Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Rodents on Mars!!! The announcement NASA should have made?

page: 12
38
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
Nasa caught lying again. How many times can they get way with lying.


A LOT MORE TIMES when most of this gullible lot on here suggest it's just a rock!




posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 05:45 AM
link   
Wouldn't be much fuss if it didn't have what resembles an eye. Is the conclusion that everything with the resemblance of an eye qualifies as a living creature, for example the common arse hole, it that a creature? Or a backward walking cat (Suppose that is a creature). If a rock that resembles a cat in one of these pics with its rear in the air, with it's eye looking at you, would that make it a creature, and if so what would it eat? These are important questions that need answered.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by OnionHead
Wouldn't be much fuss if it didn't have what resembles an eye. Is the conclusion that everything with the resemblance of an eye qualifies as a living creature, for example the common arse hole, it that a creature? Or a backward walking cat (Suppose that is a creature). If a rock that resembles a cat in one of these pics with its rear in the air, with it's eye looking at you, would that make it a creature, and if so what would it eat? These are important questions that need answered.




I will challenge you this....show me am earth rock that looks this much like a rat. Post a pic and you might just convince me.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by gortex
 


That particlular creature is not a rock and to even try to insist it is, is to try and make people believe crap when their own eyes KNOW 100% otherwise.

This isn't a guess. IT'S 100% PROOF OF A RODENT ON A NASA PHOTO THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE TAKEN ON MARS.


That is a RAT. We had them in our kitchen and were putting them in cages and releasing them at the creek till we tinfoiled up the holes and taped them and got the 2 cats.

Eyes work just fine.


Eyes work just fine but the processing has run amok! Here on earth, when I see something that looks like something, I look for something else to confirm that it is something. So if I saw something that looked like a rat, I would look for other clues to confirm that such as legs, movement, noises, rat poop.

this is one image of one side of something. now if there was an army of legless rat creatures, that would be something or if we could see the severed legs in another image...



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 06:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Jchristopher5
 


Inspect enough turds and you will finally find one that looks like a rat. It is the rocky planet after all, so much variations.

Seriously though, its just a rock that looks like a rat, or some other rodent.
edit on 6-12-2012 by OnionHead because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spiro
My friend,


Originally posted by winofiend

Originally posted by Spiro
From my personal experiences, I know fine well there are/is life on Mars.


No there's not. Prove it.

Thanks.


Yes, there is. No!

be safe be well

Spiro


That is because you can't and you know it.

Admit it,
Thanks.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by TC Mike
Ok here is the original rodent pointed out.
It looks like a the remains of a former art & sculpture gallery on mars that suffered an explosion. Thats what I would say, but draw your own conclusions.

looks like an art gallery that suffered from a nuclear explosion and all that was left was melted rock that has been eroded into rock shapes that remind of us earth creatures



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


I wonder what Martian dust tastes like?



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 07:36 AM
link   
I'm sure this has been said many times over already, but....

It's a rock, there is no way life could adapt to live in the extreme environment of Mars, not complex life anyway.

Even if life did once exist, by now it would have turned to dust, not be sitting on the surface well preserved.

Maybe when we dig deeper, we might find fossils, I don't see why that isn't possible, but out in the open on the surface like that? Only ill informed/educated (in biology/science) idiots would believe otherwise.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by woogleuk

Even if life did once exist, by now it would have turned to dust, not be sitting on the surface well preserved.

Maybe when we dig deeper, we might find fossils, I don't see why that isn't possible, but out in the open on the surface like that? Only ill informed/educated (in biology/science) idiots would believe otherwise.



I have a question. Which side of the argument is really ill informed or uneducated? Which side stands lock step with the TPTB? The majority is not always right. Check science history and notice that the sun does not revolve around the earth and the earth is not flat.

If a creature was to die on the surface of mars, sublimation would cause mummification and would not turn to dust very quickly or at all.

If you see a fish head rock on Mars, it may not be a rock.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by earthalien50
Check science history and notice that the sun does not revolve around the earth and the earth is not flat.
Scientists didn't think the Earth was flat. Even 2000 years ago it was known the Earth was spherical and even how big it was. So that statement shows ignorance.

Scientists aren't as dumb as you think.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by earthalien50
 


Even the best preserved mummies will turn to dust after a (long) while, especially when bombarded by extreme heat/cold and solar radiation.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Just Chris

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
Nasa caught lying again. How many times can they get way with lying.


A LOT MORE TIMES when most of this gullible lot on here suggest it's just a rock!


Sure thing, boss. You just go right ahead and prove that this is:
1) a rat on Mars
or
2) a rat on Earth, faked as a picture from Mars

If you can do either of the above, I'll mail you a picture of me eating my keyboard.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by earthalien50
Check science history and notice that the sun does not revolve around the earth and the earth is not flat.
Scientists didn't think the Earth was flat. Even 2000 years ago it was known the Earth was spherical and even how big it was. So that statement shows ignorance.

Scientists aren't as dumb as you think.


Two thousand years ago, scientist believed the earth was round. But no one has argued that point.

This is what I said and what I meant by my post concerning this subject:


Several pre-Socratic philosophers believed the world to be flat: Thales (c. 550 BC) according to several sources,and Leucippus (c. 440 BC) and Democritus (c. 460–370 BC) according to Aristotle.

Read about flat earth scientists here:
Flat Earth



No offense, but do your homework before you argue a point.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by earthalien50
 

And if it weren't for science, some people might still think the sun orbits the Earth.

The dates you list pre-date development of modern scientific methods.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by earthalien50
 


In 440BC there was no technology to help show them the world was round, from human perspective on the ground, the Earth is flat, especially in Holland.

This is the 21st century though, and even things that are new to us, we still have a good basic understanding of as science and technology helps make this possible.

We know the effects certain things have on other things, we have a good understanding of how things should work, and yes, we are discovering new things all the time, but that still doesn't take away the knowledge we have already gained that tells us....it's just a smegging rock!



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   
I personally believe it is a rock. I will say when I first saw the image for a few seconds I did think it was a rodent of some type, but after seeing the zoomed and enlarged image I myself am convinced it's a rock. I personally believe it is a case of pareidolia but that's me.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 08:44 AM
link   
It's a Rodent,
everybody that says otherwise is a pareidolic Rock.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by woogleuk
reply to post by earthalien50
 


Even the best preserved mummies will turn to dust after a (long) while, especially when bombarded by extreme heat/cold and solar radiation.


As I stated before, mummies


would not turn to dust very quickly


I never said that they would not turn to dust.

I am new here, but I thought that ATS veterans would do their homework.



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 08:45 AM
link   
I believe it's a rodent too but not on mars. Looks like it was photoshopped in to me. I'm an amateur photographer and I know as well as most of you on here do as well just how easily a photo can be manipulated with adding things, taking away, changing the colors etc....
I believe that life exists elswhere but the government is smarter than that, if that was real it never would have got out. We will not be seeing any pics of any 'real life" from anywhere other than earth not for a long time at least.





new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join