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.

 

Alternative 3's Base on Mars Discovered?

page: 15
65
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by samael93
 


sam...I do not think 'undo' did those things, as you say in your post.

If I am wrong, then I apologize.

just thinking you have 'crossed-over' in your thinking.....something I have done many, many times....possibly even now!

OK!!!! Pizza is here!!! See ya!!


You are half right. Undo did not make the first claim, just defended it. Undo made the second claim. Since Zorgon would not answer the first one and I had a question about the second one, I addressed it all to Undo. Sorry for the confusion. I meant 'how do you' as in how does someone. I should have been more clear.




posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by samael93
 


you said:



Wow! Complete definitive proof of bases on Mars. Do you realize what this means? All the astronauts that died in NASA missions were murdered. If our government has the technology to get back and forth to Mars, as well as buid bases there and all, well then why did astronauts die just going up in the space shuttle? I will tell you why. The government has been lying about what it is capable of and put them in harms way with old tech they new they could do better than. Go to the authorities NOW! The families of those lost astronauts deserve this kind of reparations! The OP is doing a great disservice to this country and those familes by sitting on this proof.


No one is saying that they have complete definitive proof of bases on Mars, but very compelling photographic evidence that seems to indicate bases on Mars. No one is saying they can prove those bases are OURS or NASAs. it's a theory some of us put forward. the rest appears to be further conjecture you drew from their original conjecture. it's entirely possible that we have more than 1 space program and they both can fulfill equally important goals. one could advance our hoarded and top secret tech, the other could use the mundane tech but serve to do experiments and other useful jobs, while sheltering the existence of our top secret, cutting edge technology. nothing is wasted. it's your assumption that the theory must insist it's wasted. not so.

Now, I have lots of images. Maannny images. I don't really want to share them here because I don't want people to get the wrong idea, that i'm supporting anti-NASA stuff. i'm not. i think they are trying very hard to tell us in as few words as possible, without getting called on the mat for it, what is going on but their hands are basically tied. that's my take on it. if you still insist taht i'm being unreasonable or that the ideas presented in the thread are so far out to warrant your attitude, then yes, I will provide the images. but here's the deal:

you can't chicken out.
you have to admit when you have no explanation.
and you must be cordial.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 01:13 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 



I never chicken out.
I am being cordial. (now)
I would be delighted to see things that I could not explain. That is what I am looking for.

If you do not want to post it here, start a new thread and post it there. That way we would not be derailing this thread any further.

...and yes, I feel that the things stated are so completely outragous that they belong with stories of batboy and elvis imprgnating bigfoot.


[edit on 1/9/08 by samael93]



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 01:35 AM
link   
Wow, this is a crazy thread. I must admit that all I see are organic shapes in the pics as well as things that look man made in the google earth images of places with no man made objects. I am open minded though. I cannot wait to see where this goes.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 03:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by samael93
...and yes, I feel that the things stated are so completely outragous that they belong with stories of batboy and elvis imprgnating bigfoot.


So with that train of thought... what kind of evidence... OTHER than a photo would convince you something was going on?



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 03:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
Why must I do all the work?


A) Because you enjoy it...

B)
It goes with the territory




posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by samael93
 


i've changed my mind. i'm female, i reserve the right to do that.

gonna let zorgon show you whatever he finds. i'm just pretty much convinced
we aren't alone in the universe and surprised to see that someone is very busy on mars.
whoever it is, i dunno, but it's interesting.
i know, i know, you were looking forward to it. somehow, based on your prior commentary, i very much doubt that. and i'm not dumb enough to waste your time or mine on circular arguments that surely would ensue. so go ahead, be uncordial, i can take it.. it's preferable to the alternative. (endless argument)



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 07:02 AM
link   
Not enough proof for me. To convince me i will need better resolution on untouched photos. Also there is to much going on on that planet. To much wind erosion then fact all the hits from meteors. Some of the stuff in the pictures could be remains of anything even meteors. Try to get some kin of chart that shows wind direction and average erosion. Then compare them to the pictures. If you can provide clearer pics that would help.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
I have always wondered about all these 'early deaths' of top scientists... maybe they were needed elsewhere...


Thats a plausible theory, but to quote Homer Simpson "People die all the time, just like that...". 1/3 people get cancer, and old people get sick and dies, espesially after getting retired for some reason. And dont you think that a secret re-population of man to another planet would prioritise young healthy people instead of old retired men?



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Acharya And dont you think that a secret re-population of man to another planet would prioritise young healthy people instead of old retired men?


Well lets try something else as food for thought..

Seeing as a large percentage are microbiologists... that would be a pretty necessary skill... and an older scientist has experience, is least likely to be missed, and lower gravity conditions might just lengthen lives.

Young healthy people instead you need for the labor in building and maintaining settlements but won't have the experience to deal with alien microbes
so even if you get 10 years out of the old guys, that is a lot of training for the new guys... and the old guys are 'expendable' as they are already dead...

Don't forget that Reagan was 70 years old when he became President



BTW they HAVE found the aging gene you know... but it is highly unlikely you are I will ever see that (but I am working on it
)

[edit on 1-9-2008 by zorgon]



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 06:28 PM
link   
maybe its a missile silo, that has openend for a breif moment, look for the co-ordiantes, and find a website, that has put together the mapped images of the surface of mars, if it is closed in another photo, then there is irresputable proof, that CAN make it to the news



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by monkeybus
 


I know that time may be different on Mars, but I don't think it was "a brief moment", the first photo is from 1998 and the second from 2005.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


well at least a photo anomoly is ruled out, wich is good, and there must be a co-ordinates, for the photos somewhere if it was photographed twice



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by monkeybus
 


It was with the coordinates from the first image that I found the second.

75.45°W, 6.81°S

And for those wondering about the size, the round feature is some 74 metres wide.



posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
The image above I consider to be a very clear image showing structures


Looks like one of those ink blot tests to me...I see a butterfly



posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Hi, this looks like a town to me:



it is on this pic:
www.msss.com...

and this looks like a base:


on this pic:
www.msss.com...

but i dont trust my eyes.....



posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


I have no idea. I was only "eye-ing it".

It looked to me like the shadows were being cast in the direction that I pointed out, but if you've found evidence to the contrary, I won't dispute such. If, however, the sunlight is being cast in the direction that your said, I think it changes my whole perception of this anomaly.

Can anyone else shed some light on this matter? (LMAO ... can anyone top that pun?)



posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 08:45 AM
link   
its funny to me... all this images I can't find anything in them. I'm not a sceptic, but I just find it funny that I cant see anything out of the ordinary in them.



posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 12:45 PM
link   
The mystery of Mars grows even more. How many more artificial shapes are we going to find on extra-terrestrial bodies before a closer look is taken? We've seen several on the moon, and now we find them on Mars as well.

I, more than many(due to personal associations with several controversial characters), understand the government's ability to cover up and 'out stubborn' even the most stubborn of outspoken communities... but when something looks clearly this suspicious(I think it's possible, but highly unlikely, that perfect geometrical shapes can form naturally ontop of each other and around each other in base-like patterns), one would think that at least a cursory, unsatisfying glance would be paid to it.

Granted, taking the Mars Rover in for a closer look will probably trip proximity alarms and start a countdown on a self-destruct doomsday device that obliterates the planet.



posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by maxtron
 


Still looking at the first one, and there may be something to it, but what of that 2nd one?

Is the base in the mountain side or below the cliff face? May seem like a weird question, but you never really commented on what and where...

Thanks for the pic's either way...



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join