Life on mars this is it! no doubt!

Don't need much words look for your self.
This is the proof there is live on mars!



closer



top one



bottom one



in color


Original was little bright and blue so I used auto color with IASViewer-3.1.2.

This looks like tree's of some sort to me.

There are much more tree's on the picture but don't got al day.

Excuse me for my English not a native language of mine, some people (rocksarerocks) have trouble with it to them I say.
Why don't you try to write in Dutch, Spanish, and German I can read, write and speak them! so please keep it to the thread.

[edit on 8-4-2008 by johndoeknows]

*Title edit

[edit on 9-4-2008 by dbates]

Again with the dunes? I see a rock that has been swallowed by the moving deserts.

Someone please plant these into a terragen program.

sorry my friend, but i wouldnt post this as absolute fact...have you actually been to the surface to climb this martian tree?...I hate to sound condeceding, but until we set foot on the surface its all speculation, its good to research these kind of things just dont count it as fact until well its actually facts...Deny Ignorance...Think you might be matrixing a lil bit


Good Day
Skept!cal

What wonderfully evocative images. Nicely done, johndoeknows.

Whilst these have been presented before on ATS, and mainly lifted from this site:

www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

I've never seen them in such detail before. They're almost too good to be true...

Whilst they do suggest either living, or long deceased (fossilised?) arboreal specimins, I agree with skept!cal's statement, in that we absolutely cannot decide upon what these images depict until NASA astronauts, or independant explorers, make it to Mars.

And therein is the problem. We're in for a long wait, and even when Man finally sets foot up there, there is no guarantee that any or all findings will be released. If these are "trees" that are still growing, then NASA has an awful lot of back-pedalling and explaining to do. It's just a matter as to whether they're willing to bite the bullet and admit to making mistakes, or there truly is something to the theory of suppresion of Martian ecology and history.

Of course, all we could be looking at are truly "alien" rockforms. Even if that is the case, then they are of immense interest, and no less thought provoking.

And at the end of the day, where better to find them?



[edit on 8-4-2008 by Beamish]

reply to post by Beamish



Yes I agree but until then we have to do it with what we got.
And to be honest they use sonar of poorer quality to find ships on the bottom of the oceans. this is something that cant be a rock or dust devil.


[Mod Edit - remove Large quote]

Mod Note Please Review: Warnings for excessive quoting, and how to quote
Quote the post immediately before yours: This makes no sense, and quoting the entire previous post above yours will result in a slight warning.

[edit on 8/4/2008 by Sauron]

So, why don't they show up at the lowest part of the dunes? I'm not seeing trees or any other object higher than the dune. What I see is some type of darker material sliding down from the high point of a dune and staining the lighter material.

didn't we land a rover (viking?) in mars before? sorry to early for me to google this but i'm pretty sure 'bout that. is the rover still there? can we launch another one to check mars? seems like there's a lot of mars weirdness nowadays.
must be inspired by the gary sinize "back to mars (?)" rerun movie the other day

Does anyone know what NASA is calling these things? They definetly look like some kind of plant... Please U2U me if anyone has any additional info as to what NASA says they are. Thanks.

As stated, this has been discussed before, and there is an explanation, and no, they are not trees or any other sort of plant life...

What causes the black dots on dunes on Mars? As spring dawned on the Northern Hemisphere of Mars in 2004, dunes of sand near the poles begin to defrost. Thinner regions of ice typically thaw first revealing sand whose darkness soaks in sunlight and accelerates the thaw. The process might involve sandy jets exploding through the thinning ice. By summer, the spots expanded to encompass the entire dunes that were then completely thawed and dark. The carbon dioxide and water ice actually sublime in the thin atmosphere directly to gas. Taken in mid-July, the above image shows a field of spotted polar dunes spanning about 3 kilometers near the Martian North Pole. Today, the future of Mars rovers Spirit and Opportunity remains unknown windy dust storms continue to starve them of needed sunlight.

from APOD

reply to post by beastamerica


Spirt and Opportunity were launched...have been doing research on the red planet for some years now even when the rovers were expected i think to roam the red planet for bout 6 months..so yeah we have landed rovers there..

Good Day
Skept!cal

Looking at the pictures, it kind of looks as if they were thrust out of the dune judging by the ejecta looking spray at the base of each....kind of like when a depth charge goes off. Especially the 2nd/middle photo.

reply to post by johndoeknows


No. Without wishing to sound rude, that is not proof of anything, other than your willingness to see what you want to see, and ignore all other evidence that demonstrates your assertions are nothing more than wishful thinking.

The pictures are stunning johndoeknows and good find, sensfan. That was exactly my first impression when I saw these photos, some sort of sand jet or spray (for lack of better words).

And yes, the rovers are still plucking away. There is some talk that nasa may have to temporarily shut one down because of budget cuts, but last word was that they may not have to do that...

Budget Cuts Could Shut Down Mars Rover

and an update...

Mixed signals from NASA about fate of Mars rover

reply to post by dave420


I think that's taking it a bit too far Dave.

If you actually want to examine the evidence, what I see in this image is a 3-dimensional object casting a shadow.



Now, granted, we can't state with certainty it's a tree. But I personally think that NASA's 'stained sand' hypothesis fits the observed evidence much less than 'tree' at this point. Wet sand doesn't cast a shadow. It certainly doesn't cast shadows on many dunes at once, that are laid out in accordance with the angle of the sun in the picture.

I think it's important for us ALL to keep from proclaiming 'what we're seeing is (Fill in the blank)'. Even the skeptics, even NASA.

Especially Dave, in absence of a better theory, which I've not seen you provide. I'm not just talking in this thread either. You have a tendency to call something 'bunk' without offering an alternative explanation, and you add to these posts (regularly) an insult to the poster you're speaking to.

If you've got something to say, an analysis of the evidence that shows some sort of results maybe? I'm all ears. Otherwise, we should all keep in mind that it has yet to be determined what these pictures are actually showing. And the Original Poster's guess is at this point not refuted by the evidence, especially when combined with evidence of ample surface water in both liquid and solid forms on Mars (that's NASA data).

-WFA

Debunkers....

Although we do not have proof that they are trees, surely they are NOT nothing.
Rather than debunking other opinions, shouldn't we rather try and have positive posts or speculations as to what they might be?

Originally posted by qrios
Debunkers....

Although we do not have proof that they are trees, surely they are NOT nothing.
Rather than debunking other opinions, shouldn't we rather try and have positive posts or speculations as to what they might be?

I think if you read my post above you will see that it has been discovered what they are. Case closed as far as I'm concerned.

While I greatly respect both your viewpoint and your willingness to cite sources, I respectfully disagree that this and other tree-like features are 'case-closed' stains on the sand.

The shadows cast are but one reason.

For NASA to argue against the possibility of life in one breath, while proudly proclaiming the discovery of all of the necessary requirements for life in the same breath, also makes me highly suspicious.

Arthur C. Clarke's 'trees' have not been explained properly either.


I'm sorry, I really don't mean to be rude. I just don't believe NASA when their explanations don't make any sense. I'll wait until someone can show me a 'from the ground' image of the same location before I'm calling this one 'case closed' one way or the other.

-WFA

Much love by the way, I always enjoy reading your posts.

This is LIVE on mars?

These are live pictures from Mars?

Are you trying to tell me to go live on mars?

I don't understand how anyone can post such a blantant lie and not even get the spelling correct. When you have absolute proof of something, use your spell checker, then post it.

Welcome to the daily "there is life on mars with no proof" thread. Gold star for you.

[edit on 8-4-2008 by rocksarerocks]

Resorted to attacking spelling have we?
No facts or evidence to use in this case Rocksarerocks?

Sensan had a point, with a reason. So does the original poster.
In fact, so do I.

Where is yours? All I read on this end are insults...

Is there a Mod monitoring this thread?
Could we request one respectfully?

Let's stay on topic, and discuss the issue. Not the OPs spelling.

-WFA

Originally posted by rocksarerocks
This is LIVE on mars?

These are live pictures from Mars?

Are you trying to tell me to go live on mars?

I don't understand how anyone can post such a blantant lie and not even get the spelling correct. When you have absolute proof of something, use your spell checker, then post it.

Welcome to the daily "there is life on mars with no proof" thread. Gold star for you.

[edit on 8-4-2008 by rocksarerocks]

Whoa...the OP was in a hurry, look at your keyboard, the "f" is above the "v".....so the OP made a mistake...and????
It´s pretty sad when you have to find something, ANYTHING to criticize, just so you can knock someone, because you disagree with their post, or reasoning... Do you have proff there is NOT life on Mars? The OP may not have proff there is but the post is still a good one IMO.
Edit for spelling :-)



[edit on 8-4-2008 by NetStorm]