‘Mars Face’ Discovered Near Cuban Coast!

I wouldn't mind doing some digging under the sphynx's left paw rose. Although the hall is probably long gone and under lock and key. Edgar was gifted.
sp
sp



[edit on 6/1/2008 by jpm1602]

Years ago there was a documentery on a submerged city in the dead sea i think and just as the team were close to discovering the true meanings by using a mini sub the weather was bad and then their permits were discontinued by the Israelis? Please clarify this story as I feel the details may be very sketchy but there was definetely an effort to get at truth and it seemed like secrets weren't ready to be disclosed.

Originally posted by scorps
Whatukno, i dont know much of sea life, but wouldnt sea life grow faster on certain materials then others? So if this face was truly man made could it be made out of something that the sea couldnt wear down as easily? Just a thought, please correct me if im wrong.

This is true, but were not just talking about sea life, we are also talking about erosion caused by currents underneath the water.

What gets to me about these is that it just looks like a face, people automatically jump to the conclusion that an ancient civilization must have created this because it resembles a face. Given that ideology and logic, one must assume that anything that resembles a human face must in fact be of some ancient civilization lost for thousands of years. It just simply isn't so. does every mountain side that resembles a human face mean that someone came and carved it from Atlantis? Does this mean that every time someone finds a tree that has a knot that resembles a face it automatically means that for some strange reason. Atlantians must have genetically engineered this tree to grow with a face in it? I mean reality is subjective and all but let's look at these things rationally for once.

Im just trying to look at this subject subjectively. Not being blinded by fantasy and myth.

If we were to take into the account that this MUST be Atlantian in origin cause it resembles a face then we must understand that after that long of a time no matter what the substance was made of it would have degraded and dissolved through organic life and water erosion and sand erosion. It wouldnt be there at all because the sea would have completely destroyed it by now.



[edit on 6/1/2008 by whatukno]

Mike,

I noticed that with the face off of Cuba, the top of the head points due North. Does Mars have a North and South pole, and if so... is the head on Mars also aligned to the North?

People have argued for years about the Mars face... and now with this new find... what are the chances of two identical features being displayed on two different planets? Add in the pyramid structures and their relation to each other... and the odds must be astronomical!!

reply to post by mikesingh


If you look just to the SW of your "face", you'll see another larger face staring back at you... I wonder what it looks like.. You see it?

TheBorg

Interesting, could somebody post coordinates of the moon on mars or determine of there is a relationship to the one in Cuba?

reply to post by mikesingh


Very very kewl! I would star and flag if I knew how! The similarities between the two 'faces' is uncanny. I have never thought the Mars face looks like any egyptian pharaoh, to me it looks like a being with small nose holes and a beak like mouth. Thanks for posting these!

reply to post by whatukno


I am totally with you on this one.
Just because a structure when viewed from the top resembles a face, doesn't mean it is a face.
How can people possibly say that without a doubt in their minds that is 100% identical even to that "thing" on Mars? and then even go as further too say that it must have been created by a civilization? and then even further too say that straight line rock formations under the sea are evidence of a once advanced civilization? But wait there are more..... though I couldn't be bothered quoting them at the moment.

If any of you people decide too become lawyers and I one day find that I need one, I will definitely be avoiding you....

Originally posted by whatukno

I am sorry but currents and erosion as well as growth of sea life would have destroyed any statue sunk beneath the waters. The sea destroys everything. Im sorry mikesingh. this isn't a good discovery. In fact what you have found is nothing more than a natural phenomenon that occurs everywhere.

Unlike the Cydonia face on mars this face is more exposed to an even more damaging environment. If this had been some sort of statue it would have been unrecognisably eroded long ago.

Agreed! But what happened to erosion here in the pics shown below? They must have been under the sea for tens of thousands of years. Probably during the last ice age that commenced more than 70,000 years ago when water levels off the coasts were much lower and these sharply etched cliffs and rock formations were above then sea levels.

As we know, during this time, huge glaciers covered almost all of Canada and the northern United States (and much of northern Europe and Asia as well). In some places, the ice sheets were two kilometres thick. A great deal of the earth’s water supply was trapped in these huge masses of ice, so sea levels around the world dropped by as much as 100-150 meters.

Therefore, it would be safe to assume that these ‘structures’ or formations have been under the sea for tens of thousands of years, yet they have not eroded. They are as sharp and geometric as can be, showing no signs of water erosion!











The ball is now in your court!

Cheers!







[edit on 2-6-2008 by mikesingh]

reply to post by mikesingh


pssst...we werent supposed to be starting with the atlantis-disclosure until 2015....remember?

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
Just because a structure when viewed from the top resembles a face, doesn't mean it is a face.

Right! Who said it IS a face? I wrote it as 'face' and not face. See the punctuation marks? I would have left them out if it IS a face.

How can people possibly say that without a doubt in their minds that is 100% identical even to that "thing" on Mars?

So where did I say it is 100% identical to the ‘face’ on Mars? What have you been reading?

and then even go as further too say that it must have been created by a civilization?

Christ! Where are you getting your gen from? Are you referring to my opening post or some other? Where did I categorically state that it IS created by a civilization? I thought I mentioned Atlantis and Lemuria accompanied by question marks like this: ‘Atlantis?’ ‘Lemuria?’ So I’m asking the question too and NOT contending that it IS Atlantis or Lemuria! Oh, for God’s sake!

Get my drift? You’re just shooting from the hip without trying to understand the context of the post. Do read it again if you have the time and inclination. Yeah, English IS a foreign language that few can fully comprehend. Requires one to understand its grammatical dynamics, what?

Cheers!

This general area coincides with the Edgar Cayce predicted location and indeed resurfacing of Atlantis.

Cayce's visions of Atlantis

It would seem that interesting coincidences are at work...

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
This general area coincides with the Edgar Cayce predicted location and indeed resurfacing of Atlantis.

Cayce's visions of Atlantis

It would seem that interesting coincidences are at work...

I skimmed through that link and found the picture of the water west of Andros Island Bahamas claiming to be a tunnel venting phosphresence (sp?). This area is dotted with "blue holes" that are products of natural erosion. They can be deep while the surrounding area is probably just shallow water through which the white sand shows through brilliantly. Bonefishing flats.

Science > prophecy.

reply to post by mikesingh


Mike, what you have here is a natural formation of rock. These are not statues. These are not carved by man, these are in fact naturaly occuring geology. These "structures" are not evidence of an advanced civilization nor are they statues. They are a bit of very interesting geology.

Often Mike in your claims you cleverly use terminology to skirt the terms and conditions of this site as to put forth your claims as "opinion" and not fact, even though however, people often see what you post as fact, for some odd reason some people make the automatic assumption that your claims are stated fact and do not bother to research for themselves.

Originally posted by mikesingh

I think I'll drop a line to Linda and check out any updates.

Cheers!

While you are at it please see if you can get a "package deal" on memberships to her website for ATS'ers. I would like to see some of her data on things, but cannot afford the cost of her memberships.

BTW. Great find on the face. I knew about the underwater city off of Okinawa in 1966 long before it was getting publicity. The kids in my elementary school at Naha used to discuss it on the playground. No doubt some Cuban kids are discussing the very things mentioned here all the while wondering why somebody does not investigate it.

reply to post by stikkinikki


Its not a brilliant link I admit, but it was the first one I found. You have to check the second page for Cayce's prophecy of Atlantis rising, which coincides with the rising of the Bimini Keys in the 1960s.

Im open to any interpretation regarding the resurfacing of the Bimini Keys, scientific or otherwise... I suggest holding fire on the "only science can be true" dogma until we have a hypothesis of sorts to test.

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by mikesingh

 

Mike, what you have here is a natural formation of rock. These are not statues. These are not carved by man, these are in fact naturaly occuring geology.

Hi whatukno! OK, so how do you know this? That's YOUR take on it. But can you prove these pics I posted are natural rock formations? Can you show us more examples of these type of 'sheared' rocks that look like cut blocks of stone under the sea? As for me it could be either. And of course, like you, I don't see any 'statues' in these pics!

As for me, I can't prove that they are not natural! I'm on the fence on this one.

And by the way, what I was trying to get at in the post you referred to was the effect of water on these stone blocks . They still have those sharply defined geometric shapes in spite of being under the sea for thousands of years. I was in no way contending that these are man made! Or did I?

Cheers!

reply to post by RUFFREADY

yep, I remember that one. Was it a pyramid? They also said they detected a huge submarine which they guessed to be military that took off in a hurry.

That was weird indeed.

Originally posted by yankeerose


People have argued for years about the Mars face... and now with this new find... what are the chances of two identical features being displayed on two different planets? Add in the pyramid structures and their relation to each other... and the odds must be astronomical!!

They are not identical thou.

And I'm not sure they even are faces, if they are faces, either they have collapsed and changed appearance a over time, or the makers of it weren't really very "advanced" if all they can do is make holes as eyes and mouth.



[edit on 2-6-2008 by _Phoenix_]

reply to post by mikesingh


Nice pictures, you always bring some interesting things to this forum.

Keep it up!