All the surrounding rocks have the same texture as the larger boulder in the background. Obviously its just a larger out cropping that has been eroded in the same manner the smaller surrounding rocks have been.

Ok guys, I finally figured out what it is.

It's Bush invading Mars

You know, cause it looks like a bush and it's on mars?

-Jimmy

Giant Chocolate Rice Crispy anyone?

Looks like a beat up meteor to me.

"Not statues, homes, and whatever else you are seeing, all by themselves in the middle of a dune. Whatever you saw, you'd KNOW it was something amazing. And you know what? You'd never see it to begin with. NASA isn't this stupid."

Perhaps, though sadly, the most rational thing I have read yet on the ATS Board. Been hanging around here for a couple months...continually astounded at the way people will jump to conclusions, grasp at straws, etc.

Most particularly, I've been amazed by the tendency to believe that signs of life, or objects of significance exist, surrounded by countless miles of desert terrain...like the supposed "humanoid" in the Mars picture, just chillin' in the middle of the desert?

Amazing, the little things people will allow themselves to believe, in the name of some greater picture that they desperately WANT to believe in.

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.

Originally posted by alienesque
im a designer and use photoshop everday..and i thought these were from the image compression..i wasnt impressed at all.....BUT..ive seen the same shapes on 2 images taken from 2 different angles..and the same shapes are in the same location on the ground.....so they cant be...ill try and find the images that im talking about.

I'm a bit of a technophobe on the sly so I can't get my head around how image compression creates organised linear arrangements like what appear in the Hale crater pictures. One thing I have noticed about the lines etc is that they don't appear to follow the terrain! The landscape rises and falls but the lines stay straight and true. . .

exactly...i dont like this sort of evidence as it devalues everything else

It looks like it could be the remains of an iron furnace? Hard to say anything conclusive from that far away.

okay, i think i have a good addition to this no matter what side you are on.
Can most of us agree that no matter what side u fall on this or in the middle, isn't it odd that there ws no further investigation or official explanation to many of these anomalys that IMO are much more interesting than the cydonia face? I remember seeing that face as a elementary student, and even back then when my imagination was much more uninhibited, i thought people were getting too excited over something that looked a lot like "faces" i had seen in rocks my whole life. But does everyone remember how big a deal the face was? I gurantee yu that some of this other evidence would be much harder to debunk if it was given equal press to the face. And some of you need to do more research before u post. I know by looking at re4plys that many of you(most of you) didn't visit or read the the page that the origional post was from. You just looked at the picture and decided what it was on your own. That is irresponsible. How do i know you didn't look at the page? Because you asked questions like how do u know it's not faked? and similar when the ORIGIONAL JPL images are on the link and you can find out very easily if they are. C'mon, if you are going to give an opinion, reseach it just a little bit. Finially i'd like to add that Joseph P. Skipper is not a guy that will do cropping, or anything like that. I have read EVERYTHING on his site, and he deserves as much respect as MikeSingh. they are both proud and good at what they do, and they wouldn't risk that at the price of never being taken seriously again. Skipper believes in what he does, i email him weekly, and always get a response, i have picked him as my man to corespond with because i like his method. He is not a fan of filters, and he always goes into something as a skeptic and lets evidence change his mind if there is some. That is why you will find that he does not give credit to things like the "humanoid" some of you see. Golly, look at the origional for that, the guy would be tiny. I think some of you should consider looking at evidence that is more "conceivable" and not so outrageous because the evidence of simple and complex bio-life and standing water on mars is going to be the first logical step in getting people to consider mars being anything but dead and dusty. Look at Skippers site, and look at his EXTREMELY IMPORTANT posts about image tampering, there are numerous ones, and once you understand that it is undeniable that image tampering has been happening to images that YOU PAID FOR, then maybe you will be more open to the idea that mars is different that we have been thinking.Does anyone see how ridiculous it is to believe that we have satelite pictures of earth from around 400 miles up and taking pictures through a known dense atmosphere AND are 20 + years old(don't remember exactly how old, not hte point, it's more than 20 years) that show considerably more detail than more recent satelite images of mars and can orbit much closer to the surface(close to half the distance) taking pictures through what we are told is a very thin atmosphere? when you consider how much better imaging has got in the last 20 years that makes no sense at all. Anyway, i won't spend all day trying to convince people myself, Skipper is much more eloqu the subject and the great thing about him is, if you stringly disagree or think something is fishy, or you have a question about his methods, you can contact him and expect a reply in a resonable amount of time. Just my 2 cents.

Originally posted by fleabit
Excellent, now I can add "car" to the list of 'really silly things people see when they look at rocks' list.

Actually, you may not be aware of this, but a high ranking employee for Ford Motor Company came forward a few years back with documents purporting the existence of a secret manufacturing plant on Mars. Apparently the lack of moisture in the Martian atmosphere was desirable for assembly line conditions, and Martian laborers could be hired for a fraction of the cost of even Chinese workers, as a head of lettuce was equivalent to roughly 2 months' pay.

None of this was ever confirmed, of course; unknown government officials supposedly seized the documents, and the whistleblower, in his great excitement, forgot to ever make any copies or even fax them to outside parties before going public.

Originally posted by thrashee

Originally posted by fleabit
Excellent, now I can add "car" to the list of 'really silly things people see when they look at rocks' list.

Actually, you may not be aware of this, but a high ranking employee for Ford Motor Company came forward a few years back with documents purporting the existence of a secret manufacturing plant on Mars. Apparently the lack of moisture in the Martian atmosphere was desirable for assembly line conditions, and Martian laborers could be hired for a fraction of the cost of even Chinese workers, as a head of lettuce was equivalent to roughly 2 months' pay.

None of this was ever confirmed, of course; unknown government officials supposedly seized the documents, and the whistleblower, in his great excitement, forgot to ever make any copies or even fax them to outside parties before going public.

LQTM(laughing quietly to myself)
that is good. we need to keep a sense of humor.

Originally posted by alienesque
im a designer and use photoshop everday..and i thought these were from the image compression..i wasnt impressed at all.....BUT..ive seen the same shapes on 2 images taken from 2 different angles..and the same shapes are in the same location on the ground.....so they cant be...ill try and find the images that im talking about.

because you are looking at a 3d terrain model, the 2d image is used as the texture map

hahahah thanks for the Car image post, you made me laugh really hard. I think people look into odd rock formations too much. they are all over this planet so why wouldn't they be on mars?

The first thing you should learn is to never ever use marsanomoly research. The guy thinks NASA has an "automatic software removal" system that checks every picture and removes all artifacts.

Automatically.

So you mean to tell me NASA spent money developing a program to do it for them (technology that doesn't exist by the way), and they let a software program decide what the public does and doesn't see.

LOL.