Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Curiosity at Glenelg: Just a Bizarre Landscape or Something More Intriguing?

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 14 2013 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Hi ATS! I admit the title of this thread is rather dramatic, but I'm still looking for answers as to what we see at Glenelg. So I hope you're not yet tired of posts about intriguing Mars rocks and other unusual surface features?!


I certainly am not, because there's so much interesting stuff lying around at Glenelg that it will take an army of posters to highlight all these bizarre things. You know I'm open-minded, but I'm still not convinced that it's all 100% natural ... even though we considered so many things like ventifacts, salt-weathering, vitrification, basalt erosion and so on and so on.

As far as I'm concerned, I think there's something in those rocks at Glenelg that shows patterns which seem to be of non-natural origin. Of course, I can't provide bullet-proof evidence, no question. But the least I can do is show you some of the features that I found to be somewhat out-of-place or otherwise unusual!

So here we go ...


Feature 01: The "Facemask"


Click here for the original NASA/JPL source image

------------------------------------------------------------------

Feature 02: Embossed Markings?

Original NASA/JPL source images: image 1 / image 2

------------------------------------------------------------------

Feature 03: Mechanical Parts with Center Hole?

Original NASA/JPL source images: image 1 / image 2 / image 3

------------------------------------------------------------------

Feature 04: The "Sunken" Rocks of Glenelg?


Below, you'll see 3 different rock formations, yet - for a brief moment - I couldn't fight the feeling that these rocks have something in common regarding their shape & features! Pareidolia? A trick of perspective? Let me know in case you see it too ...


Original NASA/JPL source images: image 1 / image 2 / image 3

------------------------------------------------------------------

Ultimately, I don't know what you think about all these features, but they certainly look bizarre to me. And just in case you're sceptical: I'd be happy to debunk some of those features if we can come up with some good explanations for what we see ... I very much look forward to your thoughts on this. Thanks in advance!



----------
Previous threads & posts (just in case you're interested):

- Natural Formations vs. Artificial Structures
- Martian Ventifacts or Martian Artifacts? What's Your Take on This?
- Some more 'intriguing' MSL images that got me thinking
- Curiosity "Thought-Experiment" & Image Compilation
- Potential 'Artifacts' discussed in a Video
- Discussion of the Rocknest Panorama
- Strange Shipwreck-Like Feature
- Strange Rocks Post 1, Post 2 and Post 3
edit on 14-4-2013 by jeep3r because: text




posted on Apr, 14 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   
I think there is nothing strange about these features...other than it looks like what could be typically found here on earth in a river bed or along the shoreline.

The first pic you dubbed the "facemask" looks almost identical to a conch shell or other crustacean.
Thanks for the pics though.



posted on Apr, 14 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Rocks. Rock, rocks, rocks.



posted on Apr, 14 2013 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I have to agree with the others. I grew up in SE Wyoming, and we have some of the most amazing wind-carved rock formations around here. Different density matrix in the rocks, such as harder granite within sandstone, will wear at different rates, and with blowing sand, they get carved into many shapes. Holes appear, and many look like they could be skulls or bones, but they aren't.

I imagine that any bones that would appear on the surface of Mars would be decomposed by the storms that scour the surface, if they are calcium based. Fossilized bone would probably be worn to something unrecognizable.

Also, my final note: when people bring this subject up, they are making the assumption that a lifeform on another planet is a direct mimick of life that we recognize here on Earth.

All that aside, I really do love looking at these pictures! As an artist, I can appreciate the creative mind that recognizes shapes and applies them to what we know (cloud-watching).



posted on Apr, 14 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by dmorgan
 
Rocks. Rock, rocks, rocks.

What? But how can we know for sure? Most of it is dust-covered, not?!


Below is an example of what happens when Curiosity breaks the rocks. The dust-cover makes the surface look more homogeneous than it actually is:

Click here for original NASA/JPL image.


And bizarre formations like this curved feature (also note the lines/patterns right below and to the right of the arrow) can be found in so many places at Glenelg:

Click here for original NASA/JPL image.

Leaves me wondering what all the stuff beneath that dust-cover (I mean other than obvious rocks) could be if we could just have a closer look ...



posted on Apr, 15 2013 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Earthscum
 

I imagine that any bones that would appear on the surface of Mars would be decomposed by the storms that scour the surface, if they are calcium based. Fossilized bone would probably be worn to something unrecognizable.


I agree and also think that it would be difficult to actually see any fossils directly, unless they would have somehow left an imprint on the surface of a stone or rock. However, erosion would have probably removed a few centimeters of that surface-layer during the Amazonian period on Mars (as examined in this post) making it even more unlikely to spot fossils on the surface, but not entierly impossible depending on their size.

Apart from that, some of the the interesting shapes we see at Glenelg could also be something else, perhaps the remains of something more durable and manufactured (though heavily weathered, eroded and dust-covered), but I'm just thinking out loud ...


If you look at the Mechanism of Antikythera (found on Earth in 1900), it may indeed be very difficult to tell the difference between a rock and something like that, especially from a distance ... and that particular artifact is just 2000 years old.

When something like that would be spotted on Mars (from a distance and with lower resolution), the usual crowd on ATS would probably say: Oh, that's just rocks!




All that aside, I really do love looking at these pictures! As an artist, I can appreciate the creative mind that recognizes shapes and applies them to what we know (cloud-watching).

Thanks for your appreciation and I hope it's more than just cloud-watching that I'm doing here!
edit on 15-4-2013 by jeep3r because: updated image link
edit on 15-4-2013 by jeep3r because: removed image URL
edit on 15-4-2013 by jeep3r because: text



posted on Apr, 15 2013 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeep3r
And bizarre formations like this curved feature


if it is a straight line you claim it is not a rock, if it is curved you claim it is not a rock.... I suggest you turn off your computer and go outside and start looking at nature.


Leaves me wondering what all the stuff beneath that dust-cover (I mean other than obvious rocks) could be if we could just have a closer look


When you have a closer look at a rock it is still a rock....



posted on Apr, 15 2013 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by RadicalRebel
 

I think there is nothing strange about these features...other than it looks like what could be typically found here on earth in a river bed or along the shoreline.

The first pic you dubbed the "facemask" looks almost identical to a conch shell or other crustacean. Thanks for the pics though.


Now that's an interesting comment: you see nothing strange (...) but feature 1 looks almost identical to a conch shell or other crustacean?

Although that isn't exactly what I had in mind, at least it shows that I'm not the only one who thinks it doesn't look like an ordinary Mars rock!



posted on Apr, 15 2013 @ 08:03 AM
link   
S&F man.

Good work. Some pics I don't think are much good. Need better resolution, maybe.

Feature 01: The "Facemask" : not sure if it is facemask or a casing of some sort.
Feature 02: Embossed Markings? Picture 2(a): okay, but what are you seeing there? I ask because maybe I see something else - or have a suspicion there is something else there that you don't see.
Feature 02: Embossed Markings? 2(b) Not sure.
Feature 03: Mechanical Parts with Center Hole? Yup, agree
The "Feature 04: The "Sunken" Rocks of Glenelg?" I cannot see anything due to low-res... but interesting light effects caused by unknown.

Cool stuff.



posted on Apr, 15 2013 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by jeep3r
 


SOL 67 looks like a fish ,well half a fish from mouth to fins

weird how the mind works isnt it



posted on Apr, 15 2013 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blister
 
Good work. Some pics I don't think are much good. Need better resolution, maybe.


Thanks for the pointers and the time you spent on this post, Blister. It seems that the features I see in some of the pics need more highlighting, I thought it was more "obvious" ...


I didn't want to mess around too much with those images, but I'll create some versions that show the outlines of what I mean. I'll need some time for that and will post an update as soon as possible.



posted on Apr, 15 2013 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blister
 

"Feature 04: The "Sunken" Rocks of Glenelg?" I cannot see anything due to low-res... but interesting light effects caused by unknown.


Click here for the original Sol 67 source image

In the right pic above, I roughly highlighted those sections that are (at least in my view) separated by lines that are clearly visible in the original image. When taking into account the perspective, it looks like something that's stuck in the ground with the bottom part (lower right section, darker area) facing the viewer. I don't know if this helps, but I'll try to make some better visualizations later on ...



Feature 02: Embossed Markings? Picture 2(a): okay, but what are you seeing there? I ask because maybe I see something else - or have a suspicion there is something else there that you don't see.


Click here for the original Sol 137 source image

Click here for the original Sol 188 source image

I highlighted the embossed relief-like features in yellow, I don't know if you can make it out, too? Initially, I didn't think about posting it, but when I realized there were two of these similar patterns (Sol 137 and 188), I decided to put it up for discussion here on ATS ...

Honestly, I'm not sure about this one myself: could be something, but might as well be an overinterpretation ... would be great to have some opinions on this, though!



posted on Apr, 15 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Hey jeep3r, let me think on it.... gotta check something. But at first glance very interesting.



posted on Apr, 15 2013 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blister
 

Hey jeep3r, let me think on it.... gotta check something.
But at first glance very interesting.

Below you can see roughly how I think that particular rock is located in the terrain in terms of perspective and inclination. It's not perfect and the coloring is exaggerated, but it should give us a better idea of the rough outline and shape:

Click here for the image with more context. And here for the original NASA/JPL image.

Of course, this is just my own interpretation. Yet, I think that a regular geometry is visible (eg. oval outlines, seperated elements on left side of the rock etc.).

Would be a really strange kind of erosion, even if we were talking about a ventifact ...
edit on 15-4-2013 by jeep3r because: text



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce
If it is a straight line you claim it is not a rock, if it is curved you claim it is not a rock.... I suggest you turn off your computer and go outside and start looking at nature.

I'm not generalizing, it's just specific shapes that - in a wider context - look distinctive and different than your usual rock in that area. Take into account lighting and perspective and you'll see what I mean ...




When you have a closer look at a rock it is still a rock ...

In most cases that's probably the case, but if you never really look closer and question what you're seeing, you'll probably never find anything, even though it's lying right in front of you ...



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by maryhinge
reply to post by jeep3r
 

SOL 67 looks like a fish ,well half a fish from mouth to fins ...
weird how the mind works isnt it


... or half of something else which probably wouldn't be less significant! And I'm not so sure whether it would be just our minds playing a trick on us!


Thanks for your interpretation and for taking the time to look at everything more in detail!



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Looks a lot like those pictures you see at flea markets and head shops. You know, the kind where you have to de-focus to 'see' the image buried in the pattern? I mean, here's a really interesting question that someone should ask. How much did this piece of junk 'Curiosity' cost again? I mean, with all these REDUNDANT rover missions to a dead planet, that is dead, was dead, and will ALWAYS will be dead, don't you think it should have instruments that can do science-y stuff on it that can send us stuff, called data? I mean, is it really a good idea to keep doing the same things, over and over and expecting the same results? I mean, driving around on Mars, taking pictures of soft rocks, that erode constantly in a highly windy, low pressure atmosphere, without anything to slow down the particles suspended in the atmosphere? I heard that's a problem with Mars. I'm pretty sure if it was a Human explorer, or a robot not designed by science guys, you could just walk over and kick it and say, 'Wow, that's a funny looking rock!' Here's a something about Mars that we actually do have data on. It has no - repeat - no measurable magnetic field! Isn't that amazing! I would sure hate growing up on a planet like that. I mean, a little radiation is a good thing, but not like the amount that hit's the surface of Mars every day! Another thing about Mars and it's magnetic field that's good to know? Mars has NEVER had a magnetic field! Surprise! It makes a big difference, unless it's like you know, we're looking for something like the 'Horta' from the original star trek tv show, and oh yeah, like the ones in the star trek online game. I'm always tripping over those when I'm at star fleet academy or one of the star bases! Any more science-y questions about Mars? Cool. Don't ask NASA. I mean, after all, science-y guys have shot space probes at Mars, and missed. If you have any more questions about Mars, you might want to ask, oh, I don't know, John Stewart or maybe the Monster from the Black Lagoon Nebula or even Bender from Futurama. They know at least as much about Mars as NASA or those other science-y clubs like the ESA or them Russian guys! Another thing, who knows? NASA is already WHINING about not having enough money to build more science-y rovers for Mars. I mean since NASA is out of the manned space flight business now and apparently FOREVER!



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by CarbonBase
 

How much did this piece of junk 'Curiosity' cost again? (...)

I mean, driving around on Mars, taking pictures of soft rocks, that erode constantly in a highly windy, low pressure atmosphere, without anything to slow down the particles suspended in the atmosphere?

Something in the neighborhood of $2.5bn?


But the imagery is not that bad, in my view, and reveals some interesting details in the terrain. As for the erosion: I had a more detailed look at that aspect in this post based on findings by the Pathfinder mission.



I'm pretty sure if it was a Human explorer, or a robot not designed by science guys, you could just walk over and kick it and say 'Wow, that's a funny looking rock!' Here's a something about Mars that we actually do have data on.

Well, indeed, we need boots on Mars ASAP ... no question. But for now, the publicly available images provided by MSL are all we got, I'm afraid.

And I don't know: imagine you were part of the MSL science team and would have seen all these interesting formations at Rocknest, Yellowknife Bay etc., wouldn't you have made Curiosity image all of that close-up?

I can imagine that these high quality images exist. Of course, there's the public archive at NASA/JPL and images get uploaded almost directly to that server, but it's not really done in real-time. The science team needs to approve them before they go out to the public ... and I think it's not impossible that we only see selected images.



With all these REDUNDANT rover missions to a dead planet, that is dead, was dead, and will ALWAYS will be dead, don't you think it should have instruments that can do science-y stuff on it that can send us stuff, called data?

Your irony is appreciated


But I wouldn't go so far and say it has always been a dead planet. Scientific data is key, of course, but that includes visual evidence as well. Pure morphological analysis cannot be valid proof of anything, that's correct, unless we have something in front of us that resembles something non-natural which is beyond all doubt of artificial nature.

So, yes, let them do their science at NASA/JPL and collect/evaluate all the other data. I'm convinced they are doing a very good job in that regard. But I also think that potential future results of this mission still have some incredible surprises in store for us ... if we'll ever get to see them, that is!
edit on 16-4-2013 by jeep3r because: text
edit on 16-4-2013 by jeep3r because: spelling



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Hello to you and Mars.


Your first two figures showing cylindrical/tube/pipe like features that seem to intersect, join, split, and even mesh above or below each other are absolutely interesting. You will be interested to know that similar formations have been found on images of lunar surface from multiple missions, from Apollo to LROC.Obviously, most of the formations found on the Moon are bigger in scale compared to below photos, but that is not to say they do not exist at smaller scale. I think these formations are not to be overlooked. It'd be interesting to see if these formations can be found in orbital imagery of Mars surface.

These features are not to be overlooked in my opinion. There is an intriguing mystery to be solved about these formations.


Originally posted by jeep3r
Feature 01: The "Facemask"


Click here for the original NASA/JPL source image

------------------------------------------------------------------

Feature 02: Embossed Markings?

Original NASA/JPL source images: image 1 / [url=http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/00188/mcam/0188MR1009035000E1_DXXX.jpg]image 2[/url



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by PINGi14
 

Hello to you and Mars.



Hello PINGi14



I think these formations are not to be overlooked. It'd be interesting to see if these formations can be found in orbital imagery of Mars surface.


Thanks for looking into this. I've been following your threads about moon features with great interest. It's particularly a good place to look for artifcacts or unusual formations due to the lack of atmosphere/erosion. But I'm indeed very much focused on the MSL imagery, there's still a lot of work ahead.


As for the features you mentioned: I guess I don't even want to believe it's anything else than just some erosional features that somehow formed a top-layer on the rocks, but it just looks so weird!


Apart from that, I also suspect that there's still a lot to discover on the HiRISE/MRO images. I recently had a look at EBERSWALDE (alternative MSL landing site) with some interesting observations. But I'll probably focus on the ground images in the next couple of weeks ...





new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join