Ancient Ruins Found on Mars!, page 7

reply to post by rocksarerocks

---

Well they do say that such agencie such as the NSA have technology 100 years more advanced than civilian tech.

Originally posted by puzzled2
can some one tell
1. Whats this a picture off?

2. what happened to SOL 729 images here?

now THAT is an interesting picture.
i'm trying to figure out what part of the section that is supposed to be the rover, is repressented by the three objects and "fence" .. can someone point out the parts?

reply to post by NightVision

---

What? You didn't see the kitten skull laying there? C'mon!!

you forgot to mention the Alien Fruit growing there also....

some pictures of mars look like their is vegitation growing

Originally posted by Phage
Here is the raw image
marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...

Notice a similar porous rock in the right foreground


oops no. Not that right, the other right (left) Doh!

[edit on 26-8-2008 by Phage]

I was just about to question whether it could be a large, porous rock!

But, I'm no geologist or rockophile, would I be very wrong in thinking that a rock's porousness comes from exposure to running water?

Originally posted by thrashee

Originally posted by Math(s)ew
utter nonsense

It's nonsense to suggest that what appear to be artificial constructs or faces may simply be geological formations? Oooookay. You're right, that sort of thing never happens:

Badlands Guardian

Head

And what makes you think that they weren't carved that way? Especially the badlands; in my opinion the badlands is a perfect example of circumstantial evidence that supports the idea of an ancient civilization on this planet that carved the mountain up to look like that; sort of an everlasting piece of artwork to say, "Hey we were here once".

-Euclid

reply to post by gormly

---

this kinda shizbang needs to stop. your constant insulting of the members here is bordering on abusive. no, it IS abusive. you're behaving just like an adolescent who must poke fun at anything that he deems is out of the ordinary. here's a reality check: NORMAL IS JUST A SETTING ON YOUR DRYER. should we poke around in your closet, i'm sure there are more than enough "abnormalities" to qualify you for your own "weirdo" museum

reply to post by euclid

---

How about the fact that there is no evidence to suggest such a thing.

Let's put it another way: yesterday I was lying on the grass in Confluence Park here in sunny Denver, watching the sun set and the clouds roll by.

I happened to notice that the cloud formation above me resembled none other than a profile shot of Abraham Lincoln. It was uncanny the way the formation suggested this, to be sure.

So was I to assume that random formations happen to statistically occur, and trigger recognition in my cognitive abilities, or that some unknown force was actually shaping the clouds to resemble Abraham Lincoln, though the motivation for doing so is completely unknown?

Which do you think is the more likely explanation?

reply to post by thrashee

---

There is actually a lot of circumstantial evidence to suggest that there was once a highly sophisticated, technologically advanced civilization on this planet a long time ago. It would detract from this thread for me to point out just one data -point of the pertinent data. You wouldn't understand anyway; as it i beyond your ken.

-Euclid

reply to post by necspe

---

POCKmarked meteor. POCK. Having said that, this could be anything, and it's definitely an encouraging finger pointing in the right direction for anyone who is interested in the surface of Mars. NASA does nothing to investigate such points of interest, and it's a shame they even exist in their present form.

reply to post by Phage

---

if it is even remotely artificial, it would be more than likely some type of natural camoflage for a mundane, modern structure like a tent. the addition of martian sand to the topside of it, suggests either

1) the opposite side that we can't see has a drift of martian sand against that side, which is spilling over the viewable side... however, if such were the case, there would be a small heap of sand on the viewable side on the ground, along the length of the structure, indicating the sand stacked up on the other side and spilled over the top, draining onto the ground. it's not there so that indicates either

--a) it's somewhat to very old. some unknown effect of the climate which solidifies sand drifts into hard crusts at some point after their formation has kept it from leaving a heap on the viewable side, or

--b) it's very new and the sand hasn't had the chance to create a sizeable sand dump on the viewable side, or

2) it's deliberately added for the purpose of protecting the contents of the structure, like adding lunar regolith to the structures of the proposed lunar base at the south lunar pole. or

3) it's not stacked up sand at all, nor camoflage, but rather a layer of sand that has been deposited on the top as a result of a sandstorm or the ilk.





[edit on 27-8-2008 by undo]

Aliens Among Us ...Video
  Posted 8 days ago with 65 member flags

Moon: inexplicable phenomena. Luna Cognita video.
  Posted 17 days ago with 60 member flags

UFOs \'Escort\' Mexican Aircraft - Radar Confirmed.
  Posted 11 days ago with 31 member flags

The Dyatlov Pass Incident--Russia\'s Mountain of Death
  Posted 18 days ago with 28 member flags

The Edge of Reality - Updated Report on the Illinois Police UFO case, January 5th, 2000.
  Posted 5 days ago with 27 member flags

The Aurora, Texas UFO Incident (1897)
  Posted 2 days ago with 27 member flags

Famous Argentinean painter observed UFO studying parabolic antennas
  Posted 19 days ago with 21 member flags

1/28/2012 craft in sky From Puerto Rico - Need help getting more info!!
  Posted 6 days ago with 21 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: