It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by RFBurns
If NASA had provided the other raw filter data we could get a much better idea on this than just one L7 frame..L7 is the Left UV Blue filter and the R1 is the Right UV Blue filter.
I would suspect that NASA does have the other filters of this particular shot, just wont publish it because with those other filters, we can determine if this is indeed an unusual rock formation, or something else.
Originally posted by Anomic of Nihilism
Originally posted by Max_TO
First off , nice find !
Could it be parts from one of the many failed satellites that have been sent to Mars ?
Actually, that is a VERY good point.
Right now, im having a very hard time beleaving 'natural'.
I don't want to say 'ALIENS' at this time.
So some thing falling from a satallite could be a nice possibility.
Does anyone know just how many failed missions there have been to mars?
I know that the russions had something like THIRTYNINE failed attempts, but how many actually mad it to mars and crashed/burnt up?
If any failiers happened above the planet, surely we must conclued that there would be some debris on the ground?
Originally posted by projectvn
While it may be similar to a wrench it looks like a piece of twisted metal. Two explanations come to mind if it is twisted metal:
Wreckage from previous probes sent. Or indigenous artifact. Either way....How does metal rust without oxygen?
Originally posted by thrasheeI saw the title of your post. And immediately....
Originally posted by thrashee
AMAZING!!! EPIC FAIL OF YET ANOTHER CLAIM OF CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE OF ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!
I know. I'm the big bad guy here. But come on. You would think that after hanging around ATS long enough, people would hesitate before making such utterly ridiculous claims.
Let me give you an example. I saw the title of your post. And immediately my "skeptic-dar" kicked in. Really? Is it truly amazing? Or is it going to be shown to be yet another stupid claim that some photograph taken from Mars, in which where you see a wrench and I see a naked lady, is going to be cited as "conclusive (nay, *amazing!*) evidence?
Shall I proceed? Or does it even matter?
Nah. It doesn't really matter. You're going to go through an enormous amount of leaps of logic in order to show that your Rochester test of an optical phenomenon is conclusive proof, whereas those of us who choose to follow a more scientific model will point out that such images mean.....
But thanks for contributing to the nonsense bloat of ATS. Really. We all thank you for your stunning insights into observation and scientific fact.
Originally posted by silo13
Sometimes I wonder if when some of you look at clouds you see magnificent animals?