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.

 

What's going on in Copernicus crater?

page: 28
9
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


The video does not show anything of consequence, but his theory suggesting that many tiny martians have been killed or squashed by the rovers could be correct.

This person seems to think that devine intervention is responsible for what he claims. How would he know about the tiny people on Mars when the PanCam and Navigation cameras are unable to resolve the tiny beings due to their very small size. The only objects the cameras can resolve are tiny structures. There is no evidence showing in the video that relates to tiny life-forms or tiny structures. All that can be seen are the tracks of the rover and another view showing rock formations. In my opinion the video shows us nothing that relates to what this person is claiming.




posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by arianna
A possible reason why I can see thing that other cannot may be that my brain is more 'tuned-in', so to speak, due to th amount of research that has been carried out in looking for the real truth of what's on the surface of Mars and the Moon.

Another possible reason is that you are too much "tuned-in" to what you are looking for, so you see things that are not really there.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by arianna

I am not trying to fool anyone and I am definitely not mentally ill. What I have posted is in all sincerety.

A possible reason why I can see thing that other cannot may be that my brain is more 'tuned-in', so to speak,


Could be an enlargement of the pineal gland. - I'd get that checked out if I were you. I can highly recommend Dr. Edward Pretorius, a specialist in that area.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 


Sigh......I agree that the video showed rock formations but once again we are told that everybody else is wrong while the OP has some special talent to discern rock formations from tiny structures in images.

No one on the planet has this talent or is gifted enough because we haven't spent hours upon hours playing with burn tools and contrast to discover NASA's dirty little secret of embedding hidden information from the public.

It takes an image scientist manipulating online images and is a self taught expert with a homemade diploma of "Dr. of photo analysis" to point out our sub par intellect constantly in their post. We just aren't smart enough to get it. NASA is wrong, we are wrong, scientist are wrong, planetary machines and their cameras are wrong,... wow.

I would nominate this work for a Nobel prize except we aren't smart enough to understand what it all entails.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   
ArMaP, I'm pleased that I am 'tuned-in'. It's a great shame that others are unable to share in the mysteries then they would know that everything I have presented and wrote about is the product of genuine research. Try squinting at the slab of rock and you may start to see the tiny structural formations. Look for anything that would resemble a very tiny spire, stack or tower and then the shape of the building below may be realized. I will post a 3-D version of the view when I have time.

As far as the video is concerned, it would appear that members do not have any comments to make about what they can see.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by dcmb1409
reply to post by arianna
 


Sigh......I agree that the video showed rock formations but once again we are told that everybody else is wrong while the OP has some special talent to discern rock formations from tiny structures in images.

No one on the planet has this talent or is gifted enough because we haven't spent hours upon hours playing with burn tools and contrast to discover NASA's dirty little secret of embedding hidden information from the public.

It takes an image scientist manipulating online images and is a self taught expert with a homemade diploma of "Dr. of photo analysis" to point out our sub par intellect constantly in their post. We just aren't smart enough to get it. NASA is wrong, we are wrong, scientist are wrong, planetary machines and their cameras are wrong,... wow.

I would nominate this work for a Nobel prize except we aren't smart enough to understand what it all entails.


Just wait and you will see.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 




ArMaP, I'm pleased that I am 'tuned-in'. It's a great shame that others are unable to share in the mysteries then they would know that everything I have presented and wrote about is the product of genuine research.


You seem to have chosen to ignore the last part of his post:



"tuned-in" to what you are looking for, so you see things that are not really there.

:shk:
edit on 1/17/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 




This situation carried on for some time until I started to examine the surface detail close-up. That's when everything changed in relation to finding out what is really on the surface of the planet.



What do you make of this view of a crater-like area?



Is that a lake in the middle?

It almost looks like terraces created around it.

Hmm, what could it be?
edit on 1/17/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: ok it's skin



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by arianna

Originally posted by dcmb1409
reply to post by arianna
 


Sigh......I agree that the video showed rock formations but once again we are told that everybody else is wrong while the OP has some special talent to discern rock formations from tiny structures in images.

No one on the planet has this talent or is gifted enough because we haven't spent hours upon hours playing with burn tools and contrast to discover NASA's dirty little secret of embedding hidden information from the public.

It takes an image scientist manipulating online images and is a self taught expert with a homemade diploma of "Dr. of photo analysis" to point out our sub par intellect constantly in their post. We just aren't smart enough to get it. NASA is wrong, we are wrong, scientist are wrong, planetary machines and their cameras are wrong,... wow.

I would nominate this work for a Nobel prize except we aren't smart enough to understand what it all entails.


Just wait and you will see.


You might see I bet we dont!



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 





Just wait and you will see.


How long should we wait?

Till pigs fly?

Till hell freezes over?

Until I crack my head open?



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 



In my opinion the video shows us nothing that relates to what this person is claiming.


That was exactly my point, here. These claims of "tiny Martian buildings" are also absent any merit.....except to one person in this thread.

Can you see the similarities to the video maker's claims? He believes strongly that he is seeing tiny "Humans" on Mars.....and he is the only one who can "see" them, I would guess here.

He thinks he sees them....or else, he would not have so many such videos on his YouTube channel.......and he even contacted his Senators about it!!


(Makes one wonder....)......



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by arianna
ArMaP, I'm pleased that I am 'tuned-in'.
I don't know if that's a good or a bad thing.


It's a great shame that others are unable to share in the mysteries then they would know that everything I have presented and wrote about is the product of genuine research.
I don't think that the problem is in your research, it's in the lack of control of the results you get from your research.


Try squinting at the slab of rock and you may start to see the tiny structural formations.
No, if I have to look at it in a way that is not the same way I look at other things in my life then it means that it cannot exist in the same way as other things in my life, and, even it with all it's problems, I still like my life.


Look for anything that would resemble a very tiny spire, stack or tower and then the shape of the building below may be realized. I will post a 3-D version of the view when I have time.
There's no need to spend time making a 3D version of the view, I think it would be better if you look at the photos from the microscopic camera to see if you can find the same tiny structures in any of them.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


I think you are trying to put me off of showing a 3D view because you know what it will show up.

Well, here's a couple of 3D views for you and other members to ponder over without having to squint.

The first image is a general view and the second is a closeup. Red/cyan glasses are needed to view.




Direct view. i985.photobucket.com...




Direct view. i985.photobucket.com...



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by arianna
I think you are trying to put me off of showing a 3D view because you know what it will show up.
No, I just think that your time would be better spend answering other people's questions instead of posting images that need special glasses to be seen, when you do not know if anyone has glasses like those. The ones I have don't have exactly the same colours, so they do not work with all images.


Well, here's a couple of 3D views for you and other members to ponder over without having to squint.
Does that mean that the squinting can be replaced by looking at a 3D view?



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 


Don't have such glasses here so your homemade 3D pics are a waste to me and many others I would guess.

Anyway if you have to manipulate the images several ways and make it 3D requiring special glasses, doesn't that mean you may be really reaching?



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

No, I just think that your time would be better spend answering other people's questions instead of posting images that need special glasses to be seen, when you do not know if anyone has glasses like those. The ones I have don't have exactly the same colours, so they do not work with all images.


I have offered to answer questions but i would prefer that people ask them one at a time.

I have posted the 3-D views for members and visitors who have the right type of 3-D glasses.


Does that mean that the squinting can be replaced by looking at a 3D view?


Give this a try ArMaP.

Have a look at the monochrome images using 3D glasses and see if you notice anything.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 08:56 AM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 





I have offered to answer questions but i would prefer that people ask them one at a time.


Well since I have asked the same questions several times, I will try them one by one for whatever reason.
============================================================================

You have mentioned many times in this thread that you "know what to look for".

What training do you have to look for extra-terrestrial civilizations?

Where did you train for that? On your own?

=========================================================================
Yes I know there are three question marks (gasp), but they are all part of the SAME question.


edit on 1/18/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by arianna
 


Don't have such glasses here so your homemade 3D pics are a waste to me and many others I would guess.

Anyway if you have to manipulate the images several ways and make it 3D requiring special glasses, doesn't that mean you may be really reaching?


I suggest you purchase some glasses from a well-known auction site.

The 3-D images posted above have not been manipulated or enhanced.

The process used to produce the anaglyphs is the same program as NASA uses.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 





I have offered to answer questions but i would prefer that people ask them one at a time.


Do you have anything peer reviewed besides ATS?



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 





I have offered to answer questions but i would prefer that people ask them one at a time


You seem completely convinced you are correct. What do you base this on?
Your own observations and own affirmations?



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join