It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

NASA photographs "Trees" on Mars

page: 5
33
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 03:49 PM
link   
It's a very interesting visual, it dose look as though there is tree's, in regards to somekind of branches spread out when you zoom in to the picture, although i have to be sekptical, bcause, if this was true i doubt nasa would disclose it.

If there is trees and there is obviously now ice which is water on mars, then, there will be life, that is certain fact, without water in my opinon they would not be life, if there is trees then there is deffantly intellgent life forms or beings on that planet.




posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erasurehead
Amazing photo. I don't exactly buy their explanation. According to the article the "trees" are really trails of debris caused by landslides as ice melts in Mars's spring.

Photo: NASA

Looks like trees to me..


I don't buy their explanation either. Since when do "trails of debris" go upward? Have you ever seen a trail of debris anywhere on Earth that looks like that? It sort of goes against the laws of physics.

So, unless the laws of physics are fundamentally different on Mars, I don't buy that explanation.

Debris, my a#*$



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
Unfortunately if you look at the big image,



you will see that sadly they are not trees. Just look close, you can tell.


At the bottom of the large image there are things jutting out of those cracks that do look "tree-like" as they have branches towards the top portion. Who is to say that martian trees look like earth trees? In fact, they wouldn't since they would have a different biology from any trees on earth.

You can't say they AREN'T trees by looking at that picture, since as I have pointed out, the row of things sprouting from those cracks in the sand do have trunks with branches.

Look again closely and you will see what I mean.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by anonymousproxy
It's a very interesting visual, it dose look as though there is tree's, in regards to somekind of branches spread out when you zoom in to the picture, although i have to be sekptical, bcause, if this was true i doubt nasa would disclose it.

If there is trees and there is obviously now ice which is water on mars, then, there will be life, that is certain fact, without water in my opinon they would not be life, if there is trees then there is deffantly intellgent life forms or beings on that planet.


How does there being trees make it guaranteed that there would be intelligent life?



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 03:59 PM
link   
If they were trees they would be all growing in the same direction, towards the light. They point in too different directions there would have to be multiple light sources.

[edit on 13-1-2010 by redzi0n]



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by mryanbrown
I for one am sick of arguments over low res images. It's 2010. Give me anything less than a 100m perspective or 5MP picture and I won't even care. There's not enough resolution in this image to discuss it either way.



Seems to me with all the high quality technology available to NASA and all the money it has, not sending a better camera is suspicious to begin with.

On many missions they have opted to send cameras that don't record colors in the green spectrum from what I have read, and this is the reason many Mars photos (but certainly not all) are exclusively red/orange.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fr33Q
Here are more sources about this.
There is also a link to a big, close-up image...
Hope you find more info in these sources...

Source 1: DiscoverMag


Source 2: HiRISE

Big Image:



TY.

After looking at the larger image it seems clear to me like it is an optical illusion, in fact when you see them in more detail they look nothing like trees. Also the perspective is all wrong for them to be trees.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by nikiano

Originally posted by Erasurehead
Amazing photo. I don't exactly buy their explanation. According to the article the "trees" are really trails of debris caused by landslides as ice melts in Mars's spring.

Photo: NASA

Looks like trees to me..


I don't buy their explanation either. Since when do "trails of debris" go upward? Have you ever seen a trail of debris anywhere on Earth that looks like that? It sort of goes against the laws of physics.

So, unless the laws of physics are fundamentally different on Mars, I don't buy that explanation.

Debris, my a#*$


Errr... that image is taken from high orbit pointing towards the martian surface... which means the ONLY way those could be trees is if they were all blown over and are now laying down horizontally on the ground. which they are not.

This is NOT an image taken close to the surface with the camera angled towards the horizon and as such the 'tree's are NOT pointing up. Its as NASA says.. trails of what ever running down the sides of hills and dunes. You can tell that by noticing the rough sand dune areas that appear to be sitting between the gullies of the larger hills, the lighting and placement of them easily tell you your viewing an image taken from directly above the area... also what your looking at is more than likely a few square miles of martian terrain... if those where trees, blown over or otherwise... they'd be giants.

Hey I believe NASA lies alot, but like others have said this is nothing (like 99% of the other mars anomalies) but images being miss read by un perceptive people, reading to much into em.

People see lines with bulbs on top pointing 'up' from the 'tops' of hills with dark bases in an image and the first thing their brain does is attribute them to known objects in their surroundings in order to understand them... as such your mind says 'trees' since thats all it has to go by. The mind isnt always right
not to mention easily fooled because of it.


[edit on 13-1-2010 by BigfootNZ]



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by nikiano
 




I don't buy their explanation either. Since when do "trails of debris" go upward? Have you ever seen a trail of debris anywhere on Earth that looks like that? It sort of goes against the laws of physics.


But since when do 'trees' grow upside down? In the big image were it is possible to zoom it is clear that some of those 'trees' are upside down. Not trees in my opinion.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   
I bet those trees are getting all the Co2 they need. Its dipndops temp. too!



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 04:23 PM
link   
If they are trees.

1) They are super tall.

2) They give no shadow?

So yeah, I am thinking they are not trees.

Must be something else entirely, being there are no discernable shadows coming from them.

Note the small sand dunes have shadows.

The sunlight should be coming from the Right side of the photo, as the shadows from the sand dunes lean towards the left.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by MarkLuitzen
 


They do look really interesting, but i don't think i'd go so far as to call them "tall" based on one picture. What i see is a ridge with markings starting at the point and streaking down either side. Do i think its "debris" as NASA claims, no. What exactly does "debris" consist of anyways?



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   


If you look at the middle top of the image, there is one little patch of the "trees" that are pointing down towards the bottom of the photograph. Every other patch is pointing towards the top. Now if these were fallen trees they would not have fallen in such a neat and precise manner as to look exactly as they were when they were standing.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   
If a martian citizen stood there in plain sight, wearing a bright blue jump suit and waving his hand, they'd still sell it as an "optical illusion" and try to explain that it's a rock or some crap like that. Why can't they just come clean? Is it that difficult? Do they think we're that stupid to understand reality?



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Yep. Those sure look like trees to me... Optical Illusion. LOL. NASA really does mean Never A Straight Answer.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   
ASPARAGUS, in my opinion... www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Imagir
ASPARAGUS, in my opinion... www.abovetopsecret.com...


I'm not trying to be a jerk, but do you honestly believe that there is asparagus growing on mars??



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by tyranny22
reply to post by DaMod
 


The High Resolution images does lend more credence to it being trails left by melting sediments.

However the trail doesn't seem to follow the contour of the landscape on MOST of the "artifacts".

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing ... just making an observation.


I agree, that it's an optical illusion on some of them but others don't fit the contour as well.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fr33Q
Here are more sources about this.
There is also a link to a big, close-up image...
Hope you find more info in these sources...

Source 1: DiscoverMag


Source 2: HiRISE

Big Image:



TY.



Top-center of the large image, these "trees" appear to be upside-down... Therefore it appears to me that they are not trees, or even anything sticking out of the ground for that matter. Just looks like stuff on the ground.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 05:12 PM
link   
They look a lot like trees, but none of them are casting shadows.
As cool as it would be to believe otherwise, I think this time I actually buy the official explanation.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join