The Most Interesting Mars Picture I've Come Across.

page: 15
234
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 06:32 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



The panel is much different than the normal erosion in the sediment.

It's not.


I inserted lines where erosion is taking place. Can you see how they match diagonally and horizontally? The panel does not match at all.

That's not where erosion is taking place, that's (some) of the places where the larger slab broke, erosion is taking place everywhere.


If you look at the one line on the panel, you can see that there is not one area on the images that remotely matches the “straight” line on the panel.

That depends on your definition of "matching".


What we are seeing is NOT part of the normal Martian landscape. Just my humble opinion of course...

Well, my opinion is that we are seeing part of the normal Martian landscape and that it looks like geological processes we can also see on Earth.


AND to our good friends at NASA.............................BUSTED![

Busted? Why, because you have an opinion?




As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.




posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


I will concede that many of those pictures while interesting could very well be just rocks. I see plenty of interesting rocks here on Earth all the time.

I think though, you may be dismissing the "panel" picture without due consideration. That image is probably the single most curious picture I have seen from Mars in quite some time. It most certainly does not contain the same elements as the surrounding terrain. What is your basis for saying it does? What are you seeing that I am not?



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
One thing I don't understand, why people say that this looks like gold?
To me that looks white and chalk-like.

I agree, but it is sort of yellow-ish, and the white part of it could represent a brighter reflection. Although, certainly, crystalline minerals of any kind, such as quartz, also can be highly reflective at the correct angle.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 07:36 PM
link   
I said before that everyone should keep paying close attention to the NASA/JPL images being posted up and if Hoagland is right, then Curiosity is going to some very interesting places


He also makes a good point on why these images are being released, I would tend to agree that there is a difference on disclosure by possibly Black-Ops and NASA.

edit on 25-1-2013 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 07:39 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Originally posted by Helious
I think though, you may be dismissing the "panel" picture without due consideration.

I'm not, I love geology, so I always look carefully at these photos.



It most certainly does not contain the same elements as the surrounding terrain. What is your basis for saying it does? What are you seeing that I am not?

I think it does contain the same elements as the surrounding terrain, the only thing that makes it different is the shape, and this is not that different.

The material looks the same, the thickness looks the same, the way it breaks looks the same, etc.

But as I don't know what you are seeing, why do you think it doesn't contain the same elements as the surrounding terrain?



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 07:43 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Originally posted by Blue Shift
I agree, but it is sort of yellow-ish, and the white part of it could represent a brighter reflection.

I think it's yellowish because of the dust covering it.

One thing I find strange is how many people look at a photo (usually a black and white photo) and think that the white parts must be bright reflections. Why can't things just be white? Also, reflections result in overexposed and underexposed areas in the same photo, resulting from the uneven reflective surface, something we don't see here.

That's why I said that it looks chalk-like, as if it was the result of the agglomeration of some white powder.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 





I'm not, I love geology, so I always look carefully at these photos.


Nothing about that picture has anything to do with geology. Please provide me one picture from a natural rock here on Earth that is similar to this picture. Obviously, you have seen plenty of them to so casually dismiss it as completely normal geology so I would like to have a look as well!




I think it does contain the same elements as the surrounding terrain, the only thing that makes it different is the shape, and this is not that different. The material looks the same, the thickness looks the same, the way it breaks looks the same, etc. But as I don't know what you are seeing, why do you think it doesn't contain the same elements as the surrounding terrain?


It would if the surrounding terrain had a bunch of pieces of plywood laying around right underneath the soil. The "material" looks the same? What do you base this on? The thickness looks the same? As opposed to what, rocks sitting on soil? Huh? Either we are not looking at the same picture or I think you should qualify what you saying a bit more so I can follow you.

A: What material looks the same? You have a flat object that looks nothing like a rock, laying under a partial covering of dirt that has no discernible texture as compared to anything around it, other than it being covered in a loose covering of soil.

B: What about the shape does the rest of the landscape lead you to believe it is perfectly natural and normal where it is? What else do you see around it that leads you to believe it is not out of place since I'm fairly certain it looks intensely odd to 99% of the people that look at it.

C: Thickness? The way it breaks? Thickness as compared to what exactly else in that picture are you basing that on? The way it breaks? It breaks like a piece of plywood coming off the surface of loose soil because it became partially unburied.

Just saying bro, not trying to attack you or anything but to say that naturally blends in with the rest of the picture and the rest of the surrounding "geology" well...... Thats a little sketchy.

And just for the record, I'm almost posative they found Saddam hiding under one of these that probably looked just like that!
edit on 25-1-2013 by Helious because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 08:04 PM
link   
Perfect carved circle




Hoaglands theory on the same species being responsible for Mars and Pumu Punku is an interesting idea also
edit on 25-1-2013 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
Perfect carved circle




Hoaglands theory on the same species being responsible for Mars and Pumu Punku is an interesting idea also
edit on 25-1-2013 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)


It looks to me to be more likely a fossil as the channel it is found just off of sure looks like it carried running water at some point but obviously that is superficial speculation.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by jnyblujns
 


Dude, I'm typically not too interested in the whole Mars thing, but this really got me curious. I appreciate you posting this. Seriously, I'm impressed. S+F



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
Perfect carved circle




Hoaglands theory on the same species being responsible for Mars and Pumu Punku is an interesting idea also
edit on 25-1-2013 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)
I could have sworn I saw something there in the picture, and then it just flew away!

If I only would have had my video camera…!
edit on 25-1-2013 by Propulsion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 10:31 PM
link   
At first, I was like.. man this guy really is bored..

but I have to say.. I don't know about the other stuff, but that panel looking thing is a really cool find.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Very nice work good sir, I really enjoyed reading that, and also appriviate the time you put into this, thanks.

Peace



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 10:46 PM
link   
Honestly, when ya zoom in more & give this a good stare, that is not a shadow underneath the 'slab', but just \the other side'. (In My Very Long Stared Opinion)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by CashStronomer
Honestly, when ya zoom in more & give this a good stare, that is not a shadow underneath the 'slab', but just \the other side'. (In My Very Long Stared Opinion)


Thats what I see too, I just can't understand how anyone on here can say any of these pics can't be formed naturally, they can.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 05:42 AM
link   
Mother nature here on Earth can make rocks look like panels too:-





posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Zcustosmorum
 


You have clearly had too much Irn Bru (a scotish soft drink for any non-brits here) mate if you think those rock formations are weird!...wtf a cooker hood!



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 06:34 AM
link   
Are you suggesting an indiginous Martian race of intelligent beings or aliens visiting Mars and leaving behind some artifacts? If it is the latter then why use stone to carve things out of, wouldnt they have the means to build or make things out of "berylium spheres" or something?



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by doorhandle
reply to post by Zcustosmorum
 


You have clearly had too much Irn Bru (a scotish soft drink for any non-brits here) mate if you think those rock formations are weird!...wtf a cooker hood!


If you can't see anomalies in this picture mate, then you are blind
From the same picture with "the cooker hood", what do you think the object I labelled as looking like "bull horns" is? It isn't natural and the bars on it are completely parallel to each other. Additionally, all the anomalies I have pointed out, are ALL facing the same direction, something I only noticed afterwards.

Download the full landscape pic and take a few minutes to zoom in/out on various parts, it just isn't natural and there's debris all over the place, particularly from top left corner downwards toward the middle.


Originally posted by Cinrad
Are you suggesting an indiginous Martian race of intelligent beings or aliens visiting Mars and leaving behind some artifacts? If it is the latter then why use stone to carve things out of, wouldnt they have the means to build or make things out of "berylium spheres" or something?


My theory would have to be that we have ancestors who came from Mars and after covering some of Richard Hoaglands material, a large part of what he says, he's absolutely spot on.

According to him, Curiosity landed in that crater for a reason which is because any ancient rivers would've washed sediment and debris into it, which it has, which I can see and which ties in with his view (there's also large metal fragments on the surface also, which are not natural).

Keep scanning the NASA/JPL site for more images because I am confident there is better stuff still to come out
edit on 26-1-2013 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by doorhandle
 


AND, not to mention the fact every rock in these pictures fit in the palm of your hand, Im sure they can be pretty easily weathered.





new topics

top topics



 
234
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join