It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


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

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 04:28 PM

Originally posted by Unidentified_Objective
You know why you rarely see any astronomy students with access to high power telescopes perpetuate these insane conspiracy theories on ATS? ...Because they can clearly see for themselves how desolate Mars is. Spectral analysis shows the thin, starving atmosphere cannot sustain a rat...or rodent. At least not in its present state. Perhaps if at one point Mars' atmosphere was as thick and rich in oxygen as ours...perhaps then. But...let's play devil's advocate here. IF there were rodents on are they eating? Surely, they aren't eating rocks are they? OH NOES...CANNIBAL ROCK RATS!!

And yes, attributing these baseless laughable claims to pareidolia is justified when there's zero evidence to support outrageous claims....other than a photograph that shows...well, rocks.

and who says life forms MUST and ARE exactly like the ones you and me are used to? Who is to say life cannot evolve according to the surrounding environment, or, most probably, adapt to the environment. Just some food for thought: Earth, a couple of millions of years ago, the entire landscape was completely different, trees were huge, dinosaurs, well as we can clearly see were huge, and not to mention, the atmosphere of earth was so rich in oxygene and ozone that you and me, with our organism of today, would actually have trouble breathing it. and you don't have to take my word for it, just ask your doctor.

my point is, we've seen just a fragment of Mars from up close so we really have no idea of what it is down there. It is common knowledge today that Mars had rivers and was covered in water so life, most probably was booming there as well as here. Simply put, what makes you think the life forms of Mars would be unable to adapt since all life forms on earth adapted and evolved into what they are today, went through planetary cataclism and most probably all earth was covered in fire (it's the explanation for all the coal all around) so in our histroy earth was just as barren as mars. If life adapted and evolved here why is it impossible for life to adapt and evolve there?

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 04:31 PM
reply to post by Just Chris

All I can say is WOW!!! Looks like a rat/squirrel from the front.

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 04:46 PM
reply to post by Just Chris

Maybe the poor guy just latched onto curiosity and found himself on a one way trip to Mars .. where he crash landed ..died on the spot and ...well..there he is... just laying there .. eyes still open .. his soul still wandering around coz it doesn't know what to do after dying on the wrong planet

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 04:49 PM
If there were more images to compare, and they showed this "rat" moving around, then we could say we have 100% proof. Unfortunately it's one image and the "rat" is in amongst rocks.

As much as I'd love to say this was a rat, I'm pretty sure that it's just a rock

Although, I do believe there is life on Mars, much like the rest of the planets. Microorganisms and such are a possibility all throughout the universe. I have a theory that there are actually organisms living in space whom have adapted to the conditions- just swimming about between the stars.

People say you need oxygen and h2o to support life, but what if it's nothing like that. What if they survive on some of the harshest planets to man? They might think our planet is harsh to them.

Oh god, going into a tangent. Stop! haha

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 04:58 PM

Originally posted by Just Chris
Why couldn't it be a rodent exactly?

Mars is a dead planet as far as we've been able to tell. That might be the first indicator...

Originally posted by Just Chris
I have as much evidence 'for' as you suggest you have 'against'.

No, actually you don't. You have a picture of rocks, one (or two) of which bear(s) a vague resemblance to some kind of rodent. Numerous examples of Pareidolia have been presented in this thread so there is no reason to post another.

Originally posted by Just Chris
How would you know what the atmosphere is really like on Mars anyway, and where's the pictures from your vacation their? Because you clearly sound as if you've been in person!

You would have to deny and ignore some pretty vast amounts of data and scientific study in order to conclude there is any kind of life on Mars. Ignorance and denial aren't really a solid foundation to work from.

Originally posted by Just Chris
With that said....until someone can prove conclusively to me that it's a rock, then I'll say it's a rodent of some kind, presumably somewhere in a desert somewhere on EARTH.

You are welcome to believe whatever you wish, but that doesn't make it true.

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:06 PM
With regard to this photo, we can only say this:

A) If it is an actual photo taken on the suface of the planet Mars
1. There is no way to determine the exact scale of anything in the photo with any degree of certainty. That object could be 1 inch, 1 foot, or 1 yard long (1 cm, 1 decimeter, 1 meter for our metric folks).
2. The area is strewn with rocks, with no sign of any vegetation in sight
3. The probability of it being a Mars rock is likely 99.99999% or more
4. The probability of it being a rat is likely 0.00001% or less

B) The photo was taken here on the surface of the planet Earth
1. There is no way to determine the exact scale of anything in the photo with any degree of certainty. That object could be 1 inch, 1 foot, or 1 yard long (1 cm, 1 decimeter, 1 meter for our metric folks).
2. The area is strewn with rocks, with no sign of any vegetation in sight
3. The probability of it being an Earth rock is likely 50% or more
4. The probability of it being a rat is likely 50% or less

This being said (in a VERY brief manner), and taking Occam's Razor into account, I gotta go with "A", with the belief that it is still a rock, that by pure coincidence looks like a small rodent.

edit on 5-12-2012 by Krakatoa because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:06 PM
reply to post by Just Chris

When you Magnify that Pic. , it Turns Out to be a ROCK .............Confirmed , NO RODENT.............

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:07 PM

Originally posted by new_here
reply to post by Just Chris
I have seen that pic on ATS somewhere. I agree, it DOES look just like a rodent. So does the one just to its left (sort of overlapping it somewhat) and facing the opposite way. You can see the back of its little ear, and its rear end is closest to the camera with its little tail.

I dunno, they look like guinea pigs to me!

Guinea pigs don't have tails.

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:11 PM
It's clearly a horse fitted with lowered suspension. But yeah rodents on mars, they feed on rock? Oh no there's trees on mars and food etc? This crazy ness is uncomfortably entertaining
edit on 5-12-2012 by OnionHead because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:14 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

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.



Now that we have establish it's a space mouse, should we send Mickey up their for interplanetary negotiations?

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:23 PM
Or we could have the unique situation in that the rat rock is indeed the only genuine rock in the picture and everything else that resembles a rock in the pic is actually an Martian rock weasel.

But yeah lolz, diversity of life and all that on earth alone, to entertain the thought that if life discovered on mars would remotely resemble anything of an earthly nature is laughable to the extreme. It's like the equivalent of finding sheep at the bottom of the ocean

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:24 PM
reply to post by Spacespider

why do you people photoshop these images and post these photoshopped images to try to prove a point? Especially when you took a picture that has a rat in it, and photoshopped it into a picture that has nothing in it, really? Whats the point? Oh well, even worse is when you people use the emboss filters to make specs of dirt on camera lenses look like UFOs...SIGH.. what the hell? If the original image doesn't show anything, then there isn't anything to see. And then you zoom it in until its so fuzzy no one can tell what it is WTF?
edit on 5-12-2012 by phroziac because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:42 PM

Originally posted by gortex

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:47 PM
reply to post by Just Chris

That is most definitely a rock. In fact, I would go as far to say it's a rock and someone photoshopped it by using a pixelated head of a rodent on there to make it look more believable.

edit on 5-12-2012 by 31Bravo because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:53 PM

Originally posted by Spacespider
reply to post by Just Chris

edit on 5-12-2012 by Spacespider because: (no reason given)

1. That looks a lot like a rat.
2. Everything I know and my so called "common sense" tells me that's a rock that looks a lot like a rat
3. It is not an absolute impossibility that there exists rodent-like creatures on mars.
4. Although "really highly unlikely" seems fitting.
So now my options are:
a. My knowledge and common sense are somewhat correct and that is indeed, a rock that looks a lot like a rat.
b. My knowledge and common sense are completely wrong and that is indeed, a rodent-like creature. On Mars.

My personal choice is a.
No ideologies, no prejudices, no agendas other than sheer curiosity.
It's not that big a deal, is it?


posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:58 PM
In reply to the idea that the photo is taken on Earth, and said to be from Mars... consider this:

NASA does not hire morons...and if there is an attempt to deceive the public, on such a large scale, moronic miscalculations are NOT a factor ie: photographing a picture with a rodent in it.

I offer a challenge: Pretend that you are the head of NASADC, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Deception Committee, (Obviously this is made up, go with me). Your security clearance is Level 1 - Top Secret and more than likely have full access to NASA's bank funds to do whatever you need to.

You are told create a Mars scene and photograph pictures that will be shown to the entire world, with NASA's name and reputation on the line.

- You would hire the best topographical set designers on planet Earth
- You would hire the most distinguished building contractors to mock up the photo chamber
- You would hire the most accurate lighting directors paired with outer space engineers to match the lighting of the Sun to the photo itself.
- You would hire geologists to match the rock types, colors, shape, ect to match those from speculative Mars features based on completed, research based case studies and scientific findings.
- You would pluck the most established video and photo editors and present them with the top of the line photoediting and virtual realty software that money can buy, and limitless amounts of time.

And in the end, oops, a rat crawled onto the center of the photo, and even though you probably took 50 other pictures just as a precaution, you're going to select THIS one to send out.

I know the idea of finding a conspiracy on the internet is mind boggling to the common anonymous blogger but you honestly have to consider what is at stake here...any picture worth talking about is not going to make it Google Images. The main thing you underestimate is yourselves... NASA is fully aware of conspiracy theories and sites like ATS, and the precautions that I listed above exist precisely because people like US will not let them off the hook. Don't belittle yourselves by goose-chasing after anything less than the big picture

Don't be decieved

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:00 PM
Upon further inspection it looks more like this

Its laying on its belly. It looks headless and the lower back opens up like chicken thighs.

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:04 PM
Maybe it is a rodent, but that doesn't mean that it's proof of life on Mars.

More like proof that the rover was being driven around a desert in Arizona.

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:12 PM

Originally posted by luciddream
Common sense would do the trick... Rodents alone cannot live like that... there is something called the Ecosystem

Where are the plants, the insects and the predator?.

you are just assuming that mars rodents are just like earth's rodents and that is not necessarily true. who knows what do these creatures eat or if the need oxygen to survive.

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:15 PM

Originally posted by taccj9903

Originally posted by kobewan69
I like the replyes that some people give like: "The thread was here already, it's a rock". Well the correct way to say it is "the thread already exists, people consider it to be a rock" since none of you are actually NASA scientists who can say without a doubt that it is a rock. I really don't understand why people act like they hold the absolute truth. it can be whatever, a rock, a rat, a lizard, whatever until humans actually go there and pick it up and say: "HEY, IT'S A ROCK!" stop acting all cocky and discuss not impose. this is a place where we, as people like to discuss and we don't really like BDSM where some of you impose your point of view.

Thank god somebody said it. Who really knows what it is in that image. Could be a rodent on Mars, could be a rock on Mars. Could be a rodent here on earth too. I just get tired of people stating their opinion like it is a fact. This is a conspiracy site for goodness sake.

How else would people state their opinion? Would you prefer it every other sentence started or ended with the disclaimer of "in my opinion"

It's presumed that you have the intelligence to conclude yourself that people are offering opinions, and therefore it doesn't need saying over and over and over again that is an opinion, because you already know it is, right? Stating it would be a waste of time.

If some fruitcake claims that jesus has manifested in there toast, it's perfectly normal to say "it's not jesus, it's just toast" We don't have to talk about "who really knows", we don't have to say "people consider that it's not jesus", we don't have to say "that's just my opinion of course" for fear of offending a crazy person. If we think it's just some religious nutcase seeing an image that isn't there, that's what we'll say, and we need not state that we're giving an opinion, when that fact is self evident

It's a rock. Anybody saying otherwise is wrong.

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in