The Lost City on Mars

Examination of high resolution close ups, demonstrate multiple areas that exhibit striking, geometries and obvious orthogonal alignments, providing compelling new evidence of non-geological, artificial ruins

Images from Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter reveal structures of somekind inside a creator, similar to ruins, is this a ancient city???

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f92c6a10dc6e.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7e28dddd9650.jpg[/atsimg]
You can deny it all you want but there are people who study this all their lives so im not suprised they find something cool like this.
Link

As a professional archaeologist, I see little reason to be exited about the right image - until a colleague can investigate it up close - but the left image of the Sassanian Palace, Iran, shows how large parts of the building complex is buried below ground. Exciting!

reply to post by SuperSlovak


Excellent post.

The ancient ruins on mars require further discussion and would benefit from further corroborative image-based evidence.

Are you familiar with the leaked THEMIS images of Cydonia?

(It is often referred to as the 'BAMF incident'. I shall find a summary of it for you.)

Edit: Here is an article about the BAMF incident. It will enlighten you as to the ways in which NASA deceives the public, and how sensitive data are 'leaked'...

www.marsnews.com...
*there are links to follow-up articles at the bottom.


[edit on 30-3-2009 by Exuberant1]

Martian and lunar anomalies are my pet topics. I am glad someone started a new thread on them (been through the archives reading a lot of older posts about them.)

You'd think an aggressive skeptic like me would be one of the first people to attempt to "shoot" one of these down as hard and fast as possible. Not so.

Believe it or not, they are what prompted my interest in ufology in the first place.

Yes, 99.99% of what I've come across have been natural geological activity, image defects, over-compressed (.jpg) pixel artifacts, and optical illusions. But this is also the area where I have come across an image or two that I absolutely could not find any explanation for anywhere. Even when I presented these to an associate of mine (who actually specializes in optics and has closely worked with NASA) he was unable to offer any natural or prosaic explanation.

I may not believe UFOs are visiting earth, that people are getting abducted by "grays," or that an ET presence is currently active in our solar system - but I am absolutely convinced that there is at least one VERY strange location on our moon that cannot be explained by any natural or optical phenomena.




[edit on 3/30/2009 by LogicalResponse]

Originally posted by LogicalResponse
but I am absolutely convinced that there is at least one VERY strange location on our moon that cannot be explained by any natural or optical phenomena.

Please don't leave us hanging...

Can you post an image or link to an image of this strange location?

Have you had the chance to see the amazing image of Reiner Gamma that was taken by Clementine?

reply to post by SuperSlovak


Now that you have read all about the BAMF leak; let us examine the data that was secreted into the hands of independent researchers by Noel Gorelick who was calling himself BAMF on the TEM forums.
(Gorelick was the head of the NASA/ASU/THEMIS mission and in charge of releasing the image data, which he had full control over....)


*Here is the leaked image that I mentioned in my last reply to you - along with some examples of what appear to be the ruins of an ancient metropolis trapped beneath the frozen mire of Cydonia, which has preserved them in iced-muck for millenia:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/71e4fe076488.jpg[/atsimg]



*Here is a close-up and digital analogue of the ruins that have been named "the temple":

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c9db10c60379.jpg[/atsimg]


*Here is an image with a clearly discernible structure at the bottom left - it has been named 'the skyscraper' - very interesting, a digital analogue has also been provided:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7365e1ced2ac.jpg[/atsimg]


*I particularly like this image, as it shows geometric complexities and size that one would associate with a more advanced civilization. This image has been named, "the powerplant" as usual, a digital analogue has been provided.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d27efa161aab.jpg[/atsimg]


Enjoy!

[edit on 30-3-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by Exuberant1


The Clementine images and the others that are commonly posted by anomaly hunters have always struck me as unremarkable.

However...

Some time ago I came across an online archive of moon photos housed by Arizona State University’s Space Exploration Resources. They didn't resemble any of the moon photos I've seen before from earlier or later missions, either. They are LO photos that were digitally scanned by the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston, TX.

Without going into specific details it's safe to say that they are 100% legitimate. And this is one of the primary reasons it hooked me as well as it did.

The specific image I am talking about is from this exact location: ser.sese.asu.edu... Zoom in some and have a good look around this area.

The place is littered with all kinds geometry that doesn't seem to really fit the location. But the real curiosity stood out after I zoomed in and started examining it more closely, and came across this:



There is no reason why that structure should be there given all geological evidence and what we know of the moon. It is absolutely inexplicable.

Whatever it is, it is also incredibly massive. And because of its size it's safe to assume we didn't put it there. There would never be a Saturn V big enough to haul something like that.

Since is appears to be completely buried in large amounts of regolith it wouldn't be far-fetched at all to say it would be far more ancient than we can imagine.

[edit on 3/30/2009 by LogicalResponse]

there are geometrical shapes all over mars. this one caught my attention because it kinda looks like a small dome in there.

Still in use, most of what we're seeing. That's the thing, by many species of ets.
Primarily greys though. The real mystery is whether human liasons are occurring with the black projects.

Im not sure if Ive had enough kool-aid yet but all I see is an image zoomed in realllllllly close.

The infrared doesnt prove anything to me except there is alot of squares and rectangles that have been coloured. to jump to the conclusion that these are structures and are currently being used by various ET's seems like a big jump in my opinion.

I can accept the fact that mars may have been a pre-earth for life, but nothing here blows my mind so to speak.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

cant these pictures be explained by pixelation? and if they have been enchanced, can you not tweak them to the point where you will see what you want to see?

Originally posted by mystiq
Still in use, most of what we're seeing...

There is no way to prove that any of these structures are currently being used - sure there may be heat signatures that are both abnormal and persistent - but we have yet to see any images of any current activity...

In any case, Here is one place that I would suspect of being used recently - at least, more recently that the city buried under the mud in Cydonia.

It appears to be a gigantic geodesic dome, built in a crater in order to maximize protection from the elements. Its size is astounding; A width of 38 pixels at 4.47m per pixel yields a diameter of 169.86 meters or 557.28 feet
(The dome at Disney World is only 265 feet in diameter):

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a8c00615431f.jpg[/atsimg]


*Here is a 3D rendering of the geodesic dome in the above image -
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/657ebbf699c0.jpg[/atsimg]

Originally posted by epitaph.one
cant these pictures be explained by pixelation?

Not "pixelation": Compression algorithms. That's what the supposed Martian city is on the blue colored images above for example. Well that or maybe resize algorithms, depending on the situation. It often look about the same since its either about removing information and replace it with similar as pixels next to it or creating dummy information that's similar to the pixels next to it.

In regards to the first image, I dont really see how one can compare them unless someone can specify the scale and resolution. For all we know the Iranian ruin could be the eqvivalent of a single pixel on the Martian image, which probably indicate natural features unless Martians are really, really, really, really big.

[edit on 30-3-2009 by merka]

Some interesting images. Although I can't see much in most of them, one or two are very intriguing. Nice find.

All the more reason we should be getting our arses to Mars sharpish.

Originally posted by merka

Not "pixelation": Compression algorithms. That's what the supposed Martian city is on the blue colored images above for example.

Wrong.

Do you even bother to read the accompanying links that I post?

For more information on the image and how it was released, please read the provided relevant links.

*In any case, please provide an image of a similar compression artifacts. Until you manage to do this simple thing, your hypothesis is nothing more than uncorroborated opinion, lacking any substantiation whatsoever (and formed without the facts)

Please read the marsnews link. At the very least, acquaint yourself with how the image came into the hands of the public.


Cheers!



[edit on 30-3-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by mystiq


Very hard to prove.

The same with the structures on the moon, no evidence has been gathered or circulated to prove those artificial locations are in use.

Some pretty provocative images in this thread, I'm a strong believer that at one time Mars may have supported a civilization much like ours at this current point.

If I'm not mistaken I've heard here and there throughout my research that scientist believe that Mars supported life. I can see how structures could be buried beneath the red planet after millions of years.

I do doubt however that these structures are of any use currently.

reply to post by Exuberant1

It would be helpful to provide links to the source of the images. It would be nice to know the location and how the image was produced.

Originally posted by Phage

It would be helpful to provide links to the source of the images. It would be nice to know the location and how the image was produced.

Everything you need is in my posts.

I have provided enough information for you to find out that it is a THEMIS image of Cydonia that was leaked to Keith Laney by Noel Gorelick From NASA/JPL/ASU, while heading the THEMIS imaging project, and who posed as a member named 'BAMF on the TEM forum...

As for the Geodesic Dome image, I don't particularly care where it is - it is a Dome on Mars. ;-P

*More images to come!

reply to post by SuperSlovak


Here is a unique image of what appears to be the ruins of an ancient fort or town wall - in any case, this rectilinear formation is quite interesting:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/929bc321e92a.gif[/atsimg]


*Here is an awesome comparison set by Keith Laney, comparing the ruins of a Martian city to their earth counterparts - Very interesting:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/988315beaf11.jpg[/atsimg]


Hey Phage, here is one of those sources you say you want... It is just for the first image, you are on your own with the second - I have credited the researcher, the rest is up to you. ;-)
ida.wr.usgs.gov...

[edit on 30-3-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by Exuberant1

As for the Geodesic Dome image, I don't particularly care where it is - it is a Dome on Mars. ;-P

You maybe don´t care, but me and others will like to say
we care.

Hey Phag, here is one of those sources you say you want... It is just for the first image, you are own your own with the second - I have credited the researcher, the rest is up to you. ;-)

Why don´t you use the sources as something to prove your
point? Why turn so rude? There is nothing wrong in sources,
and i know this was not a reply to me, but i like when peps
present their work and sources.