NASA Moon Anomalies III - Other Peoples Work

reply to post by ArMaP

You refused to comment on the pictures that actually look like trees.

Have you forgotten about these, or are you just selectively ignoring what can't easily be explained away?

Not all pictures resembles trees, I've never said this.

I've said that some pictures show what looks like trees.

I repeat my question since you ignored it:

Have these images been faked and how come the trees expand and then get smaller depending on the season, if indeed, they weren't plants?

2 questions you need to answer.

Until then, trees will remain to be trees just like you see in the image I posted.

edit, here are some more tree pictures:
www.ultor.org...
mars.galactic.to...
A lake and trees on mars:
mars.galactic.to...
A small article about these plants:
www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

Conclusion: Only the images that looks like trees argues for the theory 'Trees exist on mars', not the ones that does not look like trees. Posting images of areas with no trees does not proove that there aren't any trees on mars. Just really dumb ppl reason like this.........

[edit on 15-1-2010 by UfosExiZt]

reply to post by UfosExiZt

You just don't seem to get it, do you? You're like an old gramophone needle stuck in a groove!

I'm reproducing those 'trees' you posted that you insist are trees! Here's the HiRISE image of what is known as the 'Starburst'. And hey, I've made them a trifle green too!!



Zoomed through the IAS Viewer....



You still insist these are trees? I've already given the explanation in one of my earlier posts. I don't intend wasting more time repeating it.

yea thats what i figured shrike......

how bout evidence that you attended that meeting and have an autographed gift to take home?

reply to post by C-Reilly


lololol,

orionx, it's not trees dude, it's shrubbery!


let's get a pic of rocks instead of trees there. where are the rocks?

???? why the reply to me????

anyway.... just in case.... i never stated that there was foliage on mars....

i also never stated that it would be impossible for there to be foliage on mars.....

Originally posted by C-Reilly
yea thats what i figured shrike......

how bout evidence that you attended that meeting and have an autographed gift to take home?

If I wanted to impress you, I'd go through the trouble of moving a ton of feces to locate it. But trust me, I have it. However, understand primarily that I don't want to impress you. I'll look for the press kit by next shavuot!

Originally posted by The Shrike
Fred Steckling: I have his signed letter admitting that he made major mistakes in his book regarding what he claimed he saw in NASA photos. I'll be more than glad to post it here if requested.

George Leonard, like Fred, had nothing to support his similar claims either and he is known to have remarked that he wished that he never got involved with the subject.

John Lear, #1 ATS nut. Never has one individual, aside from Edgar Mitchell, uttered totally nutzoid comments. Just ask around.

Ingo Swann is as good a "remote viewer" as the Bushes were great presidents!

Richard Hoagland and his sidekick Michael "Mike" Bara are the biggest morons associated with lunar structures, more so than Steckling.

Do you have any real data to back up those quite harsh comments, or is it just opinions?

Originally posted by UfosExiZt
You refused to comment on the pictures that actually look like trees.

The fact that I didn't comment doesn't mean I refused, it means only that I didn't comment.

Not all pictures resembles trees, I've never said this.

I never said you did.

I've said that some pictures show what looks like trees.

And I assumed (apparently wrongly) that you were talking about those areas.

Have these images been faked and how come the trees expand and then get smaller depending on the season, if indeed, they weren't plants?

First of all, what images are you talking about? If you don't present specific images how can I comment them?

If you are talking about original NASA photos, I have never seen a science photo from NASA that looked faked, if you are talking about images on private sites, then I have seen several altered photos, but not necessarily faked.

As I do not know what images show those "trees" expanding and getting smaller I cannot comment on that, at least until I see those photos.

2 questions you need to answer.

I don't need to answer, but I will do it when I have something specific to comment.

Until then, trees will remain to be trees just like you see in the image I posted.

Which photo, the one from my link or the other one?

edit, here are some more tree pictures:
www.ultor.org...
mars.galactic.to...
A lake and trees on mars:
mars.galactic.to...
A small article about these plants:
www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

Do you want me to comment those photos?

Conclusion: Only the images that looks like trees argues for the theory 'Trees exist on mars', not the ones that does not look like trees.

Posting images of areas with no trees does not proove that there aren't any trees on mars. Just really dumb ppl reason like this.........

Obviously, but try to see things from my point of view. I don't see anything that looks like trees on those photos (and I was already saying that before the higher resolution HiRISE photos, I always thought that there wasn't anything showing height on those features, they look flat), so, to me, there aren't any photos that show things that look like trees.

I can only look for photos with similar looking (to me, obviously) things, but if you think they are not the same that is something that I can only know after you saying it, I cannot know what you are thinking.

Originally posted by moniker

Originally posted by The Shrike
Fred Steckling: I have his signed letter admitting that he made major mistakes in his book regarding what he claimed he saw in NASA photos. I'll be more than glad to post it here if requested.

George Leonard, like Fred, had nothing to support his similar claims either and he is known to have remarked that he wished that he never got involved with the subject.

John Lear, #1 ATS nut. Never has one individual, aside from Edgar Mitchell, uttered totally nutzoid comments. Just ask around.

Ingo Swann is as good a "remote viewer" as the Bushes were great presidents!

Richard Hoagland and his sidekick Michael "Mike" Bara are the biggest morons associated with lunar structures, more so than Steckling.

Do you have any real data to back up those quite harsh comments, or is it just opinions?

no he doesnt.... he expects to be allowed to make ridiculous claims with no evidence, yet everyone else has to show HIM proof.....

terrible debunker..... go play in the sand shrike

if everyone did it your way... there would never be evidence, just a bunch of crappy claims.....

oh and trust me.... i dont think you could impress much of anyone

reply to post by OrionHunterX

They sure do look like trees.

But they don't have to be trees, they can just be some sort of plants.

This would explain the blooming in certain seasons, just like plants on earth do.

The green color is just to highlight the plants, maybe they are green or maybe they are blue.

reply to post by ArMaP

Sure comment on the pictures if you want.
To me they all look like trees, and the lake is nice too.

What part of what image was zoomed. Is this the so called HiRISE picture?
Clearification needed. Stop. Explain the plant behaviour. Stop. Explain why none of the plant like objects in the photos can't be plants. Stop.



[edit on 16-1-2010 by UfosExiZt]

Originally posted by UfosExiZt
Sure comment on the pictures if you want.
To me they all look like trees, and the lake is nice too.

If I want? I thought that was what you wanted.

What part of what image was zoomed. Is this the so called HiRISE picture?

Are you talking about this image?


If you are, then this image is part of this image, the one you posted here.

The small image I posted is the blue rectangle on the image below, that shows a resized (to 10%) version of the photo from the link you posted.


The other images I posted show that spider-looking feature at 12.5%, 50% and 100% zoom, from the original image, not the JPEG version from the link you posted.

Explain the plant behaviour

What plant behaviour? Show me that plant behaviour, only then can I say anything about it, I like to know if I am talking about the same thing as the other person (in this case, you), I hate misunderstandings.

Explain why none of the plant like objects in the photos can't be plants.

Which photos? Be specific, please. If you don't point to a specific photo I may use a photo of something that you think does not look like trees. Tell me exactly what you want to me to talk about, that's the only way of avoiding the back and forth that leads to nowhere that we are having on this thread, and it's even off-topic.

PS: I would like to ask you to explain yourself the best you can, for some reason I am having a hard time understanding what you mean, probably because I am not a native English speaker and I never had English classes. Thanks in advance.

so,
now it's a thread about mars ??

reply to post by mixmix


Don't worry - I'm back now


Apollo 17 UFO Photographed by Moonwalking Astronauts


Whilst looking through the Apollo images again, and I came across one that contained a strange object in it - and which was gone from the next image.... only to return again a few frames later.


...Now You see it:

And now it's Gone...:

And a few frames later...It's Back!

The first frame containing the object was AS17-134-20416, the second was AS17-124-20424 (get both images at the links below). *The object is missing from all the frames in between.

history.nasa.gov...

history.nasa.gov...

I used frame AS17-134-20417 for the middle image in which the object is missing: history.nasa.gov...

reply to post by ArMaP

Ah now I can see the zoomed area.

The other ones I posted looks like trees outzoomed though. I haven't seen this zoomed in.

The plant behaviour is blooming in certain seasons. Then they retract just like in winter (leavs falling off etc).

reply to post by Exuberant1

Very interesting.

It might be one of the real ufos or it might just be a lamp in the studio

from LRO M102781342LE.IMG liine 7

a pyramid on the bottom left

a tower on the middle

a bright spot on the right: up of a tower

Originally posted by UfosExiZt

It might be one of the real ufos or it might just be a lamp in the studio

If it is either then it certainly is profound.

And I found this one. It is an Exuberant1 original find. .

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by UfosExiZt

It might be one of the real ufos or it might just be a lamp in the studio

If it is either then it certainly is profound.

And I found this one. It is an Exuberant1 original find. .

Wow didn't know that

One amazing find!!

reply to post by UfosExiZt


Everything I have posted on this thread so far was found by me - unless labeled otherwise (like Mike's Tower or my brother's blue rocket-like object).