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.
I'm not really sure what your angle is with this line of questioning other than to "pigeonhole" chance321 into a corner. So, to confirm, is that what you're doing?
I think his answer was the right one. If life can exist in the universe, then we have already conceded that life exists. If life exists, then life might exist elsewhere. If life can exist elsewhere, then life can have existed on Mars.
My point is, once we have considered a possibility as being true, then we must consider other possibilities too. Right?
I don't know about the photo as being true, or false, therefore I'm on the fence.
However, in Richard Hoagland's defense
don't really care for the guy btw
He draws other valuable arguments regarding the geometry in the Cydonian region. Angles measuring 19.5 degrees.
Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
OK something REALLY ISN't right here! the article says this image was released today, but the "black and white version of the NEW photo" is the exact same picture I've had on my hard drive for years now. This is not a new photo at all.
Either mail online is retarded or NASA just re-released an old photo and called it a new one.
HiRISE captured this image (in 2007) of an eroded mesa made famous by its similarity to a human face in a Viking Orbiter image with much lower spatial resolution and a different lighting geometry.
Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
This picture doesn't prove or disprove anything... the only way to no for sure is to go there and check it out.
Where are all the peppered impact areas that are all over the area including on the face itself that are so prevalent in the earlier photo?
Sorry to use Hoagland's name but to play devil's advocate I think he has some very interesting topics. Only if he would shut up about them...
To clarify earlier about possibilities, If we are open to one possibility, then we must be open to others in lineage to that possibility. I can't explain it any better than that without using an analogy.
Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
reply to post by FlySolo
To clarify earlier about possibilities, If we are open to one possibility, then we must be open to others in lineage to that possibility. I can't explain it any better than that without using an analogy.
I think I get your meaning here!
Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not
Originally posted by misinformational
reply to post by DoomsdayRex
Proof that NASA fake's photos: blogs.discovermagazine.com...