Amazing Site Of A Lost Civilization On Mars!!

Originally posted by Quackmaster
I stated the method required to go from seeing that picture to making a statement that it proved an ancient civilization on Mars required a comical level of guess work and illogical thought.

Yet there are so many of you on here that see a blurry orange pic on the internet and start doing back flips screaming life on Mars. I guess the majoirty of belief in a topic is based on the simple fact you just want to believe something.

So Quack, what constitutes proof to you are the casinos of Las Vegas. You'd want to see something like this on Mars otherwise as you say, it requires a comical level of guesswork that it could be the ruins of an ancient civilization. Not quite right. Now have a look at this pic below. What do you think it is?

Australian archaeologists have uncovered the remains of ancient human settlements in Syria.

A team of researchers from the Australian National University have used declassified US spy satellite images from the 1960s to help them find the location of the ruins.

Archaeologist Mandy Mottram says the remains of pottery factories, tombs and even an ancient basilica were found.

"You can pinpoint the sites using the satellite images quite simply because you see anomalies in the landscape," she said.

"You can't go, 'Oh yes looking at the photograph, I know what this is going to be', you don't know that until you go there, but you can get a pretty fair idea that there's a site of some kind there."

Ms Mottram says the remains of an ancient basilica were among the finds.

Ancient human settlements in Syria? Wow! These guys, according to your warped logic must be off their rockers or more aptly, lost their marbles! Does that look like there was an ancient civilization there?

As what you stressed, it requires a degree of lunacy to imagine that! But heck! These ARE the ruins of an ancient city - Syria!

So back off some. It'll do your blood pressure some good!!

Cheers!!

lawprofessors.typepad.com...

I understand and accept your point, apologies if I caused offence and I agree I do get too stressed.

However, back to my original point, but perhaps in a gentler manner ;-)

The picture you show to back up your hypothesis does not in anyway prove or disprove the city of Syria. It helps to concentrate the efforts of the archeoligists at areas that could potentially have ruins in them. In hind sight we know this to be true in this case.

The picture of Mars does not allow the same level of hypothesis - the context, potential alterations to the image and the lack of any proven evidence for a culture or race having existed on Mars that could have constructed such structures means at best anything you say is based on unsubstantiated assumptions.

Now, I will meet you half way, because your posts have in the past taught me a lot, but in this instance I think you are asking a little much to expect this to stand up on its own. I will agree that I can't disprove it is an ancient this, that or the other - but at the same time you definately can't prove your statement.

I hope we can play nice again 8-)

Hello Mike,

Thank you Mike for your patience. I have been looking at Mars pics for only three months now (some NASA-doctored moon pics did it for me) and I already have in my collection lots of pics showing snake-like things, plants looking like a combination of lichen and algae - for example the one that was run over and torn in half by one of the Mars Rovers - and there are pics showing multitudes of balloon-like things that move. As soon as I have my little project ready, I will post a scene where one of these balloon-things gets eaten by something even weirder looking. For the unprejudiced observer there is a plethora of unexplainable and oddly artificial looking details in the Rover images.

Much to our collective chagrin is the following fact that many a casual observer cum self-proclaimed debunker seems to miss: ALL the images from Mars or from our Moon are doctored. There are at the moment more than 6 GB on my harddisk, most of them showing the effects of computerized image tampering. Whenever there are very light or very dark smudges on Mars images you can be sure this software struck again. Also very obvious are curious changes in surface structuring going from rock-strewn to featureless. If this smudging doesn't go far enough our NASA or ESA pawns issue images in crappy Jpeg where the background turns to a angular grid with any amount of zoom. Just look at the latest SPIRIT pics where the suddenly dusty sun panels are shown. There are white splotches in one pic that have only one explanation, especially the triangular one! I live in the country and I know a snail when I see one, or two.

I am convinced that there is something hidden on Mars. Why? For most of my fifty years in this vale of tears I've been an avid reader. While reading Sitchin's work many question that went unanswered during these years found a coherent intelligent answer. How do you know it is an intelligent answer? Compare it to the answers you get from NASA or the archaeology establishment and you will know.

Has anyone read George Orwell's 1984? The main character works for the Ministry of Truth where his job is to alter old newspaper articles, i.e. cut out pictures of people who fell out of favor or put new endings to old stories etc.
Considering the time and money invested in tampering and obfuscating what really is in our Solar System, this decidedly must have great importance.

If Sitchin's theory of the Annunaki way station on Mars holds tight - and taking into account the obvious proofs stashed in museums all over Earth - this would explain the presence of civilization on Mars as well as the reluctance of the current crew to make their presence known. They know us.

The Face On Mars has not been debunked! To the contrary, in NASA's dreary attempt to debunk something undebunkable they let their mask slip once more. For all you great DEBUNKERS out there: the military has been using software enabling computers to identify artificial landmarks. This software gave the Face a better than 98 percent probability of being artificial.

And now, Mike, I would like to give you a link to a pic that I found a couple of weeks ago because I know you will appreciate it. By the way, I do ignore posters who see 'only rocks'. Here goes:

origin.mars5.jpl.nasa.gov...

NASA claim the pics are from Sol 87 which translates to March 30/April 1st, 2004. Since there are more than twenty pics showing the coated guy wearing breathing apparatus from different angles they filed these pics under different Sols (all around Sol 87, Mars Rover Spirit Raw Pictures) probably to be able to say: This is there several days in a row therefore it must be a rock. When you are through looking at our friend in the top right corner please take a close gander at the top left and please tell me what you see.

Looking forward to hearing from you, Mike.

Greetings from Switzerland,

Outrageousfortune

[edit on 25-4-2008 by outrageousfortune]

Originally posted by outrageousfortune
As soon as I have my little project ready, I will post a scene where one of these balloon-things gets eaten by something even weirder looking. For the unprejudiced observer there is a plethora of unexplainable and oddly artificial looking details in the Rover images.

That should be interesting, I will wait patiently for those images.

There are at the moment more than 6 GB on my harddisk, most of them showing the effects of computerized image tampering.

Knowing that it is not possible to know if an image was altered in any way, I would like to know how can you be sure of that.

By the way, I do ignore posters who see 'only rocks'.

That is not nice.

Why do ignore people that just state their opinion? Is it just because their opinion is not like your own? Or is it because you think that all people that see only rocks are all trying to hide something?

reply to post by outrageousfortune


Hi outrageousfortune! I agree with what you've said. Do we trust NASA with what they dish out? Not entirely. They’re like a woman in a bikini - showing a lot, but hiding the areas of interest!! NASA – Never A Straight Answer!!

It would be very interesting to see some of your pics. We have here some good guys who give balanced expert opinions like ArMap, internos etc. So let’s see what you’ve got. I suggest you open a new thread in my forum so it doesn’t get lost in the plethora of threads posted on ATS everyday.

Now, is this what you were meaning? Looks like an animal to me! Good find!

And they made you an expert? This is so laughable that it hurts. Tell me, what are the height and length of this place?

And pleace, for once, stop claiming to have found lost civilzations without facts and computer generated images.

It's clearly a rustback gorilla. You can tell by his stance....

Or it's a rock. Could go either way really...

Originally posted by mikesingh

So Quack, what constitutes proof to you are the casinos of Las Vegas. You'd want to see something like this on Mars otherwise as you say, it requires a comical level of guesswork that it could be the ruins of an ancient civilization. Not quite right. Now have a look at this pic below. What do you think it is?

Australian archaeologists have uncovered the remains of ancient human settlements in Syria.

A team of researchers from the Australian National University have used declassified US spy satellite images from the 1960s to help them find the location of the ruins.

Archaeologist Mandy Mottram says the remains of pottery factories, tombs and even an ancient basilica were found.

"You can pinpoint the sites using the satellite images quite simply because you see anomalies in the landscape," she said.

"You can't go, 'Oh yes looking at the photograph, I know what this is going to be', you don't know that until you go there, but you can get a pretty fair idea that there's a site of some kind there."

Ms Mottram says the remains of an ancient basilica were among the finds.

Ancient human settlements in Syria? Wow! These guys, according to your warped logic must be off their rockers or more aptly, lost their marbles! Does that look like there was an ancient civilization there?

As what you stressed, it requires a degree of lunacy to imagine that! But heck! These ARE the ruins of an ancient city - Syria!

So back off some. It'll do your blood pressure some good!!

Cheers!!

lawprofessors.typepad.com...

Isn't that an image of the Gaza stripe? you know ... a part of the middle east? Because the image text does NOT say that they found the ancient place WITH satelite photos. They only got help finding tracks and ruins only wisible by air. And you know why they rely on satelite photos?? Becuase i Wouldn't be flying around in a small plane in the middle east unless i wanted to be shot down.

Yet a poor comparison by you MS. Do your homework before you make claims..

Originally posted by tep200377

Isn't that an image of the Gaza stripe?

Dear Tep, since you claim to be a know-all, I would like to point out some very basic glaring mistakes that are unforgivable. For example, it is NOT 'Gaza Stripe'. It is Gaza Strip. Your knowledge of geography is pretty atrocious!

Since English isn't your first language, I would excuse you for glaring spelling mistakes too, like 'wisible' and 'satelite'

So please do your homework before flying off the handle, especially your Geography which seems you are clueless about.
Thanks.

Now I'm heading for the bar. The beer is at least cooler than your disposition!

Cheers!

On the subject of the first satellite image provided, can anyone explain this kind of stepped erosion of rocks?

Also, the pattern of grids presented in that area looks like a road/ sewer system to me. Or is it a byproduct of the way these images are put together?

reply to post by 44soulslayer


That image is a computer rendered image using a real photo superimposed over a 3D surface created using the data from the stereo camreas aboard Mars Express.

That step effect is only present in the computer generated model, it does not appear in any photo of the area.

The image is this one, also available on the ESA site.

reply to post by ArMaP


I see. Thanks for the clarification.

I did find something interesting in the photo from the ESA though : a face!

I realise its a rock formations, but what the hey... take a look nonetheless :

Close up: img160.imageshack.us...

Scale view: img405.imageshack.us...

Just a curiosity!

It's called a bump map and it's used to highlight geometry from a photograph. It does not prove anything but wild imaginations and lack of education.

[edit on 2008/4/30 by SteveR]

The original image and ESA source no longer seems to be available. I'd like to know the precise coordinates for this image's location, so that I could look up high-rez images from MRO.