It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Intriguing Phobos Anomaly!!!

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 05:21 AM
reply to post by Misfit

i dont bite when skeptics throw a view point over .
they are the people you meet in the pub you wouldnt normally talk to.
they love to argue and are arogant and blind to any other possibility and wont even spend time to study stuff.because in my opinion it dont fall in there comfort zone.

they remind me of pit ponys

very interesting photo

[edit on 18-10-2009 by dashar]

posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 05:30 AM
Thanks for the replies guys, hmm, now it would be intersting if it was indeed the lost probe, anyone have any pics to compare......geez phobos is a very interesting satelite indeed.

posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 10:25 AM
reply to post by Outlawstar

I found an image of the Phobos Spacecraft.

Not sure of the dimensions of the Probe will keep looking, it had 28 thrusters so must have been pretty big.

Here is a link to the Wiki page about the Probe, still cant see any size information.

Don't even have to stretch the imagination much, the shape does have some similarities, one of the anomalies you pointed out does look like the so called Monolith, but the second does look like a debris field, and if it did hit Phobos (Phobos II ) it does not have to have been completely destroyed, that was proven when they crashed a recent probe into an asteroid, and it was never their intention to do so, it kind of just bounced a little on impact.

If it does turn out to be Phobos II, then there will be a little excitement about it, you cant discover a 20 year old missing probe and it not be, especially when these Images have been looked at thousands of times and nobody noticed?

It does not fit in with the surrounding terrain, but size is everything where this is concerned, and that surely can be figured out, because we know the scale of the image I should imagine, and will find the probe dimensions, maybe all 3 anomalies, because there is a third to the lower right are the Probe and the two landers, but I'm reaching there, as for it being the Monolith, the location of that is well documented, so can be ruled out pretty quick. or confirmed either way.

Again great find.

posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 10:31 PM
Looks like this is one of those threads, where it will disappear into oblivion, without a reason to do so.

The OP has asked a reasonable question, normally these threads go on for days if not weeks, yet it dies, it has been said in some posts, that it is the Phobos Monolith, yet clearly is not, so it becomes unimportant?

I find that to be a real shame I really do, a possible distraction from the insanity happening elsewhere, it amuses me sometimes that one poster can produce a thread full of total BS and it becomes thread of the week, and another such as this just melts into obscurity, or perhaps this topic will return in a week or two by another member.

There was a thread a couple of months ago, by a MOD, saw something in orbit around the moon, backed up by other video proof by another member, the object was screen captured and proven to be there and huge, and I do mean it was huge.

Yet as soon as the evidence went up, nobody wanted to know anymore, I don't understand can someone please explain it? are these threads a taboo of sorts? is there fear of really discovering some truth or evidence, that when it comes along, heads go down and it's like it never happened?

Sorry OP, I think you deserve much more and your thread should be one of those debated and not ignored.

posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 04:46 PM
reply to post by azzllin

I agree, this is very important even if it turns out to be our long lost Phobos II. That's pretty important news in itself!

Shouldn't we tell someone about this possible Phobos II sighting? I'm sure there are folks that would want to know.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by DaMod]

posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 08:30 PM
Hey guys, thanks for the support, Id also love to see some more input here, in the meantime, Id like to draw your attention to a couple more intruiging anomolies Ive come across in this image, first is these two little fellows which are directly SE of the previous "DebrisShip" anomaly, immediatly the similarity between these and the afformentioned anomaly becomes apparent, and dare I liken the furthest left anomaly to the "bitten dougnut" UFOs that NASAs STS videos have made so infamous.

Heres the first view.

And now further zoomed and picked out, I dare say very intriguing, Id love to hear some opinions on these.

And here we are even closer, note the scattered "debris" here too and how they are very similar to the anomaly, hmm.

Right now thats interesting enough, however unless Im mistaken and what Im about to show is a simply expainable phenomenon, in which case Id love it to be explained, but it seems Phobos is literally littered with "MiniMonoliths" almost like standing stones, discernible by their long shadows, Id really like to know what these are as even if the sun is at a low angle, perhaps hence the shadow length, these "objects" stick out like a sore thumb and are intriguingly aligned in some cases, I genuinly dont know what to make of these and would like some input.

Ive marked the seperate areas of interest here.

1.I found the GIZA-like alignment between these three "standing stones" particularly striking.

2.Here again we find another GIZA-like setup, mere coincidence? Note again the long shadows.

3.Heres a tantalizing trio, seemingly in Pyramid Formation, again if these are some sort of well known geological feature, Id love to know.

4. Heres another trio of "standing stones", this time in a more elongated triangle.

5.The differing shadow lengths on theses is quite intersting, hmm.

6.Hmm, am I clutching at straws with this one, its more contentious, however previous images really leave us no option other than to conlude that these are also "standing stones"

7.And finally(for now) this little guy all alone on the incline of a moon floating pecefully in the plenum of space.....hehe, shadow on this one is quite large too.

So to conclude.
If these really are artificial structures as the evidence I dare say seems to suggest, than it throws a new interesting light on the reason for a mission there perhaps, and the reason maybe for phobos 2's "accident".
Speculation I know, but we gotta start somewhere.

Id love to hear some thoughts on this captivating space rock!!!

Lay it on me.

Regards, Dan.

[edit on 20-10-2009 by Outlawstar]

Mod Note: IMPORTANT: New Policy Regarding Images On ATS – Review This Link.

[edit on Sat Oct 31 2009 by Jbird]

posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 08:51 PM
Thank you.

I had heard Buzz Aldrin speaking about this on a radio program?... then brushed it aside as conspiracy after bringing it up.

These are all very intresting pics. I can see the lost probes for the fist pic you posted at the beginning of the thread, but these raise some serious questions.

These are phobos':
Dimensions 26.8 × 22.4 × 18.4 km[2]
Mean radius 11.1 km[3] (0.0021 Earths)

So these anamolies still have to be pretty good size to make those shadows.
#7 is so clear.

Great Find. Buzz was definitely pushing for public support for a phobos mission. He said it'd be a lot easier to land there than on Mars.

posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 09:26 PM
Thank you Outlaw for the unique satellite photos of Phobos. What I see is the

surface of Phobos being stealthed and I do not expect anyone to see what I am

seeing on the surface. By changing the angle of magnification and light hitting the

surface of the last photo of your first series of photos Posted of Phobos something

remarkable happens. I call this splicing or splitting the layers of the photo and

within these 4D layers I can see perfect humanoid holographic images.

Phobos in my opinion is truly an inhabited space station and the first line of

offense and defense for the planet Mars. These what I call holographic

images are to perfect including helmets, headdresses and crowns to be an

accident. ^Y^

[edit on 20-10-2009 by amari]

posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 09:53 PM
reply to post by amari

Could you post a picture of what you came up with? This is pretty interesting. Almost look like communication towers to me. Is this where they film the show "Earth"?

posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:00 PM
S+F Tthanks for sharing. Very interseting to say the least. Could this be the ' monolith ' that Aldrin mentioned about.

posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 10:29 PM

Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
reply to post by amari

Could you post a picture of what you came up with? This is pretty interesting. Almost look like communication towers to me. Is this where they film the show "Earth"?

The Beings of Phobos filming Earth would be like a rerun of a closed loop bad

movie over and over again. Because this same bad movie has been played

over and over again through out the history of the Universes. ^Y^

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 02:28 AM

Originally posted by dashar
reply to post by Misfit

i dont bite when skeptics throw a view point over .
they are the people you meet in the pub you wouldnt normally talk to.
they love to argue and are arogant and blind to any other possibility and wont even spend time to study stuff.because in my opinion it dont fall in there comfort zone.

they remind me of pit ponys

very interesting photo

[edit on 18-10-2009 by dashar]

I completely agree.
The stories often include "a guy they know" who is "a whiz" in the field anyone is talking about.
They then are rather vague about things, or make bold claims and then attempt to impress upon you that if you do not listen to them and believe what they say, they might get offended and angry, and they'll yell at you. With words. It may even escalate to a fight.


I actually know a guy (lol) just like this. And his dad, too. e_e
It's just nothing but "I know a guy who is the foremost in his field." and then "/BOLD CLAIM FROM LEFT FIELD" although it's also usually some really old thing like "THERE WAS A GUY WHO MADE A CAR THAT RAN ON WATER. HE WAS A GENIUS. THE OIL COMPANIES WOULD HAVE NONE OF IT BECAUSE HE WAS SMARTER THAN THEM. THEY KILLED HIM. OOOOOOH. I'M IN THE KNOW. LOOK AT ME. REVERE ME. RAAAR."


posted on Oct, 26 2009 @ 04:35 AM
Thanks for the replies guys, wish we could get more though

posted on Oct, 31 2009 @ 09:56 AM
Just gottta bump this thread as Id really love to continue this debate and would hope it doesint disappear into the void like so many other topics

posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 09:20 PM
reply to post by Lichter daraus

Too bad we don't know the scale of the terrain. From the depressions that seem spread out to one end of the supposed object, I would guess--if pushed to guess--that the object is a crashed something--which could well be one of our triangle craft and that the depressions are where it tumbled as it came down. (Hence, no ETs involved and why we don't need rockets to fly to the Moon anymore [or want to] or even Mars!)

The regolith (dirt) on Phobos is assumed to be about 100 feet thick (or was that 100 meters?). Anyway, deep! Plus, the gravity is so small that a spacesuited human weights less than an ounce. (I'll look it up if pressed.) But you can throw a baseball into orbit, Sagan said!

But it would have been a very slow crash into the fluffy regolith.for it to be that. Any object of any speed would have bounced off unless it was a tens of thousands-miles-hour meteor with enough immense kinetic energy to burn itself a hole. Whatever, the holes near the object must be connected in some way to it because they are what the author Ivan Sanderson called in his ancient book OOPAs, Out Of Place Artifacts.

posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 09:43 PM
reply to post by 2Faced

Actually, in looking at your blowup, the top image appears to me like a roundish nosecone-like structure protruding from one of the larger holes. That is a good trick to rotate an image of a space body to find the light angle that suits your brain's concept of light and shadow.

For the best sense of a scene, the light should be coming from above right, if possible, but above for sure. Many times I've been looking at Moon craters with the light wrong and my brain sees Hoagland's domes rather than craters. You don't think....Naw. He's smarter than that.

posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 09:52 PM
reply to post by Outlawstar

You evidently have download the images of the seemingly "crash" scenes, and have mentioned changing contrasts, etc. Have you tried a trick that the astrophotographers use? They take multiple images of an astronomical object and then layer them one on top of the other. They do this to bring out diffeent details that the different camera settings allow. They they stack them and get great results that they could never get with any single image.

I'm not trying to just keep the thread running. Phobos is my ancesteral home. (joke!)

posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 10:27 PM

Originally posted by azzllin
Perhaps you have stumbled upon one of the missing probes?
That image could well be the final resting place, contact was lost on a very close approach, and with having two other smaller craft on board, that could explain the domes?

The debris field is not likely the missing Phobos2 probe. It wasn't that large. Remember, it was carried aloft on a rocket, If it crashed, it is not likely the solar panels would have remained in a nice, deployed position showing it optimum size.'

Plus, Phobos2 was approaching the little moon from the right side if looking at the moon from Mars. The debris area is virtually on the top forward edge of the moon. Not likely a place it would have wound up if it lost power/control as it was approaching the right side of Phobos and still some distance away.

Interesting place for the debris areas, in my estimation. Out there on that forward end facing Mars, you could stand there and look down of Mars. That would be a a desired position for visually looking at the planet, no craning your neck to see it overhead or to the side, etc. Just the place I would set up camp.

posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 10:45 PM

Originally posted by Misfit

Have you always been so arrogant, that in the vast universe of countless millenia in age, that only humans are sentient?

Can you close that box up any smaller?

I don't know if it's arrogant. It is mind boggling to think that in the vastness of the universe that this planet might be the only one that has life, and humans might be the highest life form. Mind boggling, but possible.

posted on Nov, 16 2009 @ 10:50 PM
Ah this is what I stay up for. ^__^
Great find! I'm looking forward to reading what everyone else thinks. Giving you a S+F.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in