Ancient stone head on Mars?

Originally posted by amazing
This is a conspiracy theory website

Yes, and its motto is "Deny Ignorance", not "Believe anything silly thing someone posts here"

the word "rocks" is thrown at those that bring these anomalous pictures for us to judge.

Except there has been no anomalous pictures shown, just pictures of rocks that some people have made up stories about....

reply to post by 0bserver1


OP 1 cannot see the stone head shared. But when the word nothing but MARS rock is used by one its like in this image below this is what one refers to for example as just another MARS rock or nothing there.


to clarify.


Thanks to the ATS member who shared...


NAMASTE*******

Good pictures. They're on the moon too. The problem is, why are there faces with eyes in everything. We're in a mystery realm.

Mars itself is loaded with mysteries.



www.marsanomalyresearch.com...


my personal favorite, aside from the dolphin one.

reply to post by Unity_99


personally, I like the giant parrot sculpture

Originally posted by Wyrdnews
ROCKS, ROCKS EVERYWHERE!

I'll oblige...



I mean the OP has got to be trolling... I mean at least with earlier threads on this stuff you actually kinda could see what the thread starter was getting at but with these rocks in this OP's pic...

Come on, a head really?.. there's no way in hell any of those rocks could look like anything even remotely like a face, well not any face im familiar with.

I suggest the OP and anyone who agrees with him needs to go outside take a trip to the beach or mountains and look at actual rocks of all kinds out in the wild to get some idea of what they are talking about before spouting off that these things are heads or faces or rats or tiny aliens being run over by the mars rovers...

the aupcii works to circle around the fliers...

I think I might take pictures of clouds and then photoshop arrows pointing to parts of the clouds and post them...look! it's Hitler!...look,... It's a pineapple!,... look,... it's a carburator for a "57 Chevy!!!


These kinds of threads muddy the waters for REAL anomalies that should be studied...

In all seriousness psychological operations kind of makes sense for if sense this or that and accuracy is made & more questioned as well as control of mind with exposure then again makes sense to maybe pareidolia test for what minds see or make up but then jump jump jump blink,blink,blink IN & see w/the who op generated, observation is collective somewhat.

NAMASTE*******

Rocks are like clouds you can make out of them what ever you want . Sorry I want to find evidence of life on Mars but I's got to be better then rocks.

Originally posted by amazing
How would we ever find ancient relics here on earth if we weren't looking for them ( looking for rocks that look artificial, so to speak)?

Archaeologists do not walk around looking for strange rocks, they base their work in stronger evidence, like signs of occupation on the area.

It's valid to believe that some of these artifacts, if they existed, would still be preserved, especially considering the atmosphere and the massive sand storms that have the possibility to uncover things hidden for ...millennia.

The problem I see with that is why would only strange things would remain and not things easily recognisable? Why always statues and never a metal pan, for example. And why are the strange objects always at the limit of the resolution and not close to the camera?
(Yes, I know that there are cases where the objects are close to the camera, but the majority isn't).

This is a conspiracy theory website with a multitude of forums devoted to, not only conspiracies but, archeology, ancient civilizations, extra terrestrial life, space exploration etc.

True, but that doesn't mean that we should accept everything as true just because someone says it, right?

What's going on here is a belittling of those that find these anomalous pictures or hold to the theory that there might have been an ancient civilization on Mars.

I agree, it's OK to disagree with what other members post, it's not OK to treat them bad because of that, regardless on the "side" we are on this (or any other) topic.

reply to post by Ophiuchus 13


That's a fake, the original ESA photo doesn't show nothing like that and those symbols are recognisable as coming from a computer symbols font.

reply to post by ArMaP


yes ArMaP

reply to post by StrawAnonymous


The poster you refer to does makes some good posts; and does have a history of aggression (the combination of their words and their avatar make them memorable, and not always in the light they seek to be viewed). Aggression can be seen as passion, and I would not dissuade a poster from being passionate; just refrain from being snarky, disruptive, vindictive, cruel, evil, or creating threads that would have the sole intent on making fun of others.

1 year at the site a long term member? Well, time is open to perception of the individual. Ahh, you might've been trying to kindly encourage more positive posts, I see!


What the poster you replied to fails to realize, is the point that was being made to her is that what archaeologists see as real finds, a random skeptic being shown pictures of the objects would almost definitely say 'it's rocks, just rocks'. The proposition the poster you replied to suggested, making a 'fake' post to call out those who see things in rocks as others see things in clouds could easily be turned around the other way. In the same 'spirit' of what they suggest, we could create posts that have real artifacts in desert areas, things others would consider 'rocks', make them look like mars/moon images ... then pounce on them when the hidden text is revealed that the objects were from a real archaeological site from a meaningful find. Doing such things, though could be considered 'fun' from the adversary position in the know, from either fake thread, it is disrespectful to a community based on denying ignorance and intent to be helpful, sharing, and making each other better, more knowledgeable people at the end of the day.

Though using earthly archaeological techniques would certainly be of great value, these techniques can not only overlook things on our planet or dismiss them at time to be found later to be more (depending on the current accepted theories of where man/life could've existed or could've been capable of); but when considering we are talking about an alien planet, all bets are off.

Let us assume for a moment, there was some form of humanoid life there 20,000 years ago. Something happened that destroyed the balance that allowed life to exist. Now, if we take our own world as an example, our current way of life would all but disappear. Roads would decay to dust, so would all our houses and skyscrapers. Erosion of 20,000 years would take care of a lot of the rest. Even things like the pyramids would face near certain degradation; I mean whatever your idea of their age, they still have a long way to go to reach 20k years old and are already deteriorating.

Unless petrified, bones turn to dust just as well as flesh. The only thing that we would see are pieces of leftover ruins; ruins made in stone, crumbled from lack of protection from the catastrophic events of the dying and then dead planet.


I am not trying to convince anyone these are anything but rocks; but to have a closed mind that there is a possibility that not everything is a rock, or that we should expect to see a lot if we saw anything, is embracing ignorance and equal to a kid with their fingers in their ears screaming 'nah nah nah, I can't hear you' with their eyes slammed shut.


With a closed mind, science cannot do its job. Closed minds are how we got people being criminalized for saying the earth revolves around the sun and is spherical. When you scream heretic at people who think outside the box, you do yourself and humanity a disservice. Debate and discuss the subject with belief and conviction in the facts you see, with an open mind to the possibility you could be wrong, no matter how strongly you believe in your paradigm.

When you resolve yourself to attacking people instead of ideas, you belittle yourself. Debate ideas, discuss facts; leave the snide comments and ideas to the immature and the playground bullies.

BSc holder in Geology here.

Rocks I am afraid.

Wow
Dont know about heads, but they do look like little tanks to me, well camoflaged tanks.

Sorry, I vote rocks on this one. :/

Based on my training and years of experience as a Lunar cartographer, I just see ordinary and random shaped rocks.

Try as I might, I'm not seeing anything but rocks.. I don't see anything even remotely resembling a face or a head.. are you sure this isn't similar to the phenomena of looking in the clouds and seeing faces?

Wow nice collection of martian rocks....

I think what is happening to you, is that you want to believe there was advanced civilization on mars so bad, and so your mind associates random images with things you are familiarized with, thus feeding into your self delusion that what you see is what you think you are seeing, in which case you think a volcanic rock is a stone head.

What is it you are running from in your past, that you need to believe so hard that there was civilization on mars?