It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by smurfy
As much as the pictures are intriguing I find myself literally, in something of a rock and a hard place as to what I think, so no apologies for the pun. Where it is easy to see 'Vertebrae' in many of Arken's examples this time round, and while others say they are rocks, or peculiar looking rocks, I don't think of either. I see lightly hardened shapes born out of a mixture of dust and moisture making a delicate cement, and most likely the shape is reborn over time and time again, with erosion from both wind and dust.
I mean, what did NASA concentrate with Curiosity firstly for their experiments? It was this guy Jake Matijevic who is an out of place rock, let's call him, 'Jake the peg'
go to the link here;
You can see from that link the difficulties they have with 'Jake the peg' when even the Earth based science is somewhat controversial, NASA is not so bothered with exotic shapes of congealed sand. There are some shapes in Arken's linked pictures that do look like rocks, but they are also the most unlikely contenders for vertebrae looking objects.edit on 19-2-2013 by smurfy because: Picture.
Originally posted by MysterX
reply to post by Zcustosmorum
Yes, but not generally unless they have to or have already offered to, and yes i do.
Oh, and what Armap said too.
Originally posted by ausername
Originally posted by humphreysjim
reply to post by Unity_99
If this was on Mars, you'd be calling it a "Martian Patio".
If this was on Mars you'd be calling it "rocks"
Originally posted by ArMaP
Originally posted by Bennogob
I wait for the "almighty" Phage to show us his explanation on this one , but after 15 pages nothing...
But for the OP I must admit you catched my attention^^Those symmetricals "shapes" in the middle of the first photo of the "supposed" fossil looking really like vertebral disks on some animal's skeletons...
Personally, I'm with the "rocks" crowd on this one. I just don't think that Mars ever had lifeforms that advanced. I'd settle for microbes.
Originally posted by Arken
reply to post by ArMaP
What could be a "good reason"?
"Craters with squared structures inside"?
"Perfectly squared structures cover an area of 12 x 7 kilometers all same oriented"?
"Structures like Machu Pichu with steps and stairs all perfecly oriented"?
Do your best, ArMaP.
Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by tzdub
3rd party news? ATS often beats the MSM to the punch by days.
Originally posted by Arken
reply to post by impaired
Hi impaired, my friend.
Thanks for your friendly advice I try to submit these requests directly to the main source....