Alien Critters On Mars? Check This Out!!!

Originally posted by zorgon
LOL you missed the point.. that for me they are no longer possibilities...

Ha Ha....no, I didn't miss the point. You clearly labeled them as 'possibilities'.

If you are saying they are not possibilities, I would need to see solid evidence, not provided by some breathless website with an 'agenda', and definitely not of the doofus variety previously provided in this thread.

But the problem is, you don't have any....

Everything I've seen requires some imagination, is from a slightly off-center source, or is patently dumb. The other problem is that wonderful plot device....I can't tell, its confidential.

Its getting more and more difficult to enjoy this site. I put effort into avoiding personal attacks, I try to avoid judging peoples wisdom and intelligence....and what happens? I've been referred to as naive and close-minded, and its been suggested my intellect is flawed. My serious questions don't get answered. Responding posters make bizarre leaps of logic and flawed assumptions. On another thread a poster admitted to simply flooding the thread with posts until the other poster simply stopped posting.

My conclusion is, these positions can't be seriously defended and its only presented here for the entertainment factor. Well, you've discovered a fun 'niche' for yourself. Have fun with it.

With all of that in mind, MrPenny, maybe we should begin anew with the questions. Start with the first one, and then we'll go from there. What do ya say, huh? Give it a go?

TheBorg

P.S. Just trying to encourage intelligent and enthralling discussion on this guys, nothing more, aside from gathering the truth.

[Edited for clarity.]

[edit on 29-3-2007 by TheBorg]

Now let’s check out some objects that resemble animal fossils which have been circled. The annotations are self explanatory.These images have been reproduced with the express permission of JP Skipper.

Is it possible that there has been parallel dinosaur development on Earth and Mars??? If so, what is the chance of that occurring on two different supposedly isolated worlds without some kind of exchange and even possible artificial intervention of some kind??? The chance of parallel development by natural means is nearly incalculable without subsequent explanations along this line desperately grasping at straws.
So, it may be that the exploration of the Mars archeology, when and if that ever does become feasible, may be about just barely scratching the surface of a true understanding of life origins right here on Earth and how incredible that actually might be. Think of it!
JP Skipper

Are we getting closer to the enigma of probable ancient life on Mars? Only time will tell!

Cheers!

[edit on 29-3-2007 by mikesingh]

Originally posted by MrPenny
Ha Ha....no, I didn't miss the point. You clearly labeled them as 'possibilities'.
If you are saying they are not possibilities, I would need to see solid evidence,

Yes I labeled them as"Possibilities"

And then I said to ME they are no longer merely possibilities. I am quite sure it would take many weeks of hard work to convince you

As to the confidentiality of sources... skeptics in general always say that is a scapegoat, yet what happens is that when you seriously look into this "nitch" you will find many that are willing to share info, some you can present and others you can't, and its a problem.

You may say why not? just spit it out... well true one could do that, but then one would lose the trust of anyone else who may have wanted to come forward so its a lose/lose situation. If you reveal it, your cutoff never mind the damage to your source... if you say something, but can't show it, the skeptics will call you out...

So I guess its better to just say or show nothing at all then... and go back to my Medieval life...

But then... how boring would these threads be?

But answer me this, Mr Penny... what brings you back to these threads over and over despite what you just said in your last post?

Honestly, zorgon, I think it's the desire to be wrong. He wants to be wrong on this one I think.

Just my thoughts though.

TheBorg

P.S. Anyway, when's the next Martian flyby for us? Where's John when we need him?? Is he staying on the Moon?

Originally posted by TheBorg
Honestly, zorgon, I think it's the desire to be wrong. He wants to be wrong on this one I think.

Gee that's heartwarming....I'm a skeptic, so there's something wrong with my point of view.

My old uncle never failed to check the coin return slot on pay phones. Every single one he walked by....he checked for a coin. He would actually walk out of his way, just to walk past a bank of pay phones. I asked him why? When I never see you find a coin?

His answer? Its easy, not hard to do, and someday....there may be a payoff.

Does that cute little parable help illustrate why other skeptics and I return to these type of threads?

Earlier in the thread, mike posted some comparisons of an object on Mars with known terrestrial examples of modern and fossilized skulls. Very intriguing. Yet, mainstream archaeologists, geologists, palaeontologists,....whatever, zip, nada, zilch? The discovery of ancient remains from under former arctic ice on Earth gets more attention. I work very hard to remain bias free in my decisions. It appears the only source for these speculative theories are websites and publications that very much want these things to be what they hope for.

Ah but of course MrPenny....the mainstream is corrupt and in on the coverup....can't you see that?

And some of your co-horts, (not damning anyone in particular by association, just pointing out), tend to respond to skepticism with very negative, rude, and/or ill-worded screeds. Not exactly diplomats for the cause.....

MrPenny,

Well my biggest problem with what you are/were saying was already addressed (et.al, "will remain"). So hopefully you don't feel as if I'm being rude or whatever.

This area seems to have a certain amount of prepartory work, before it even seems remotely acceptable. You actually *do* have to imagine the impossible is possible, for starters.

Some people can't get past the hurdle that since something has the stamp of officialdom, it's the truth.

"Iraq is hiding weapons of mass destruction." -Bush.

The idea that scientists anywhere are capable of lying is the next step. For some reason, science and scientists take on an almost god-like status and can't be called into question by anyone but other scientists and those scientists have to be in their immediate peer group.

"The standard of intelligence of the average Negro is similar to that of the eleven-year-old youth of the species Homo sapiens (1980, 89:129). " - Osborn, Henry Fairfield (1980), “The Evolution of the Human Races,” Natural History, 89:129, April; reprinted from Natural History, 1926.

If NASA has nothing to hide, why have all the moon films disappeared?

"It is not widely known that the Apollo 11 television broadcast from the moon was a high-quality transmission, far sharper than the blurry version relayed instantly to the world on that July day in 1969." - One Giant Blunder for Mankind, Sydney Morning Herald.

Why are the photos that don't mysteriously disappear end up looking tampered with?

I wrote the "rude, negative, and ill-worded" part this morning, just before departing the house for work. While driving here, I started to wonder if I had used too large a brush to paint that picture. Maybe co-horts was an unfortunate choice of words. "Others on that side of the fence" maybe?

Possibility. Impossibility.

I'm a creative type. My walls at home are decorated with my own original art. Abstract, still-life, and portraiture. However, I find myself incapable of imagining the impossible to be possible, without the awareness that it is simply fanciful musing. I will never swim, un-aided with mechanical means, to the bottom of the Marianas Trench.

I am sure there are situations or conditions where I can not know the possibility or impossibility of occurrence. In that case, I am probably not even aware of those scenarios.

Ultimately, I am not claiming the total impossibility of zorgon's, yours, or other persons theories (well, with the exception of one person, maybe). I think my position stems from the utter certainty of some; that their opinion is the correct one and mine is the wrong one; all the while being unable to drive that final nail in and conclusively seal the case. I think all I can confidentally say with certainty is, I don't know.

This and other quotes originally posted by undo
Some people can't get past the hurdle that since something has the stamp of officialdom, it's the truth.

"Iraq is hiding weapons of mass destruction." -Bush.

Ooooh. In my case, that is an unfortunate choice of examples. For starters, I think our current president is so far on the other end of the scale from science, I'm surprised he doesn't read tea leaves at press conferences. For 'official' politicians in general? I don't believe half of what they say, and disregard the other half.

The idea that scientists anywhere are capable of lying is the next step. For some reason, science and scientists take on an almost god-like status and can't be called into question by anyone but other scientists and those scientists have to be in their immediate peer group.

This is where your reasoning starts to fall down. Well of course they're capable of lying. Everyone is. That isn't exactly one of those "Eureka!" moments. The rest of the quote looks like one big giant assumption. How much of the general public holds scientists up to "god-like" status? I don't know....and I bet you don't actually know either. As we speak, scientists now are having their work altered, reworded, or suppressed by bureaucrats and federal administrators. That's one example of pressure on scientists; they are not getting a free ride. Yes, they have a peer review process. I'm not sure what you mean by "immediate" peer group, but it is required to be persons from the same discipline.

Not only would an incredible number of scientists be involved in the secrets, (it boggles my mind), you're completely leaving out the thousands, millions maybe, of engineers and administrators that would necessarily be involved.

Having experienced something of human nature during my life, the idea that a group of humans in those numbers could coordinate a massive cover-up of the scale envisioned by you and others.....approaches comic status.

This bears repeating. The cover-up is key; uncover one firm piece of evidence illustrating the cover-up and its scale....then you've got something.

Your examples of bad science from two scientists illustrates only that two scientists had poor conclusions in the respective fields of sociology and evolution.

If NASA has nothing to hide, why have all the moon films disappeared?

I believe that is referred to as "begging the question". One doesn't necessarily follow the other here. Its simply a fallacious argument. Having no other information, the answer to the question; "why have all the moon films disappeared? is, because NASA lost the moon films.

I know, I know....that's far too mundane and ordinary MrPenny. I'm sorry, any other conclusion, with the information available, is a wild-ass guess.

If the evidence requires imagination and tricks of logic.....what does that say for its veracity?

EDIT: Man I hate editing.


[edit on 29-3-2007 by MrPenny]

[edit on 29-3-2007 by MrPenny]

The heart of the matter is what you avoid, and its there that the answers are most readily seen.

There's a slender but well lit trail that leads from the days of German Higher Criticism, winds its way through Darwin's "The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life," through Osborn's "11 year old" theory, through Huxley's "No rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average Negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the white man." and advances forward to the Nazi Party and the Eugenics program (an example how one man's science can be another man's gas chamber), through the smuggling of Nazi scientists to the USA at the end of WWII, through the formation of JPL by Jack Parsons and his "Manifesto of the Antichrist," the rocket program by head Nazi scientist, Werner Von Braun, who designed the Saturn V, and on and on and goodgriefopenyoureyes on.

That's the heart of the matter.
Next is to simply consider compartmentalization.
only some are in charge of photography and film footage
only some are in charge of it before its altered.
only some are in charge of it after its altered.
each person handles one aspect of the entire whole.
they are not allowed to discuss with each other, the top secret or secret portions of their job.

this narrows down the amount of people who would have direct knowledge considerably.

I knew that I had seen something that looked like these rocks, with those round holes and strange shapes.

Today I looked in a book (yes, one of those paper things ) and I found what I was looking for.

It's called "Capo d'Orso" and is in Sardinia, Italy.

I could not find better photos, but I think this shows enough to see why I thought these rocks familiar.

Capo d'Orso

most of them look just like normal rocks and sand
but theres one that really is odd the one next to the end that looks like a axe or sometin

Armap,

The same thought crossed my mind, that it might be wind/water erosion of something larger that broke apart. I'm not completely convinced that the rocks with holes are fossils but there are some "fossil" looking things in the earlier images of the thread, that are a bit too erm...artificial looking to be fossils or natural formations.

ArMap points out an important fact. There are an extremely wide variety of rock formations. Many of them seem quite unusual. I would hazard to guess that many people in these forums have not traveled all that extensively to areas that contain geological curiosities. What some people see as a fossilized Martian life form, others will recognize as a known type of rock formation. The key here is in educating oneself in the field of geology to better understand mineral formations, wind and freeze thaw erosion, meteors, impact fracturing, and the like. When one has a deeper understanding of the subject, what once may have seemed unusual, is suddenly no longer an anomaly.

I have been with friends who saw a fireplace made out of numerous pieces of an unusual rock. Every one of them thought it must have been Lava as it looked melted. Not one correctly identified it as limestone pieces from a cave formation. I didn't fault them for their incorrect assumption as they had never been exposed to such formations before. Once I pointed out the differences you would find in Lava, they all understood why it couldn't be volcanic rock.

This misunderstanding of geological formations seems to be quite common in some of the threads on ATS. When individuals don't have a solid grasp on the subject of terrestrial geology, they often make incorrect assumptions about rock formations they see in the Mars images.

While I do indeed consider the possibility of finding evidence for life on Mars or in it's past, thus far, what I have been shown here on ATS, is images that offer me no evidence of such.

I built the Mars Quest exhibit for the Space Science Institute and have always kept an eye on the new discoveries coming down from Mars. I have also done a good deal of study in Geology as well as extensive travel to deserts, volcanoes, and caves around the world. I also have a personal collection of fossils and mineral specimens form a wide variety of areas and ages. While it is always great to see interesting images from Mars, it is in every ones interest to fully examine the details before speculating that a rock that looks like a fossilized head, is actually anything other than a cool rock.

[edit on 29-3-2007 by Terapin]

Terapin,

I agree to a point. That point is that it can't be convincingly applied across all anomalies, and there's the rub. Sure, there can be cases where its pattern recognition. And of course, there are going to be cases where it's mistaken identity due to lack of data on the material in question. But there are far too many examples now, to chalk them up to mistaken identity and pattern recognition only. Not just for Mars, but for the Moon and even other planetary bodies/moons in the solar system.

Add to this, that many ancient texts point at or describe inhabitation of other planets and moons in our solar system, and you have more than enough information to form a hypothesis. All that remains is weeding out the legitimate examples from the pattern recognition and mistaken identity cases.

Originally posted by ArMaP
I knew that I had seen something that looked like these rocks, with those round holes and strange shapes.
Today I looked in a book (yes, one of those paper things

) and I found what I was looking for. It's called "Capo d'Orso" and is in Sardinia, Italy. I could not find better photos, but I think this shows enough to see why I thought these rocks familiar.

Capo d'Orso

Good pics. So should we assume that there are or were similar geological processes at work on Earth and Mars to have produced similar structures? Similar processes mean similar evolutionary paradigms? And that means that life probably did exist on Mars at some stage or even exists on Mars today?

Originally posted by MrPenny
I am sure there are situations or conditions where I can not know the possibility or impossibility of occurrence. In that case, I am probably not even aware of those scenarios.

Either possible OR impossible? Why should you paint things in either black or white? There are shades of grey too! So what we’re presenting here are the grey areas. But we need to take this into consideration too instead of just trashing it.

And, as you and I know, there are more advanced civilizations partying it out there in the universe than all the grains of sand on Earth. And some arrived on the scene probably millions of years before we did. So isn’t it a possibility that some of them did travel to the Solar System and inhabit Mars sometime in the distant past?

So what’s the big deal if Mars did indeed support life? Why do we shut our eyes to this possibility? Why do we want to? The problem is that we are not psychologically geared to accept this concept as we are conditioned toward skepticism from childhood, considering the type of ‘scientific’ straitjacket we’re bound in from the beginning. So out of box concepts and theories are ridiculed as they don’t follow the 'scientific' precepts we have been taught.

All I say is, let’s have an open mind and stop painting things in pure black and white.

Cheers!!

Originally posted by mikesingh
Either possible OR impossible? Why should you paint things in either black or white? There are shades of grey too!

Yes mike, *sigh* I'm aware of that old saw. Please, describe to me something that is 'almost' impossible, or 'sort of' possible. To clarify my statement...it was an attempt to describe things that we don't know we don't know. Admittedly, it looks like a stupid sentence...probably why D. Rumsfeld was pilloried for using it.

And, as you and I know, there are more advanced civilizations partying it out there in the universe than all the grains of sand on Earth. And some arrived on the scene probably millions of years before we did.

No mike, *sigh* You, nor I, know this. It is, again, a wild-ass, wishful, guess.

So isn’t it a possibility that some of them did travel to the Solar System and inhabit Mars sometime in the distant past?

Yes mike, its also possible life developed and evolved on Mars natively.

So what’s the big deal if Mars did indeed support life? Why do we shut our eyes to this possibility? Why do we want to? The problem is that we are not psychologically geared to accept this concept as we are conditioned toward skepticism from childhood, considering the type of ‘scientific’ straitjacket we’re bound in from the beginning.

You are aware, its "scientific" curiosity that has "scientists" looking for signs of life on Mars? Presumably because they think there is a possibility of finding such signs? Are these the 'nutty' scientists that have slipped their straitjackets?.....Huh?...They work for NASA and ESA?

Please, someone try to mount a logical argument.

If your above quote refers to me in any way.....I guarantee you cannot find a reference of mine on this forum that indicates I think life on Mars is impossible.

All I say is, let’s have an open mind

If jumbled logic, assumptive reasoning, and gross generalizations are signs of an open mind.....no thank you.

Thankfully it doesn't.




[edit on 30-3-2007 by MrPenny]

MrPenny,

Well, don't blame the entire topic just because you don't agree with my crazy theories. I have alot more where those came from. But the fact remains you can still see anomalies while at the same time, someone else is discussing crazy theories

Originally posted by TheBorg
Honestly, zorgon, I think it's the desire to be wrong. He wants to be wrong on this one I think.

I do believe that this is so, Borg... I think its what drives most non believers...

But ya can't get them to admit it

I haven't heard from John in a bit too... but I have been working alot

Maybe the Aliens got em, or since the weather warmed up hes out diggin up that Gold

Gee that's heartwarming....I'm a skeptic, so there's something wrong with my point of view.

No not at all... And the coin story works.... LOL I used to do that too and it paid off a lot

Earlier in the thread, mike posted some comparisons of an object on Mars with known terrestrial examples of modern and fossilized skulls. Very intriguing. Yet, mainstream archaeologists, geologists, palaeontologists,....whatever, zip, nada, zilch?

I too have a problem with that. I have shown that image to several of my friends in the rock and mineral field without telling them where the image is from, and I get a lot of positive feedback that several of those pieces look like fossils, certainly enoiugh to want to go dig them up...

So come to mention it I am on a board that is exclusively for rock experts... I will post the image there and add a note that if you have seen this please don't respond and see what I can "dig up"

Last few days I have been studying Earth Craters and found many, but the dispute within the scientific community is astounding... You think we have disagreements? You oughta see these pros go at it...

I think this battle of theories and the fear of their reputation or grant money will make most scientists and other mainstream sources bow out of attempting any explanation, save those who vehemently speak out against...

This is just an observation on my part...

But that "fossil" image is a good one... Perhaps sending it without source to get a general opinion from different paleontologists around the world might be an interesting exercise...

Can't hurt to try. Its not like these guys hang around the internet commenting either way on Martian anomalies

The discovery of ancient remains from under former arctic ice on Earth gets more attention.

Possibly because we are all hoping to find that elusive past civilization

I work very hard to remain bias free in my decisions. It appears the only source for these speculative theories are websites and publications that very much want these things to be what they hope for.

This is quite true, because only those people feel passionately about the search and the possibilities... but there are a few skeptic websites and bools as counter point

Its the same with religion... those that believe spend a lot of time trying to show their point of view, and yes, to convince others, but atheists don't generally create websites to counter this

Same goes for UFO data...

I think its a question of passion... the believers have a desire to share what they believe, but skeptics have nothing to share or shout about except to knock down a pedestal. Don't get me wrong, this is not an attack against non believers, but the motivation is not the same...

Now the problem with the believers side is that it also attracts the fringe people... and that makes it really hard to sort truth from fiction

So skeptics that are seriously looking into this are quite a help in the search, if simply for the reason it makes us work harder to find that clear image of a building with lights on tucked into a crater that NASA missed

Ah but of course MrPenny....the mainstream is corrupt and in on the coverup....can't you see that?

And some of your co-horts, (not damning anyone in particular by association, just pointing out), tend to respond to skepticism with very negative, rude, and/or ill-worded screeds. Not exactly diplomats for the cause.....

I believe that is referred to as "begging the question". One doesn't necessarily follow the other here. Its simply a fallacious argument. Having no other information, the answer to the question; "why have all the moon films disappeared? is, because NASA lost the moon films.

I know, I know....that's far too mundane and ordinary MrPenny. I'm sorry, any other conclusion, with the information available, is a wild-ass guess.

LOL Yes it is easy to conclude that "NASA simply lost the films" Okay we all KNOW what bumbling incompetents they are, right? And after all those old dusty films from the 60's are just cluttering up the place...

Hmmmm....


As Undo pointed out, the film footage was a lot better than stated...

Seems the guys who worked five years on making them were a little pieved with the results...

Here is an interesting article on that quality... seems the "bumbling idiots" forgot that their super high res TV cameras were not compatible with television networks... so they set up a TV camera to take the shot from a screen image at mission control...

OY

Search Is on for Original Apollo 11 Footage