Mars Anomaly - Possibly Presenting Features of Intelligent Design

Erm, it looks like a wind-scoured rock to me.

Originally posted by amazing
Very interesting rock or artifact. We'll never know from this picture alone.

The question really is; If there was an ancient Martian civilization and there well could have been. How do we look for it without invoking pareidolia (s.p.)? How do Archaeologists look for ancient civilizations without succumbing to this dreaded curse? Aren't we supposed to be looking for anomalies, artifacts and such, presenting them for review and discussing them? Isn't that how science works?

Hi Amazing! Absolutely, "we'll never know from this picture alone". Well said! And yes, that is, in part, "how science works" - discovery by whatever means!

Regarding pareidolia, it really is not a "curse" as you say, except maybe for "skeptical thought". It is a recognition capability tool, and a blessing that most are born with. That is even how we are able to recognize familiar faces and objects. Without such capability we would be in very sad shape. And as intelligent beings, we are able to apply that capability to many different objects and situations, but a person of any intelligence would not claim that a "cloud" that looked a battle tank, would be a real tank.

Some proffer pareidolia situations for skeptic benefit, but are at times not realistic. There actually is a similar term for people with an inability to recognize - "prosopagnosia". But, than we don't hear much talk about that.

reply to post by mblahnikluver Rocks don't grow, it's called weather erosion from natural conditions on the planet. The same thing happens here!

"Rocks don't grow". Of course, that was the purpose of my statement! Nor does "natural erosion" create such features, as are depicted in the photo.

If what is shown in the Curiosity photo is really there, then only intelligent design could be the cause, in my opinion. If the photo is wrong, then such could cause my assessment of an anomaly to be wrong!

Thanks for your comments mblahnikluver, even though we do not agree with what we see there!

Originally posted by smurfy

That is what I am trying to point out to you, there is no 'rectangular extension' on the left hand side. There is however a light grey segment of rock half diamond shape in front of the dark rock, partially concealing the dark rock, that light grey piece of rock is also casting its own shadow and adding to the illusion. Actually the grey rock I'm talking about is really a protruding part of the dark rock that is catching the daylight, not concealing it.

Hi smurfy! Thanks for trying to help! What I am seeing is not as you describe your view. I would like to know how you disregard the seemingly "perfect angle" rectangular pieces - ie. the elongated part, and the larger rectangular piece on the end of the rectangular elongation? Just wondering? Or do you just not see the rectangular shapes?

Again thanks for your thoughts!

Originally posted by rdunk
Hi Amazing! Absolutely, "we'll never know from this picture alone".

Well, we have to photos, one from the left and the other from the right camera, so we can make an attempt at showing it in 3D.

The image from the right camera was slightly reduced and the image from the left slightly enlarged to compensate for the different lens.

An anaglyph, for red+blue glasses.


A cross-eye version, for those that don't have red+blue glasses.


An animated GIF, for those that cannot see either of the previous images.


I hope that helps.

Thanks much ArMaP. I don't have red/blue glasses, but with what I can see, this still looks pretty much the same to me, as the OP screenshots.

ArMaP, do you have any thoughts relative to the shadow that is under the elongation? While it is not very seeable in your pics, in the OP magnification pics it is very obvious. Yet, when looking at it, it is hard to find what object is responsible for that shadow.

Ok smurfy and all - - because of smurfy's comments about the rocks and the anomaly "elongation, I have done more "looking", and there is one thing I definitely now see as being different relative to my prior comments.

That difference is.....what I referred to as a larger rectangular piece on the end of the elongation, I now see this as being a rectangular opening in the rock/sand that the elongation is thrust into.

And if that be the case, then I would no longer suggest the elongation to be "rectangular". I said to begin with that it seemed to be "obfuscated", thus it could be any shape, and any construction.

Yep, now to me, it looks like whatever the elongation is, it doesn't stop in the air, but extends into the opening there. (not just going behind a rock) For this anomaly, we can assume that whatever the elongation is, it must be a significant element of of whatever the function of the oval structure

Can anyone else here see it that way?

Thanks smurfy!!!!

Originally posted by rdunk
ArMaP, do you have any thoughts relative to the shadow that is under the elongation? While it is not very seeable in your pics, in the OP magnification pics it is very obvious. Yet, when looking at it, it is hard to find what object is responsible for that shadow.

I don't see anything strange with the shadow, it looks to be in the right place for being the shadow of what looks to me like the topmost rock of the group.

reply to post by ArMaP


ArMaP, I am not sure what "rock" you are referring to, as having created that shadow. On the basis of all of the other shadows in this photo, the sun's prominence would be about directly overhead. So, that doesn't leave much even to make that shadow.

So which rock?? I am still looking too )

reply to post by rdunk


OK, so we know that we are both talking about the same thing, which shadow are you talking about?

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by rdunk

 

OK, so we know that we are both talking about the same thing, which shadow are you talking about?

ArMaP, that is a good thought!

The shadow I find interesting is the one in the photo that is almost directly under the elongation on the left end of the anomaly. The shadow ends near the point where the elongation now seems to go into the wall of rock and sand.

Yes, looking at a shadow is somewhat like "looking at clouds", but the difference is..........shadows must have a "generator". And I see nothing to have generated that shadow. As I said earlier, that entire elongated piece seems possibly obfuscated, as viewed in the screenshots. Whatever generated that shadow has to be somewhere around the left end of the elongated piece.

reply to post by rdunk


It would be easier if you posted an image with that area marked in some way.

Is it the area in yellow in the image below?

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by rdunk

 

It would be easier if you posted an image with that area marked in some way.

Is it the area in yellow in the image below?

You are right ArMaP, but I did not think about a "shadow locater" until it was too late for that post-edit. So, I will just add it here for you.

And yes, you do have the right shadow, however, you did not color it all in. But that is it.

reply to post by rdunk


I think that shadow is just the left side of the rock to the right of the shadow. As light is coming from the top and a little from the right, that shadow is not as dark as real shadow as it's just an unilluminated face of the rock.

That's what it looks to me, after looking at the 3D images (I used the cross-eye version, the one I find most effective for me).

Originally posted by ArMaP

 

I don't see anything strange with the shadow, it looks to be in the right place for being the shadow of what looks to me like the topmost rock of the group.

In the meantime, I took a closer look at the original sol 120 image referenced in the OP
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

While looking more closely at this outcrop at 'Shaler', I noticed at least three interesting areas of which I'd love to have had close-up views (which Curiosity of course didn't acquire). You'll find the areas in question highlighted in the image below:

Click here for a large version of the above image.

Upon closer inspection, you will see that all of them feature some kind of reliefs or patterns which are certainly not the result of compression artifacts. I didn't want to highlight the features in the image itself, so here some further explanations of what I think I see:

A. Relief/scratches in the upper section (top left to middle right)
B. Wavy kind of relief/pattern (left to right) quite parallel to eachother in top-bottom direction
C. Slab with layers peeling off and a gill-like pattern/grid (bottom left to top right)


I'm not saying that these features are artificial, but they would certainly be interesting from a geological point of view, I suppose. I can imagine a lot of the parallel lines having been caused by water or salt erosion with plates gradually breaking along straight lines. However, I didn't find a quick explanation for the wavy patterns in B as well as the gill-like parallel lines in C.

Any ideas how these could have formed? Thanks in advance ...

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by rdunk

 

I think that shadow is just the left side of the rock to the right of the shadow. As light is coming from the top and a little from the right, that shadow is not as dark as real shadow as it's just an unilluminated face of the rock.

That's what it looks to me, after looking at the 3D images (I used the cross-eye version, the one I find most effective for me).

Well ArMaP, I appreciate your diligence in trying to help with this! If one does even a little study of shadows, we can find that shadows/silhouettes are a function of many factors. But, very often they do represent a perfect shadow silhouette of the object casting the shadow.

I really don't believe that we can see in this photo, the object responsible for this shadow. There is no visible "rock" in position to make this shadow.

Also, I find it "extremely interesting" that the elongation piece that goes into the side of the surface "shows no shadow" at all. With the apparent angle of the sunlight that we can see, there should be a long shadow there, on the ground directly under it, or on the ground slightly to the near side of it.

It is really sad that we cannot see the structure of this elongated piece. It does seem to extend into the side of this surface area. With what we can just barely see of it, it likely has some type of mechanical purpose - we can see one "metal-looking" stud on the near end of it, and maybe just the top of the heads of two or three more going to the left. Sure does look obfuscated, but if so, why would the main body of the anomaly have been left mostly visible??

Chances are that we're going to get some more images of the 'Shaler' outcrop. According to BBC, Curiosity is likely to stop by again when leaving Yellowknife Bay to head for Mt. Sharp:

Curiosity is due to turn its drill again in this mudstone for further analysis before climbing out of Yellowknife Bay and heading for the crater's big central mountain, Aeolis Mons (Mount Sharp).

But almost as soon as it starts that journey, the robot is going to stop at some of the most spectacular rocks seen so far on the mission. Scientists have mentioned the so-called Shaler outcrop but haven't yet spoken about it in great detail.

Source (BBC News)

Let's hope we'll get some more close-up views of the area ... could be helpful to clarify what you think you saw in your OP. And when considering that the mission team referred to 'some of the most spectacular rocks' in that article, it may even help to verify or disprove some of what I posted about in my own threads!

P.S.: I still don't think they'd show us an anomaly in close-up view, even if it were there ... !

Having spent almost 4 years and about to get my BSc in focused on Geology.

I can tell you they are rocks.

Sorry.

reply to post by rocksandstuff

Hey there, rocksandstuff!

It's good to have someone with geological expertise commenting on these topics. Also, I realized you've only registered some days ago, so welcome 'on board' again and I'm very much looking forward to your upcoming posts & threads ...

Originally posted by rocksandstuff
Having spent almost 4 years and about to get my BSc in focused on Geology.

I can tell you they are rocks.

Sorry.

edit on 10-5-2013 by rocksandstuff because: Grammar, clarity.

Hey rocksandstuff, welcome as a member to the forum. Early congrats on your career degree plans!!

By the way, a silly question........is your user name rocks-and-stuff, or is it rock-sand-stuff"?

There certainly are a lot of 'rocks" on Mars to look at and study. For sure, the Rovers are doing just that with some of their experiments. But, one thing also for sure, knowing what rocks might look like does not necessarily give one an "eye for anomalies".

IMO, there is nothing about this anomaly that looks like a rock, nor the surrounding rocks. It does have very specific unnatural (design) features, as well as relatively significant obfuscation of the elongation to the left.

However, I do appreciate your comments and "educated opinion", as you certainly do join others here who also can see only rocks in this thread. For sure, this anomaly is amongst the "rocks-and-stuff"! .