Statue on Mars: A reclining god, a king, an ancient hero?

Really? You guys cannot see a turned head and two big breasts? You rock people are really weird. It's clear you come on these Mars forums to have a little contest as to who makes the most derogatory comments or gets the most laughs. Why respond at all?

This is a statue of a woman in a sitting position with bare breasts.

originally posted by: DigitalJedi805
a reply to: Quantum_Squirrel

You're pretty sure of that...

They say there isn't life on the moon too...

>_>

Cool post; I'm not totally sold on the statue - pretty blurry. Although - the above 'Original' seems much lower resolution than Curiosity actually shoots... That or obfuscated for secrecy. I'd like to see the unedited copy in NASA's storage shed.

Yeah i am pretty sure with the available evidence and not wishful thinking, hope, excitement and the human ability to make familiar shapes out of things with no familiarity, that this is just .. a rock

Its just my opinion of course.

Expect the worst hope for the best not the other way around , or your life will be full of disappointments.

Q

originally posted by: Aleister
Some of these youtube Martian sites should really be on ATS's hoax list. This is just a heavily pixelated group of rocks, and the hoaxster who posted it on youtube surely had to know that. Mars is just a box of choc-o-lates.

But one Mans rock is another Womans Marsamal!

Love these threads, but this one is just too blurry.

Keep looking guys! I appreciate the work.

I can't help but add my requisite jab at the rock peeps. Do you go to archaeological digs and yell " it's a rock" at those guys too? LOL

Bad image on this one though.

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: Aleister
Some of these youtube Martian sites should really be on ATS's hoax list. This is just a heavily pixelated group of rocks, and the hoaxster who posted it on youtube surely had to know that. Mars is just a box of choc-o-lates.

But one Mans rock is another Womans Marsamal!

Or one Woman's bunch of rocks forming what the youtube person has then colored-in with purple or some such, outlining what they want to outline in a pixelated portion of the entire photograph (it's a very small portion) is another Mans youtube vid attempting to get hits from portraying something as breasts. That's what tabloids are for, for something they should know isn't real (and they more or less admit that they know by trying to portray the photoshopped version as the "correct" photograph).

The "statue" is way too far in the distance to see clearly, the image is just too blurry.

That being said, I can see the statue and the animal it's holding but only after it was suggested that's what it might me.

So without the NASA image number, the power of suggestion and pareidolia...I'm going to go with it being a pile of rocks that may or may not be on Mars.

Still interesting nonetheless. Mars photos, threads and theory's are always fun to check out! SnF

originally posted by: Aleister

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: Aleister
Some of these youtube Martian sites should really be on ATS's hoax list. This is just a heavily pixelated group of rocks, and the hoaxster who posted it on youtube surely had to know that. Mars is just a box of choc-o-lates.

But one Mans rock is another Womans Marsamal!

Or one Woman's bunch of rocks forming what the youtube person has then colored-in with purple or some such, outlining what they want to outline in a pixelated portion of the entire photograph (it's a very small portion) is another Mans youtube vid attempting to get hits from portraying something as breasts. That's what tabloids are for, for something they should know isn't real (and they more or less admit that they know by trying to portray the photoshopped version as the "correct" photograph).

LOL that was a mouthful!

With that level of resolution I can find Dali's melted watches, the Mona Lisa and a pile left by a dog.
None of the above, and it is a pile of probable rocks.

Seen 2 video's from these people and both for me are desperate grasps at seeing something, all I see are odd shaped rocks.

originally posted by: antoinemarionette
Really? You guys cannot see a turned head and two big breasts? You rock people are really weird. It's clear you come on these Mars forums to have a little contest as to who makes the most derogatory comments or gets the most laughs. Why respond at all?

This is a statue of a woman in a sitting position with bare breasts.

And if this was a picture taken of Mars by a rover, you would probably claim that it had to be a statue as well. Luckily, we know better, and knowing these things, many of us can accept that sometimes rocks are just rocks.

You can't label "rock people" as "weird" and then claim that this is a statue of a woman with her breasts all exposed for wandering robot eyes to see and think that you won the upper hand in the credibility department. I mean, really--just think about it for a second.

Unless one wants to ass-u-me that all Mars landings have been faked, we now have a nuclear-powered SUV joyriding around on the surface of Mars, taking hi-res pictures and soil samples. So why can't we drive closer to at least some of these features to get a better picture? This isn't the Face circa '76. Also, the soil tests seem so vague, ie 'chemical signatures that suggest life may have been possible' on mars something like 2 billion years ago. Would Curiosity's instruments be able to detect a living bacterium if it crawled right onto the sensor today? Or would that make too many people's heads explode?

a reply to: Lady_Tuatha

a reply to: Lady_Tuatha
I'm usually all on the side of inteligent design but in this case I can definitely see.... Rocks and Pareidolia.
I believe the recent carvings of a cross and circle discovered are more compelling.

originally posted by: Quantum_Squirrel

originally posted by: DigitalJedi805
a reply to: Quantum_Squirrel

You're pretty sure of that...

They say there isn't life on the moon too...

>_>

Cool post; I'm not totally sold on the statue - pretty blurry. Although - the above 'Original' seems much lower resolution than Curiosity actually shoots... That or obfuscated for secrecy. I'd like to see the unedited copy in NASA's storage shed.

Yeah i am pretty sure with the available evidence and not wishful thinking, hope, excitement and the human ability to make familiar shapes out of things with no familiarity, that this is just .. a rock

Its just my opinion of course.

Expect the worst hope for the best not the other way around , or your life will be full of disappointments.

Q

Well I mean no insult, but I think you should spend some more time examining the 'available evidence' - I.E. The Moon Base that doesn't exist... Just rocks, right?

Perhaps a poor example, the point is - I see no reason why this picture must be written off as rocks - it's been proposed by NASA that there may have been life on Mars - it only makes sense to me that if there were ever a civilization there, it would have been capable of leaving remnants of this capacity behind.

I will give you that there are a lot of people pointing at things that likely are just rocks and calling them coffee cups - but I don't believe that gives us the right to say that everything observed as 'something else' is just a rock.

The world is flat and the sun revolves around us, right?

Mars is just a floating rock with no historical or futuristic relevance, right?

I do prepare for the worst and hope for the best - but suppose that 'the worst' is shrouded in the proposed secrecy that surrounds this sort of topic? Or perhaps 'the best' is similarly shrouded - is it wrong to prepare for the worst and hope for the best in one motion?

I am prepared for this image to be a sign of malicious intergalactic space raiders - or even nothing, but I hope that it is a hint to our own history, or that of another people we do not know of yet. But I have also not concluded one way or the other, as you seem to have.

You seem to have lost your hope for the best, if I may be so bold.

It is truly my opinion that it is ignorant to write this off completely - none of us know for sure until we show up, and threads like this, while sometimes very unclear or just misconceived, are the only way to speculate.



No hard feelings :-/

a reply to: DigitalJedi805

Hey look, you linked a video of a Spanish TV show. Way to fall for hoaxes...

Statue on Mars: A reclining god, a king, an ancient hero?

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: DigitalJedi805

Hey look, you linked a video of a Spanish TV show. Way to fall for hoaxes...

It was just to make a point.

[s]Spanish overlay or not - you tell me you don't see astronauts walking around a fairly large complex in low gravity by 2:30, and I'll find a different example.[/s]

Did you not actually watch any of the video in this post that you commented on? Same footage...

And BTW - You seem all too infatuated with your profile portraying you as a 'disinfoer' - best way to hide something is in plain sight, right? On my list.

I got to go with pile of rocks on this and the others that Ive seen

a reply to: funbox

new heights of fuzzy & 'new-age' (space-brother) propaganda
"men living on the moon, all 6 feet tall and dress like quakers" -joseph smith
(that nasa 'mars exploration' concept art seems to be more of the same)

bit of a giveaway how every so-called mars anomaly ends up being haphazardly linked back to earth spirituality..
be it a mother goddess statue, john carter movie, 19.5 degrees or even that bodhi tree you mentioned, and somehow always uploaded by someone called paranormal_crucible, sheilaaliens or voltron the magnificent

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Lady_Tuatha



A reclining god, a king, an ancient hero?

Now we are getting somewhere-- that colorized version was so daft it wasn't even humorous

the Rover image lets the viewer see clearly that this partially uncovered 'Statue in the round' was likely a sculpture of a seated Fertility Goddess backstanded by the Shrines concaved oval behind the goddess figure...

an outdoors fertility god-goddess shrine would give it a reason for being there...
(I have not heard any reasoning for the anthrophomoric statue in the first place)
Why/Why is it a Fertility god-goddess, seated figure... well I 'see' both female breasts and a oversized male protrusion in the appropriate places....
the image is surrounded by tonnes of rubble as one might expect from a very ancient god-goddess/fertility statue & shrine



ADD: the statue appears to be just as large as those seated Egyptian Pharaoh sculputures drowned under the Aswan Dam lake waters

originally posted by: DigitalJedi805

originally posted by: Quantum_Squirrel

originally posted by: DigitalJedi805
a reply to: Quantum_Squirrel

You're pretty sure of that...

They say there isn't life on the moon too...

>_>

Cool post; I'm not totally sold on the statue - pretty blurry. Although - the above 'Original' seems much lower resolution than Curiosity actually shoots... That or obfuscated for secrecy. I'd like to see the unedited copy in NASA's storage shed.

Yeah i am pretty sure with the available evidence and not wishful thinking, hope, excitement and the human ability to make familiar shapes out of things with no familiarity, that this is just .. a rock

Its just my opinion of course.

Expect the worst hope for the best not the other way around , or your life will be full of disappointments.

Q

Well I mean no insult, but I think you should spend some more time examining the 'available evidence' - I.E. The Moon Base that doesn't exist... Just rocks, right?

Perhaps a poor example, the point is - I see no reason why this picture must be written off as rocks - it's been proposed by NASA that there may have been life on Mars - it only makes sense to me that if there were ever a civilization there, it would have been capable of leaving remnants of this capacity behind.

I will give you that there are a lot of people pointing at things that likely are just rocks and calling them coffee cups - but I don't believe that gives us the right to say that everything observed as 'something else' is just a rock.

The world is flat and the sun revolves around us, right?

Mars is just a floating rock with no historical or futuristic relevance, right?

I do prepare for the worst and hope for the best - but suppose that 'the worst' is shrouded in the proposed secrecy that surrounds this sort of topic? Or perhaps 'the best' is similarly shrouded - is it wrong to prepare for the worst and hope for the best in one motion?

I am prepared for this image to be a sign of malicious intergalactic space raiders - or even nothing, but I hope that it is a hint to our own history, or that of another people we do not know of yet. But I have also not concluded one way or the other, as you seem to have.

You seem to have lost your hope for the best, if I may be so bold.

It is truly my opinion that it is ignorant to write this off completely - none of us know for sure until we show up, and threads like this, while sometimes very unclear or just misconceived, are the only way to speculate.



No hard feelings :-/

Bwahahahahaha....are you kidding me with that video?! SMDH....