Curiosity: Is Rocknest a "SHIP CEMETARY"(?!) on MARS showing the remnants of a lost civilization?

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gildenel

Originally posted by jeep3rOr take this close-up as an example:


How could anyone think that is just a rock, it's been carved, not sure what it is, but it's definitely not a natural formation, I've never seen anything natural that looks like that.


Hey Gildenel! Thanks for your various posts in this thread, your support is highly appreciated ...


I wish there were some others out there who would actually analyze the visual data, even though it takes lots of time and effort to come to the same conclusions as I have drawn from Curiosity's astonishing panorama (taken between Sols 64-72).

Again, I'm not the person who looks at 'one feature' saying: OMG, it's a lizard or OMG it's a statue etc. I'm referring to an accumulation of different artifacts while taking into account their inclination and their 'partly buried' position in the martian sands (after petrification & erosion)

But if you look at it from that perspective, they do display common features incl. geometry that is definitely not the result of some ancient lava stream or any other natural process. And again, I don't know why those various shapes resemble ships (??!), it's just the only conclusion that makes sense after having applied Occam's razor and excluding Pareidolia as an explanation (due to the fact that there are too many of the same features).

So, yes, I'm completely serious about this, and I still hope to find further supporters here on ATS (and I'll fight hard to convince all of you)!!

Cheers!
edit on 18-2-2013 by jeep3r because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeep3r

Originally posted by Gildenel

Originally posted by jeep3rOr take this close-up as an example:


How could anyone think that is just a rock, it's been carved, not sure what it is, but it's definitely not a natural formation, I've never seen anything natural that looks like that.


Hey Gildenel! Thanks for your various posts in this thread, your support is highly appreciated ...


I wish there were some others out there who would actually analyze the visual data, even though it takes lots of time and effort to come to the same conclusions as I have drawn from Curiosity's astonishing panorama (taken between Sols 64-72)

Again, I'm not the person who looks at 'one feature' saying: OMG, it's a lizard or OMG it's a statue etc. I'm referring to an accumulation of different artifacts while taking into account their inclination and their 'partly buried' position in the martian sands (after petrification & erosion)

But if you look at it from that perspective, they do display common features incl. geometry that is definitely not the result of some ancient lava stream or any other natural process. And again, I don't know why those various shapes resemble ships (??!), it's just the only conclusion that makes sense after having applied Occam's razor and excluding Pareidolia as an explanation (due to the fact that there are too many of the same features).

So, yes, I'm completely serious about this, and I still hope to find further supporters here on ATS (and I'll fight hard to convince all of you)!!

Cheers!
edit on 18-2-2013 by jeep3r because: (no reason given)


Hi jeep3r, sorry about that typing before thinking again, of course your absolutely right logically if its not a natural formation, looking at the shape it would have to be some sort of ship, I'm just excited to see these things, as I would have thought that any evidence would have been erased from the pictures somehow.



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by jeep3r
 


Cheers. You are welcome.

I do have a very vivid imagination, but alas, all I see here are rocks rocks and rocks again. Especially because there is not even a scale to measure what size these ROCKS are.


That goes for each and every one of these threads. I didn't even bother to comment on the other thread which went up today, showing even more rocks and claiming it are fossils.



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by H1ght3chHippie
reply to post by jeep3r
 

That goes for each and every one of these threads. I didn't even bother to comment on the other thread which went up today, showing even more rocks and claiming it are fossils.


Hey H1ght3chHippie! Don't worry, I absolutely respect your point of view ... it's really OK to think it's just rocks!


With regards to the thread on 'Mars fossils' by Arken, I can also understand that you're not really eager to comment anymore when looking at all those fossil-enthusiasts. But whether or not there's something to it ... I think he's doing a great job in getting everyone really excited over there!!



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 12:34 AM
link   
Aye aye I hear you.

Keep on ROCKing



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I have looked very closely at all the photos and there are definitely interesting shapes that do not look natural. Every time there is something of interest, they never zoom in on it where WE can see for ourselves with high resolution that these things are not just eroded rocks. I am waiting to see anything in the released shots that prove to me with no doubt that it is indeed a real relic made or manufactured. I dont believe that "THEY" will let us see anything like this because as soon as "They" spot it, it will remain hidden from us.
WHY did the Brookings report only see things One way? Instead of Life here still goes on in spite of it being elsewhere? Sure it would shake things up, but the electric bill would still have to be paid and jobs would still await us and hunger would not cease from that revelation. I wish "They" would just be completely honest about all of it.
The truth sometimes hurts, but is better in the long run. So, give us the truth.



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by SuperSax
I have looked very closely at all the photos and there are definitely interesting shapes that do not look natural.


Hey, thanks for the reply, SuperSax. And for taking the time to look into this! In the meantime, I also created a video presentation on this, where I go a bit more into the details using a much higher resolution of the MSL footage:



And here goes the direct link to the video on YouTube (perhaps it's better to watch it in fullscreen/HD/1080p).

By the way: Welcome to ATS!! I noticed that your profile is still quite 'fresh'. But I'm sure that'll change pretty fast, so enjoy your time here on the forum and thanks again for your post!



posted on Feb, 23 2013 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dimens

Thanks for sharing this. Need a good imagination to see those ships but i had the same idea. The only problem being scale.


Hey, Dimens! It took some time, but I finally finished the scale estimates for the objects in question. I based them on an image from Sol 157 where both the rover and the 'rough' contours of the objects can be seen.

For all those who asked me about scale, I provided the details in this post of a new thread I dedicated to the whole subject (also contains a video presentation on this).

Thanks again for your post, Dimens!





top topics
 
14
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join