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: 6
33
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
the image looks really bad IMO. NASA has billions of dollars in their budget, but cannot send a fregen good camera to mars?

from what the image shows, they look like trees, but they could also be just debris as they mention.

i have a hard time believing that these might be trees. How cold is it at Mars's surface? from what i remember it goes way below zero on the surface. i don't think plants could survive in those conditions.




posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenstorm
It's not the first time they caught trees on camera.
All optical illusions...



I knew the recent face picture from the video had to have been smudged or messed with because it was so far gone that it didn't even show the variances of height in the structure. After them explaining in the vidoe the High res filter and low res filter and then the averaging, that tells me everything. It tells me that they saw that face structure and knew that if they showed it in high detail that there would be no doubt that it was built by intelligent beings. So they had to cover it up. Also the trees in the video, I wrote about those and what Arthur C Clarke said about them. He made comment they look like the Banan or Baanan trees in India. You can't explain that away as sediment rolling off a sand hill. Those trees make shadow where they should if the sun shines in a certain direction (to whatever direction and under the tree. Believe it or not it could be a petrified forest. Hoagland made comment also about Mars being a moon of a planet that exploded. It's entirely possible that our solar system had 3 habitable worlds, 2 planets and one habitable moon circling the one destroyed. And as the guy commented on the video this happening millions instead of billions of years ago (it would explain the asteroid belt). The say that the asteroid belt formed from the primordial solar nebula as a group of planetesimals, the smaller precursors of the planets. I can believe that, but what if the Mars's planet blew apart and added it's debris to the field. The asteriod belt is between mars and jupiter. And it could explain the cataclysm or isms that happened on this planet.

If a planet exploded or broke apart for some reason, it wouldn't have the delta V for the debris to escape out of the system. It would form into a massive shotgun debris of particles traveling around the inner system eventually crashing into planets (Earth, Dinosaur extinction or the flood cataclysm from an ancient time etc.). Then the majority of the debris would settle into an orbit.

Wouldn't it be funny that we or two different civilizations may have existed in this system, and a cataclysm of one of the planets exploding (which would be enough) destroyed both of us to the point that we forgot what we used to be and how far we have come.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zedd31415

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??


NOT ME,... NASA!



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Angus123
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.


This guy took the words out of my mouth.
I believe the official scientific story.

Never mind the trees, I think the terrain is very interesting to say the least.

However, even though it may be co2 of some form; this looks like an oil field in Iraq that is in pristine condition.

If TPTB "really" had their head screwed on. They would pump all their energy, money, resources and time into building industrial spacecraft and grab all the oil out of Mars. Mars looks like one giant oil field, as if all the ancient "good stuff" is just a few hundred feet under the sand.

TPTB should leave the oil in our Earth, let our planet have all its original "sauce" of minerals and leech of the other planets that contains no life. Earth would be like a palace then.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by 0010110011101
 


So wait...in order to debunk that those things are actually 'trees', they just go ahead and say that there's ice on Mars...
Ice.
As in...frozen water...on Mars...
Wasn't Mars supposed to have been described, by NASA, as a barren desert with absolutely no water on it?
Has the official stance been detracted?
When was this and how could've I missed it?!?



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 06:01 PM
link   
definitely not trees.

I seen the low resolution picture and thought wow that's interesting.

I clicked on the super high res picture.

and immediately it was obvious.

It's not trees.


Use your brains people, not everything is a conspiracy.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   
This thread is absolutely killing me


Why can people not grasp the basic idea of if NASA were hiding trees (of all things) from us, then why would they release not only a normal picture, but a pretty decent quality one?
Its akin to NASA taking a picture of an alien building a snowman on one of Mars' polar caps, releasing it to the public and then saying 'umm, yea.. thats just a couple of rocks... pictured from a funny angle'.
If they dont want us to see something then they dont have to show it, full stop. They could take pictures of Hawaii and tell us its mars if they want, its not like anyone can check!



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   
I would love to find trees as much as anyone. And I cannot prove beyond all doubt or with absolute, unequivocal certainty, that they are not trees. However, they do not look like trees to me based on the photo.

There are several alleged "trees" in the large photo which are flush against the sides of the "dunes," and thus not appearing to grow out of the ground like trees. Since they look virtually identical to the others which do appear to be protruding out of the ground, it seems like the latter really are an optical illusion, based on the former not appearing to be trees.

I have highlighted the ones I'm referring to in the photo (use the scroll bar to see the rest of the highlights):




posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 06:34 PM
link   
ROTATE THE IMAGE UPSIDE DOWN...
The real perspective....



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 06:35 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.



looks alot like coral reff to me



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Imagir
 


That makes even more sense, in my opinion.

The way the "trees" are flush against the dunes, casting no shadows, and following the curvature or the dunes' edges perfectly, really indicates to me that they are on the surface of the dunes, not protruding from the ground and up into the air like growing vegetation.

I can't know for certain without setting foot on Mars, of course. (Oh, that I could.)



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   
It would be very cool if these were indeed trees or some type of vegetation, and initially I really thought it was a picture of exactly that. However, after seeing the larger image and taking a close look I unfortunately have to conclude that NASA is correct on this one (at least about it not being trees).

As someone mentioned, if they were in fact trees NASA would never allow the photos to be released.


On another note, when oh when will we finally get some up close "Blu-Ray" quality images/video of what's up there?



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 06:56 PM
link   
So there term trees automatically provokes images of a green environment and yet even on this site everyone is responding to a news sites which indicate's a manipulation of subconscious programming.

Have you not been taught anything from this site ?



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by AceWombat04
reply to post by Imagir
 


That makes even more sense, in my opinion.

The way the "trees" are flush against the dunes, casting no shadows, and following the curvature or the dunes' edges perfectly, really indicates to me that they are on the surface of the dunes, not protruding from the ground and up into the air like growing vegetation.

I can't know for certain without setting foot on Mars, of course. (Oh, that I could.)


Thanks.

Perspective is all.
As usual never trust in NASA images, even if sometime, something slip out...



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   
NASA is making fun of everyone who claimed to see HUGE trees without shadows in the past.

Pretty cool pic though



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 07:27 PM
link   
quote from the article





The "trees" are really trails of debris caused by landslides as ice melts in Mars's spring Photo: NASA






The images appear to show rows of dark "conifers" sprouting from dunes and hills on the planet surface. But the scene is actually an optical illusion.


right i am sure its only an optical illusion thats what nasa wants us to believe.





The "trees" are really trails of debris caused by landslides as ice melts in Mars's spring. You can even see a cloud of dust, just to the left of centre of the picture, where an avalanche is caught happening


Sorry i am having a bit hard finding that on that picture, wheres the avalanche? and what avalanche?



Maybe its time to stop believing in NASA its a waste of an organization
they still want us to believe MARS is red and has still has no life.


Get grip people time to wake up.




One more thing why was NASA and the western media why they did came so quick to dismiss this?

[edit on 13-1-2010 by Agent_USA_Supporter]



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   
i never would have thought "trees" if it hadn't been mentioned.
although this is a very cool picture and i appreciate a good photo of some part of the universe i couldn't easily visit myself.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   
The image just doesnt look right. But of course we depend on nasa to never fake anything and to always be truthful with us.
I knew a lady that painted over old fotos for a living. she would restore them to like new or make old black and whites into color. This reminds me of that. Also to me it looks like stands of left over trunks of trees from a terribly hot volcanic blast (notice they seem like they are in ravines and low areas that may have protected them) and they are petrified and yes many could be lying down and are loosing deris off them. The pic just dont look right.
but thats just my opine



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Barkster
 


every photo of mars we had might be have faked by NASA, They do have the power and the tools, so why should we believe anything NASA says anymore?


there nothing more then spinners.


(Theres no water on the moon)
(Theres water on the on moon)

Get it?



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by happygolucky
 


You are obviously not aware that what I typed was meant as a joke, henceforth proving you have no sense of humor what-so-ever. I always play on the fact that idiots make claims, such as "swamp gas" or "reflections." It's in no way meant to take away from the discussion at hand, but instead to provide a laugh now and then, to remember how so many topics of this nature are deflected by disinformants.




top topics



 
33
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join