The Bonneville Crater

More examples:




external image

[edit on 21-3-2005 by jogava]

[edit on 21-3-2005 by jogava]

You guys are closed to one of Humanity's Greatest Secret.

Ask yourselves this:

How would you react if you saw the same pattern in everything that you look at?

Wouldn't it feel like having a glimpse of death?

Think Illuminati and Symbolism...

[edit on 21-3-2005 by Desmond]

I looked at your last images jogava and let's talk about the third one. It looks like two intersecting lines on the left side of the rock, right? But the lines, if real would be masonry joints of assembled individual stones. But on the right side you clearly see it is one piece of rock, not stones with masonry joints. If it were these individual stones they would separate, and not be in one piece. This looks to me like a chunk of rock broken away after the meteor had hit the area. Sorry, still not buying it.

Regards.

Here's the thing people....to me, yes, it looks as if they could of been a part of something "built"....... it's a possibility...but no one as of "yet" can prove it one way or another. I have always felt that we have been lied to about Mars anyway.....but that's another thread. The thing is, if we don't have people who ask questions, and notice things that others may not see....we would be missing out an many things throughout history....keep an open, but intelligent mind.
Off to work

Originally posted by rwatkins
I looked at your last images jogava and let's talk about the third one. It looks like two intersecting lines on the left side of the rock, right? But the lines, if real would be masonry joints of assembled individual stones. But on the right side you clearly see it is one piece of rock, not stones with masonry joints. If it were these individual stones they would separate, and not be in one piece. This looks to me like a chunk of rock broken away after the meteor had hit the area. Sorry, still not buying it.

Regards.

In my Web I explain one of the construction techniques that I have detected. It consists of applying to stones just by a robust form or is enough, a cement layer, plaster or similar, that soon molded on the stone, giving the final form to the sculpture or construction. Here it is explained:

Martian construction tecnichs

Examples of this technique:




If that piece that you say, you were made with this technique of coating, if he is feasible.

[edit on 22-3-2005 by jogava]

Originally posted by LadyV
Here's the thing people....to me, yes, it looks as if they could of been a part of something "built"....... it's a possibility...but no one as of "yet" can prove it one way or another. I have always felt that we have been lied to about Mars anyway.....but that's another thread. The thing is, if we don't have people who ask questions, and notice things that others may not see....we would be missing out an many things throughout history....keep an open, but intelligent mind.
Off to work

Thanks, I understand that it is difficult to include/understand what I expose, my me she has cost much work to find and to classify all the objects of interest, and is of this form as better one occurs counts of which I affirm. In agreement spend the hours in the study of the original image, they are perceived the details, the eyes they are accustomed, they become but selective, they perceive better the details, and not only that, in addition the Bonneville crater is a set of objects, that must also be interpreted like this, like a numerous group of archaeological rest, fragments and parts of many different origins, like enormous puzzle waiting for being ordered...

I think I get what your saying, but it is difficult to follow the english descriptions.

I think your saying that mortar was used to assemble the blocks, and possibly stucco or plaster was coating the stones. I am looking, but maybe not in the right places, because I see what appears to be fragments sitting on other stones.

I would suggest maybe adding some arrows and text to point details in the pictures. Also, maybe get some help with the english translation.

I do not want to sound discouraging, I think the pictures are very interesting. I think if it were true, it would be the discovery of the century. But I think the only true way to verify, would be to go there and look. I feel the same way about the anomolies at cydoina. The pyramid is very interesting.

Keep looking, nice effort.

Originally posted by Desmond
You guys are closed to one of Humanity's Greatest Secret.

Ask yourselves this:

How would you react if you saw the same pattern in everything that you look at?

Wouldn't it feel like having a glimpse of death?

Think Illuminati and Symbolism...

[edit on 21-3-2005 by Desmond]

That they have to do iluminati with this? Reason why to my it concerns, I prefer to analyze this from the point of view of archaeology, nothing but.

I am not safe to understand to him well, him request that includes/understands that I do not speak its language and that I must translate in line with the translator "Babel Fish", everything what you answer to me, and to respond translating of the same form which I write in answer to his words.

Ya the broken english makes it hard to read. Im still up in the air about all of this. BTW--> I live in northwest indiana, on lake michigan. Just alot of dunes around here. I havent seen lines like that in nature around here. A small line or something, sure. But not like that one. Thats the one that sticks with me.

Originally posted by rwatkins
I think I get what your saying, but it is difficult to follow the english descriptions.

I think your saying that mortar was used to assemble the blocks, and possibly stucco or plaster was coating the stones. I am looking, but maybe not in the right places, because I see what appears to be fragments sitting on other stones.

I would suggest maybe adding some arrows and text to point details in the pictures. Also, maybe get some help with the english translation.

I do not want to sound discouraging, I think the pictures are very interesting. I think if it were true, it would be the discovery of the century. But I think the only true way to verify, would be to go there and look. I feel the same way about the anomolies at cydoina. The pyramid is very interesting.

Keep looking, nice effort.

Thanks, I am in agreement with you, my work has not concluded, little by little I will be improving and extending all the information, but they include/understand that I am only in this task, and is very many to do, after to have even spent a whole year from the beginning of my investigation.

Originally posted by spliff4020
Ya the broken english makes it hard to read. Im still up in the air about all of this. BTW--> I live in northwest indiana, on lake michigan. Just alot of dunes around here. I havent seen lines like that in nature around here. A small line or something, sure. But not like that one. Thats the one that sticks with me.

Spliff greetings, moan not to be able to offer a correct translation, my budget is zero. If somebody wants to collaborate, he would be magnificent to translate it correctly, but I cannot give nothing in exchange for the effort, I investigate free and I share it of the same form, I see this like an obligation that I must take care of altruistically and thus she would have it to accept any collaborator. In my Web I inform here on collaborations: Collaborate

Another example of coating:



[edit on 22-3-2005 by jogava]

Here's some straight lines for you...






It's called jointed granite.

don't forget about hexagonal basalt collumns

So that they insist on demonstrating that the nature reproduces forms that seem artificial? that knows anyone to it. But that does not prevent that there are forms of artificial aspect, that are truely artificial.

They understand it? so that it is very easy, not that they try with that attitude, it is incoherent.

What? That didn't translate so well. Try again.

I see nothing artificial in the Mars photos.

Normal geologic processes on Earth often produce rock forms with straight lines, regular joint patterns etc.

Many of these same processes are likely to have happened on Mars as well.

In any event, your theory is not supported by the evidence that you have given us.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
What? That didn't translate so well. Try again.

I see nothing artificial in the Mars photos.

Normal geologic processes on Earth often produce rock forms with straight lines, regular joint patterns etc.

Many of these same processes are likely to have happened on Mars as well.

In any event, your theory is not supported by the evidence that you have given us.

Moan the translation errors that make difficult our understanding,
to my also is difficult to understand to them you to me.

What I say, is that the fact that they exist formation natural that is similar
to the artificial ones, is not reason so that the images which I have shown
to them, are it also. So single it is a possibility. I cannot surely say absolute,
that all the objects that I have selected in my study, are truely artificial,
which if I can assure, is that exist too many together indications,
in a single zone, and some of them, if I have the security of which they
are artificial, since I have dedicated many hours to them of analisis
independently. There is much to see in the Bonneville crater, in fact,
the majority fragments that are inside and around his, is parts of artificial,
scattered, broken structures and eroded by winds and the Martian sand
during thousands of years. Many fragments are halfed-bury, and all of them
places setting of a dust layer, are difficult to see, difficult to detect,
but they are there. Long time is required to see all the things of interest
that there is in that crater, I recommend to them that "they take a walk"
by using for it the original photography. Know that crater,
will not waste the time.

[edit on 22-3-2005 by jogava]

It was not built, people.

This is a meteor crater.

If they put a statue on something and a meteor hit it, you wouldn't be able to tell anything was there.

What you are seeing is rocks shattered by a meteor impact.

Originally posted by Byrd
It was not built, people.

This is a meteor crater.

If they put a statue on something and a meteor hit it, you wouldn't be able to tell anything was there.

What you are seeing is rocks shattered by a meteor impact.

Already that the crater was generated by a meteorite, but the forms have not been created by this, but well to be the meteorite which has destroyed them. does not seem sufficient to him the destruction? There there was an enormous concentration of constructions, perhaps outside a city, a temple or a palace. It seems to him this form created by the meteorite?


If the meteorite destroyed everything, so that this rock is whole?

I advise that it reviews better the images to him, is evident that it has not reviewed the sufficient thing to them.



[edit on 23-3-2005 by jogava]