Secret Conspiracy Community Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.