Former NASA Astrobiologist claims: evidence of alien life on Mars was destroyed!

page: 8
66
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


You're just repeating the same old regurgitated nonsense about someone, in this case me, supposedly not being able to read.

You do it all the time, and it's getting very old. And I believe that life existed on Mars too, as well as possibly having water below it's surface. ~$heopleNation




posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Aleister
A question, thank for any answers. The possible fossil pointed out in this thread, the segmented object, is either a naturally formed rock or a fossilized lifeform. Either or, it seems. So it's the best or one of the best possible lifeform candidates found on a Mars Rover photograph. And it happened because the first rover happened to land in the tiny crater which probably exposed this when it hit nearby. That makes it really old, way down there under ground level, brought to light by a meteorite (another song the Beatles could have sung, if they'd thought of it..."Brought to light by a meteorite" nice line and title for a song. I call dibs on the title, anyone want to add some lines here, or if it gets good maybe we can move it to another thread.....so my question:

On this thread, posters talk about the earth lifeform that comes closest to looking like this one has little arms coming out from a central core. I can't see that on this possible fossil, are you saying this object has tiny arms or is itself a segmented tiny arm. I see the segments fine, and in some areas have some melding into some areas of the surrounding rock. Thanks.
edit on 22-2-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)


He had a theory that the picture on mars shows a crinoid. Here are some pictures im not seeing that in the image.

www.bing.com...



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by wildespace
 


That has to be the most hilarious things ever!
Let's not go over to those rocks that look like skulls from a distance, if you don't drive up to them for inspection, you'll never know, then why go to mars.

Another one to check out I call the broken table...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Arken
reply to post by Ross 54
 


Do you seen the video?
He say in the first minute, and quote:



I've found the remains of life forms that are absolutely, conclusively Extraterrestrial.
edit on 22-2-2014 by Arken because: (no reason given)

I viewed the video twice, in full. Richard Hoover said he'd found fossils of microorganisms in meteorites on Earth. He made a good case that these weren't due to contamination from Earth, so by elimination, he assumed they were extraterrestrial.
The issue of an alleged fossil of a more complex form (crinoid) found on the surface of Mars is a separate issue. Hoover didn't claim that he was certain of this; repeatedly called it a 'possible fossil'.



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Aleister
A question, thank for any answers. The possible fossil pointed out in this thread, the segmented object, is either a naturally formed rock or a fossilized lifeform. Either or, it seems. So it's the best or one of the best possible lifeform candidates found on a Mars Rover photograph. And it happened because the first rover happened to land in the tiny crater which probably exposed this when it hit nearby. That makes it really old, way down there under ground level, brought to light by a meteorite (another song the Beatles could have sung, if they'd thought of it..."Brought to light by a meteorite" nice line and title for a song. I call dibs on the title, anyone want to add some lines here, or if it gets good maybe we can move it to another thread.....so my question:

On this thread, posters talk about the earth lifeform that comes closest to looking like this one has little arms coming out from a central core. I can't see that on this possible fossil, are you saying this object has tiny arms or is itself a segmented tiny arm. I see the segments fine, and in some areas have some melding into some areas of the surrounding rock. Thanks.
edit on 22-2-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

Looking at the image in the OP, I see two possible segmented arms next to each other, curving in to a common center. If this is a fossil, it may be an incomplete one, or perhaps the rest is invisible to us; inside the rock. The two segmented arms are on the left side of the image, about half way down the frame. They are at about the 11 o clock and 10 o'clock positions. Richard Hoover and, he says, other experts think this looks very much like a fossil of a crinoid, a starfish-like creature. The link shows images of creatures of this kind. Page down to Agaricocrinus americanum for one that has an especially close resemblance to this supposed fossil. en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 22-2-2014 by Ross 54 because: corrected positional figure
edit on 22-2-2014 by Ross 54 because: added link, removed erroneous name
edit on 22-2-2014 by Ross 54 because: corrected link address
edit on 22-2-2014 by Ross 54 because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-2-2014 by Ross 54 because: corrected link address



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


I hear your points. But I have no proof even that you exist.
Fairy tails might be an unfair characterization of what I said.

Subjectivity is the condition of all intelligent beings. But there is probability, and based on what I know, and have actually experienced, I can say life not human, and technologies not conventional or even within our technology to date actually exist.

As for specific items cited, we only have testimony from McKinnon and his motivations remain fairly simple. We can't know what he actually saw but we can see the smoke from the fire he started in the defense community. We can deduce the intensity with which there was response to the breach of secure files. He made another statement too that while he was on those systems he saw many others from many other countries hacking in to the same materials. So, there might be corroborative out there for what he saw. I tend to believe the direct story, but not necessarily all the interpretations.

As for NASA, I know about other agency branches. Outside of Ames where I contracted in the late 1980s, I have a friend who was launch specialists at Vandenberg and some Alaskan launch facilities. There are many facilities for space operations around the globe for secret DOD launches of technology. Vandenberg has been a fairly secure place for this, but encroachment of more homes and business within eyeshot of launch operations has increased over the years, making it harder for such to be practical. There is some evidence that a couple Saturn V launches happened in the 70's for military reconnaissance with additional Moon missions. Back then you could launch from Vandenberg and no one except the townspeople of Lompoc or Orcutt were notified and could see launches.

As far as NASA people, they are as you say, but the agency itself has a leash and what comes out is always scrutinized for policy and security. Some simple things get out in papers, but all else is managed. I did not need a security clearance to work at NASA. I could go most places I needed, and unaccompanied also. NASA is not working on anything too fringe. They keep NASA busy with all they need to satisfy scrutiny and the basic maintenance and development of conventional systems and technologies, with just the right amount of advances to not be called a dead, static or otherwise a useless funding entity. The same who own our government and military own NASA too remember. Fresh paint on the facade every once and a while is always a good idea to maintain the illusion.

Here is a link to some statements on NASA-Military relationship. I did not want to quote or paste in all this. It is one of many articles and investigative journalistic pieces on this subject. NASA-Military Connections

My step father was a DOD investigator. His office for a while was on the only patch of grass at the end of the runway on the lake bed at Edwards AFB. When the first Shuttle landing happened my family was there. Had I been there (I had an invite from my dad, I missed due to deadlines at work.) I would have been closer than the White House reps and other visitors. So from what I know, the military are the meat of NASA's meat and potatoes.

I however am positive that there was and might still be life on Mars in microbial or simple plants. Even remnants of past civilizations are not out of the question. However our ability to correctly recognize such evidence, or also find acceptable proof is not as likely to be made available with the management of the information from probes and explorer technologies there now. We have to go there. We need someone like Google to fund a rover-research mission capable of the chemistry and geologic and orbital science unfiltered by the current.

I worked a little for SETI too. People believe that if there was a discovery that it would be public immediately. I don't thing so however. The truth for what some of these military and even private agencies like SETI are finding are beyond the understanding of 99% of the population, and it is not just a question of life. It hasn't been for some time I think. Because what has been found denotes a new paradigm for what we call the Universe or even reality. Implications are so profound so as to undermine all our belief systems and general ontological views. We ask why don't those who know disclose the realities of UFOs, Aliens and paranormal phenomena they've found? Imagine finding out that most of what we know is wrong, about the universe, reality and even our personal awareness. Conversely the realities also undermine our sheepish controllable knowledge, so the implications would tell us our controlling entities are useless for anyone but themselves. The King is not only naked, he is a hologram.

I hope I answered some of your questions.

ZG
edit on 2/22/2014 by ZeroGhost because: Details added



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 05:05 PM
link   

dragonridr

Aleister
A question, thank for any answers. The possible fossil pointed out in this thread, the segmented object, is either a naturally formed rock or a fossilized lifeform. Either or, it seems. So it's the best or one of the best possible lifeform candidates found on a Mars Rover photograph. And it happened because the first rover happened to land in the tiny crater which probably exposed this when it hit nearby. That makes it really old, way down there under ground level, brought to light by a meteorite (another song the Beatles could have sung, if they'd thought of it..."Brought to light by a meteorite" nice line and title for a song. I call dibs on the title, anyone want to add some lines here, or if it gets good maybe we can move it to another thread.....so my question:

On this thread, posters talk about the earth lifeform that comes closest to looking like this one has little arms coming out from a central core. I can't see that on this possible fossil, are you saying this object has tiny arms or is itself a segmented tiny arm. I see the segments fine, and in some areas have some melding into some areas of the surrounding rock. Thanks.
edit on 22-2-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)


He had a theory that the picture on mars shows a crinoid. Here are some pictures im not seeing that in the image.

www.bing.com...


Thanks. It's a segmented something, and I'm noticing it may have, on the bottom, two separating segments instead of one, one going off to the right, the prominent one swinging up and in on the left. I'm probably the last to see this.

funbox did a gif, one of his masterpieces



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


Poor old Richard Hoover pops up every few years announcing he has found 'microbial life' in meteorites.
No one takes him seriously anymore, the science community think he's about as credible as John Lear.





posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 08:36 PM
link   

MCL1150
reply to post by wildespace
 


That has to be the most hilarious things ever!
Let's not go over to those rocks that look like skulls from a distance, if you don't drive up to them for inspection, you'll never know, then why go to mars.

Another one to check out I call the broken table...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...


Looks more like a robotic graveyard, maybe someone else lost a couple probes!



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 12:26 AM
link   
Anyone who is familiar with photoshop and knows what a clone tool is can see clearly that NASA clones over stuff. I know that as sure as I know my name. They do such an aweful job as well.



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by ZeroGhost
 




The King is not only naked, he is a hologram.


For these words you deserve an Applause, ZeroGhost.



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 02:02 AM
link   

lotusfoot
Anyone who is familiar with photoshop and knows what a clone tool is can see clearly that NASA clones over stuff. I know that as sure as I know my name. They do such an aweful job as well.


You must ask this to Mike Malin...



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 02:14 AM
link   
so, we found some microbes on Mars, the absolute "Deadest" rock in the solar system, next to Mercury of course. Finding microbes on Mars, maybe not a stretch. Since WE, meaning the angry monkeys that live on a different, nearly dead rock floating in space, probably are responsible for CONTAMINATING the surface of Mars, with microbes, from all the JUNK we left all over the place!

Now, as far as all the statues and dinosaurs and fred flinstone homes and starbucks littering the surface of Mars? Edgar Rice Burroughs is laughing and turning at the same time I'm sure!

When a Martian walks into a dunkin donuts in Las Vegas at 3 AM and orders a large coffee and two raspberry jellies and moans about getting killed at the tables, I MIGHT change my mind about life on Mars. He sounds like a decent guy and WHO DOESN'T enjoy a good cuppa and a few jellies after a long night drinking, gambling and getting down with your fab Martian self !



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 02:20 AM
link   
reply to post by tencap77
 


Sorry to say this, and with all due respect: but WTH are these NON SENSE words?
Too much donuts?



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 02:38 AM
link   

MCL1150
reply to post by wildespace
 


That has to be the most hilarious things ever!
Let's not go over to those rocks that look like skulls from a distance, if you don't drive up to them for inspection, you'll never know, then why go to mars.

You send a rover to Mars with specific tasks in mind, such as chemical analysis of rocks and soil, geological analysis from the images, and other types of analysis of the martian environment. You don't just go looking at rocks that might (or might not) looks like skulls or bones in your imagination.

Perhaps all the conspiracy/alternative people can chip in together and send a rover to Mars that will do exactly what you want. ;-)


Another one to check out I call the broken table...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Ever heard of ventifacts?
edit on 23-2-2014 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   
[

lotusfoot
Anyone who is familiar with Photoshop and knows what a clone tool is can see clearly that NASA clones over stuff. I know that as sure as I know my name. They do such an aweful job as well.


I've seen documentaries on NASA and other artists coming out on manipulation and seeing original photos with clear structures and evidence of other civilizations, but the tools they use currently are way beyond what we have in the public domain now. The "healing tool" in Photoshop is an example. It looks at the surrounding color, texture and pattern and replicates it in the brush to cover or erase spots and scratches. Making it close to impossible for people to see any issues.

Several years ago the tools they used were less precise, and we could clearly see areas of the photos that were smeared or diffused. Most the lunar retouched photos we are finding artifacts are a couple decades or more old. Now however there would be no evidence if done right.

I do digital retouching professionally and also have a friend who was working for JPL fixing the images, stitching together and color correcting images from Mars landers, and although he does not believe in the specific phenomena I do, he has never shown any attitude for covering up anything he might find. He knows about my own experiences and is sympathetic, not otherwise arguing with my observations. He knows I have a good technical and science understanding and am an experienced amateur astronomer and science illustrator so a critical thinker. But if he found such, I am sure I would know in how he responds to such subjects. He is however not involved as closely with imaging at NASA, JPL and USGS as he was.

ZG



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 03:05 PM
link   

wildespace

MCL1150
reply to post by wildespace
 


That has to be the most hilarious things ever!
Let's not go over to those rocks that look like skulls from a distance, if you don't drive up to them for inspection, you'll never know, then why go to mars.

You send a rover to Mars with specific tasks in mind, such as chemical analysis of rocks and soil, geological analysis from the images, and other types of analysis of the martian environment. You don't just go looking at rocks that might (or might not) looks like skulls or bones in your imagination.

Perhaps all the conspiracy/alternative people can chip in together and send a rover to Mars that will do exactly what you want. ;-)


Another one to check out I call the broken table...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Ever heard of ventifacts?
edit on 23-2-2014 by wildespace because: (no reason given)


Knowing what I know about how the mind works in seeing patterns and projecting those onto similarly shaped and shaded rocks, I have had issues with such speculative discussions becoming too certain and not accounting for how likely an observation might be a misidentification of naturally occurring land and rock forms.

When I am in the right place, usually in the desert, like Death Valley, and with sufficient camera and equipment I plan to duplicate this effect to show how we can easily be fooled by an image from a critical angle. If the rovers would move a foot in any direction, the image would either be 3D or more accurately stereo, or it would show a particular collection of rocks, or shape from an alternate angle was not what we thought.

Saying that, I am of the firm belief that there are in fact such forms of evidence we can see in photos and telemetry. I have seen very convincing lunar images and even video that clearly show such evidence. Most of what people show and argue here tend to be otherwise wrongly identified illusions of rock forms, or animals in the clouds. We can spend hours looking at high resolution images from Moon, Mars and even Earth to find things that look like things, but it is mostly an exersize in futility for any substantive results. Not impossible of course, just not as likely.

If it is not clear, or there is not corroborating evidence as an alternate angle I don't waste my time with it. There is altogether better things to research out there with more provable evidence.

ZG



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Great read. I love stuff like this and I am a big believer of past civilizations of advanced nature involving mars



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Arken
reply to post by wildespace
 


With all due respect, wildespace, but... are you an astrobiologist?
Has you established the Astrobiology Research Group at the NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center?

Stll, I admire your attempt to discredit, wildespace..




Still, I admire your enthusiasm Arken.


Thanks. Enthusiasm and perseverance.
Well, my uncle was a blacksmith and he has taught me how using hammer and anvil, fire and water in order to soften the steel...


Arken The Awesome

Great thread, greater rebuttal



posted on Feb, 24 2014 @ 12:19 AM
link   

wildespace
So he thinks those small round things are fossils, based on the similarity of their shape. But morphology alone cannot be used unambiguously as a tool for primitive life detection.
proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org...

Those things are probably concretions.
Concretions vs. fossils

So, another thread with a loud, sensational title, but little to show for it. A former NASA scientists does not make an infallible expert; plenty of knowlegeable people with big achievements went down the pseudo-science/conspiracy/anti-mainstream path.

Still, I admire your enthusiasm Arken.


Maybe you forgot the part about the meteorites, or maybe you didn't watch the video. Maybe you didn't read the papers he has published, or maybe you didn't understand them, just like he suggests. So, over 40 years at Nasa and inventor of the year, and is willing to debate anyone who thinks they can prove him wrong. It seems as though you took the least important aspect of the conversation (crinoids) and used it to try and discredit the whole conversation. How convenient.. Perhaps you should be the one to debate him?





new topics
top topics
 
66
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join