NASA Mars Anomalies 2010 *new video*

reply to post by Exuberant1


Exuberant your as bad as Imagir your pictures are zoomed in so much its not detail is artifacts from scanning and pixels NOT detail ,Lear, Hoagland and Laney are all like that its like join the dots in a shape they THINK they see and colour it in please post a link to the originals so we can see the scale of these so called buildings under the surface

Look at this one you posted no REAL detail and in your post you see the pixels I know your not that dumb!

img156.imageshack.us...

Now for a Guessing Game with no image context (Armap, Mikesingh, sit this one out)

Is it A Flying Saucer UFO or a Moon Crater...??

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by UfosExiZt

 

Look here

Eyebrows ,eyelashes , eyelids,nose ,nostrils, mouth & posible checkbones so just because someone quotes odd's doesn't mean its true!

Well it certainly looks to be real to me.

Do you have proof that it isn't real or what are you trying to say?

There is just too low probability of that face accuring by natural causes. Someone made it.

reply to post by Exuberant1




VERY Poor image but will go with crater.

reply to post by UfosExiZt




This image if you actually look at it! You can make out trees in the image so not man made its natural provided plenty of links on previous posts which show faces in rocks all over the world!

inlinethumb36.webshots.com...

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

VERY Poor image but will go with crater.

Poor and without context...

...I'll put you down for 'crater'.



*Who's next?

reply to post by wmd_2008

There are several faces and other sculptures etc on mars that probably hasn't accured from natural causes.

The face that was proven to be artificial is just one of these faces on mars.
That face you linked with the trees, how do you know this hasn't been created as well just like on the face on mars has been?

reply to post by Exuberant1




Two points

1) The ignore button mentioned above is also handy for you guys because then when somebody like me posts a nice clear image to contradict your claims its not an issue for you IF you guys were truly convinced about your point of view like me you would never ignore anyone because we they post low res low quality images I can respond with something far better!

2) This image (typical of yours) pixelated or what come on Exuberant1 get something we can see detail in

img213.imageshack.us...

reply to post by wmd_2008

You sure do love your smileys.
Interesting you are the only one "laughing"....
Nothing in your posts are funny, you are just being closed minded. A shame really....

reply to post by wmd_2008


Well I'm putting you on ignore now. You can imagine reasons for it - but you are annoying and I haven't found you posting anything useful during the past few months; Nothing at all.

There is no sense continuing to beg us not to put you on ignore.

It will be frustrating for you, but I'm sure you will eventually post something noteworthy and find yourself off the numerous ignore lists you are currently on.


Edit:

Also, If you cease abusing the emoticons and maybe you'll find yourself taken more seriously.



UfosExiZt,

So what do you think of the image up above, Is it a saucer UFO or a moon crater?


You've got a 50/50 chance of being correct!




[edit on 10-1-2010 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by Exuberant1




HE has a 100% chance of being right if he knows what to do!

reply to post by Exuberant1

It definately doesnt look like a crater at all to me.
It looks like it is dome shaped.
Maybe a saucer or maybe some sort of structure. Hard to say really...

Well Exuberant and others may not see this

What this.









Is it a rock on the sufrace






Or is it a crater



It depends on how you look at it thats why good quality images are required not like some of the rubbish posted a few posts above!



[edit on 10-1-2010 by wmd_2008]

reply to post by Exuberant1


I vote for Sept. 4, 1971; Lago de Cote, Costa Rica
Aerial survey plane photo showing disc on edge





Or am I wrong?

[edit on 10-1-2010 by derpif]

Here's something to lighten things up for the people on here who are far to serious about this subject

new hi -res picture of face on Mars showing new detail!

www.needlesports.com...

On more serious note look at this picture look at centre of the rock for
man with hands on hips.

www.needlesports.com...

If that appeared on a Mars picture no doubt it would be a statue its just rocks your mind fills in the blanks.


In fact a link to this site for people that think detailed looking faces cant just occur in nature.

www.needlesports.com...



[edit on 10-1-2010 by wmd_2008]

[edit on 10-1-2010 by wmd_2008]

Originally posted by derpif
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

I vote for Sept. 4, 1971; Lago de Cote, Costa Rica
Aerial survey plane photo showing disc on edge





Or am I wrong?

[edit on 10-1-2010 by derpif]

It's just a crater

reply to post by wmd_2008

You ignored my question.
How do you even know any of these faces you link to hasn't been created like the face on mars was?

reply to post by UfosExiZt


Geologists have had a look no evidence to show its made but if you bother to look at the op video he claims that around the Mars face are signs of stone blocks etc although how he can say that from the poor quality image he used is anyones guess!

reply to post by Exuberant1


Exuberant you are very skilled about analyzing and enchant images,please take a look at this and tell me what do you think about.

Originally posted by derpif

I vote for Sept. 4, 1971; Lago de Cote, Costa Rica
Aerial survey plane photo showing disc on edge

Or am I wrong?

Nope!

You are Correct - Even more correct than Imagir who was also correct





The only one who was totally wrong was WMD_2008.