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.

 

Alien Magic Kingdom on Mars !

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by NephraTari
reply to post by Nohup
 


Agreed. Much of this can be explained away by tricks of shadow and sand drifts.


you might also be wrong and there really is something there.




posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by sllapur
I'm seeing a good amount of symmetrical, Ziggurat-like structures, accompanied by many smaller, also anomalous looking structures.


I wouldn't trust the opinion on anything except their age of anyone who says they can't see a single structure resembling artificial edification.


Just my 2 cents...


Peace, love and light.



thanks for your reply and your advice



some people cannot comprehend this...it's way out of the norm for them to consider it.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
you can't prove that there is nothing there.
just because you think it cannot be anything does not make it so.


I never said that "nothing" is there. Rocks, of course. Erosion features. But it's not up to me to prove that it isn't artificial. I can't prove a negative. It's up to you to make a case for its artificiality, if you can.

Like I said, there have been other much higher resolution images taken of the area since the one you're using was taken. Show me higher detailed, non-blurry images of the city that make it undeniably artificial. Poke around and do some research on your own, rather than just parrot what some dude on a website somewhere said and did.




posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:05 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:14 PM
link   
I can’t believe how full of it you are guys!

Thanks Easynow , these pics remains astonishing still to these days!



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Nohup
 



It's up to you to make a case for its artificiality, if you can.


i don't have to prove anything...the pictures are evidence that there is something not natural there. the evidence has already been presented


oh and if you think some other doctored photo from NASA is going to dismiss this your wrong.

it's a known fact that NASA looks for these kind of anomalies and i believe they missed this because of the angle and any future pictures that are presented will be doctored and that area covered up.


so you see this will remain a mystery



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Please post a link to the original at original resolution without alterations or sizing. I'll take a look and see whats in the photo before manipulation to see how much of it is real.

Thanks so much.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


i did post in it the Op but here you go




www.msss.com...


you need this version of the map... you will see when you go to the link

View full-size image, processed but NOT map-projected

also to add you need to rotate the image 180 it's upside down

[edit on 10-9-2008 by easynow]



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jabbah
I can’t believe how full of it you are guys!

Thanks Easynow , these pics remains astonishing still to these days!


thanks


yes i agree with you, they are very intriguing and sure does make you think outside the box.


thanks again



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Picture 1 : Rocks.

Picture 2 : Rocks.

Picture 3 : Rocks.

Picture 4 : Rocks.

Picture 4 : Rocks.

Picture 5 : Rocks.

And the rest of 'em. All rocks.

Bye.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by AntisepticSkeptic
 


what kind of rocks ?

lots of square ones too



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 07:58 PM
link   
i see it as well as the city behind it with the pyrmids!! you just have to look closer.they have the tech to give us better pics but business is business!NASA is a branch of the military!illuminati



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Hi EasyNow, ATS,

Very GOOD I'd say, without reading the whole thread, will later if I can, saved a lot of pics, will flag+star.

Very good from my first glance.

*



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Hi EasyNow, ATS,

Very GOOD I'd say, without reading the whole thread, will later if I can, saved a lot of pics, will flag+star.

Very good from my first glance.

*



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 08:29 PM
link   
What you see below is that area at 300% with no manipulation or interpolation.




That is all the information in this photo. Everything else that was done to the photo adds information that was not there. When you resize interpolation is used to do what amounts to a guess as to what goes into the new pixels. See below (forgive the crude graphic) -




To help explain interpolation; the area's in blue are the areas that are filled in when you increase by doubling the size. The squares containing the pixels from the original photo are all that there is for the algorythm to work with. The results of what is placed in those new pixels is determined by the interpolation method chosen. Your examples look like they were resized using Bi-cubic Smooth which more or less uses a smooth gradient to fill in.

Every time you double the size you increase the pixels by 4 times. When you get up to 300% or so it gets really bad. There are also other methods like Linear (Nearest Neighbor) or Bilinear Interpolation which give varying results.

This picture below is the area referred to as resembling a car I believe.



That is all the information in that picture. What made it resemble a car was all the post processing done to it. What you see above is what is really there.

The more you resize or use filters to enhance photos, the less real info is still there.

[edit on 9/10/2008 by Blaine91555]



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 09:10 PM
link   
I'm not attempting to provide arguments for this case. My contribution to this thread is what I have said. I wouldn't trust the opinion of someone who says they don't see anything suspicious in those pictures.

I'm not saying there is this or that, certainly not a Disney resort (even though I found the analogy to be of good taste and comical).



Peace, love and light.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 09:20 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Id love the idea of some ancient cities on mars to explore but when you show pictures taken from space identification of buildings become difficult the other mistake I all ways see is if you an image shadows often times will complete pictures the only way to disprove that is to find 2 pictures of the area taken at different times.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Seriously I am more worried about the giant gorilla face not that little box

heres the original

Man these pictures are really blurry they could be seriously anything. A higher resolution picture would be nice because whatever these things are, natural or not, would be more interesting close up.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 10:20 PM
link   
Easynow, even thogh I do not see your city, Ido see something in the pictures after looking at the original NASA photos. It looks almost like waves crashing on a beach to me. Most likely this is just the sand blown dunes though.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join