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 peacejet
reply to post by mikesingh
Actually, we cannot come into a conclusion regarding this, because in the first image taken by viking, a majority of the "destroyed" portion lies in the shadow.
A close-up enlargement of this fascinating object (above – bottom), reveals an apparently "snapped off" body geometry, at least five visible cylindrical "segments," and a hint of other fossil-like features buried in the surrounding rock itself – all classic hallmarks of a former living organism!
So, what did the JPL Rover science Team do with this potentially explosive scientific find …?
They promptly ground it into powder … right before our eyes (PanCAm color image, below)!
Quoting from one correspondent, James Calhoun:
I have been a collector of marine fossils for 34 years, an amateur to be sure, but with years of field experience. When I saw the "Fossil" pic [on "Enterprise"], it was clear to me that it met a number of the basic criteria of fossilization. RCH was correct in that "scale does not matter," as the physical characteristics of the item are immediately apparent, and it is sad that the MER team did not present a professional paleontologist to comment. In that light, I have heard a varied number of explanations as to what type of fossil this could be, everything from a segmented worm (annelid) to a shrimp (crustacean). I would like you guys to consider that based on the symmetry of the object, that it could be in fact an early Crinoid, a filter feeding marine plant-like animal, a type with a calcium carbonate exoskeleton (this is Earth-based of course, the Martian exoskeleton [could] have been of a differing mineral composition). I have included a couple of pictures for symmetry and scale reference. Notice the triangular symmetry in the "branch areas," not to mention the segments, and also that the scale is inline with the "size of the blueberries." Your opinion would be most appreciated. Thanks for your time and I appreciate the work the team does." ...
What are the odds of two independent experts – who have never met, let alone talked to one another on this subject! – separately identifying this specific crinoid's fossil on a random Martian image ... and then, the precise region on Earth where it's counterpart is found?!
OK, what's a "Crinoid?"
A crinoid [sometimes called a "sea lily," because of its superficial appearance to a spreading flower (below)] is, as James Calhoun described, "a filter feeding, marine, plant-like animal …." Crinoids first appeared in Earth's primeval seas over 500 million years ago, in the so-called "Cambrian Era," climbing to dominance over the next 150 million years, before receding once again in the terrestrial fossil record. ...
The mysteries presented by this astonishing discovery are far too complex to even begin to explore in any depth here. But a few questions seem in order ….
Given that this is real, that all of us now who have independently looked at this, and come to the same conclusion -- that this could in fact be a genuine Martian fossil at Maridiani Planum -- are not delusional … what could it mean?
A few days after the acquisition of this remarkable image, NASA held a sudden "water press conference" in Washington DC. There they announced, with much fanfare, that Opportunity had discovered – via its analytical equipment, measuring the chemistry of the outcrop -- that the site it was exploring once " was soaking wet in the past." While refraining from also claiming that "Opportunity Ledge's" layers of sediments had been laid down in actual liquid water, they came very close … and hinted that this confirmation could come "as early as a few days."
Originally posted by Solomons
All mikes pictures he has brought up have never shown anything that even remotley comes close to showing remnants of a civilization or signs of intelligence.
Originally posted by Vector J
But more seriously, you can't compare the old picture to the new one, different angle, different resolution, massive difference in shadowing. You just can't make a decent comparison from what you've posted...