NASA releases new close up of Mars Face

Originally posted by selfless
They are not assumptions.

The aliens at/on earth hypothesis are speculation. That's the only fact in this matter. Feel free to come and deabte this if you wish:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Face on mars or not, nothing is confirmed and no one can say otherwise.

It's confirmed that when you remove the shadow angle that just so happens to show up in the old low quality image the face disappears.

And just so you know, i am really not here to persuade you, that's for sure.

My college textbook on persuasion stats that virtually every exchange in human communications involves some level of persuasion. The fact that you're debating this sums it up. I cant honestly say that I'm not trying to persuade anyone with my presence based on my knowledge of social science. For fairness there are degrees to the level of persuasion involved. Coersion and violence is the extreme end just so you understand the spectrum I'm talking about. Just keeping it real yo

So for you to say that i am wrong and my stance is to be open to all possibilities means that you are the one who is wrong.

But firmly stating thal ALF's visit here isn't being open to the possibilities, it's being firm in a belief. Being open would involve stating that it's possible they're here rather than stating it as a fact.

Originally posted by selfless
IgnoranceIsntBlisss my friend,

If you just say ( I am open to all possibilities regarding the face on mars)

Then i will think you are right :0

If the face still existed without the perfectly alligned shadow then I would have to state that it's a serious possibility. The fact that it disappears when you remove the shadow ends it right there in my view.

As far as aliens at earth goes, I think it's rather absurd with all that I know, but I still cant say that they absolutely aren't.

With the face its rather obvious once you take away the shadow.

It's all good, believe NASA if you choose to, i am not here to persuade you.



[edit on 16-4-2007 by selfless]

Check out my 2 videos and you'll see that a person couldn't possibly distrust NASA more than I.

My arguments here are based on my "common sense" (there's no such thing as literal common sense).

[edit on 16-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Hmm the only pictures out there that aren't the old mars pictures are the computer generated images from NAZI I mean NASA.

So how can you trust your source of image from NASA if you don't trust them?

i posted the pic earlier in the thread of what i saw. i looks like the head of a "grey" but im sure its just an annomoly. the only thing that makes me sceptical is that nearby there is another annomoly right near it which resembles a group of pyramids. do they have any of those 3d images of those yet? id be interested to see what they might look like from the side

Originally posted by selfless
Hmm the only pictures out there that aren't the old mars pictures are the computer generated images from NAZI I mean NASA.

Only the new ones are. Check my older comments here.

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Originally posted by selfless
Hmm the only pictures out there that aren't the old mars pictures are the computer generated images from NAZI I mean NASA.

Only the new ones are. Check my older comments here.

Please do post the pics in here.

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

This device works like a television camera, but will takes still images instead of motion video. In narrow-angle mode, MOC's black and white, high-resolution telephoto lens will spot Martian rocks and other objects as small as 1.4 meters (4.6 feet) across from orbit.
www.msss.com...

[edit on 16-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

I thought those images were from NASA?

Those don't look like photographs but computer generated images.

Originally posted by selfless
If you are not open to all possibilities, you are wrong, it's that simple.

Yes, you keep saying that, but in the next breath you adamantly deny the possibility that NASA's research is valid:

Originally posted by selfless
But NASA is the source of information i will not consider reliable.

So, you're not open to all possibilities, and, therefore, by your own declaration, you are wrong.

It's that simple.

— Doc Velocity

Why is it collapsed on one side? What was underneath it that gave way?

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Originally posted by selfless
If you are not open to all possibilities, you are wrong, it's that simple.

Yes, you keep saying that, but in the next breath you adamantly deny the possibility that NASA's research is valid:

Originally posted by selfless
But NASA is the source of information i will not consider reliable.

So, you're not open to all possibilities, and, therefore, by your own declaration, you are wrong.

It's that simple.

— Doc Velocity

Way to go TWISTING that around now.

I am open to infinite possibilities towards the subject of the thread, The face on mars, my infinite possibilities was not towards the intentions of NASA.

Infinite possibilities is only available as long as nothing is confirmed hence the face on mars.

But nice TRY trying to twist that around now, that was almost like a trap on my part hahaha... but no not really.

Funny...

I agree with Jefferey. I myself believe that E.T.'s exist, but at some point we have to take a step back and rethink or "relook" if you will what we are actually seeing.

The face on mars has always intrigued me. But in all honesty, we try so hard to prove to everyone else that there really is something on Mars or the moon that we end up fooling ourselves.

Do I believe life existed/exists on Mars or the moon? Yes I do. But I'm not going to blindly believe in what others are saying. I make up my own mind and go by that.

Peace,
Frontkjmeper

Doc Velocity, mr dis info specialist.

If you want to discuss the validity of NASA I suggest you start your own thread or go to one that is already open.

I have stated my judgment towards NASA and i have my reasons that are with out a doubt valid to me but this thread is not about the validity of NASA it's about the face on mars.

The only reason i stated my stance on the NASA subject is that the computer generated images of the face on mars ( The subject of the thread) was from NASA and i stated why they don't confirm anything in contribution to debunking anything.

Therefor, still open to infinite possibilities towards the face on mars, not NASA.

There, i hope that is clear and understood.


[edit on 16-4-2007 by selfless]

we have proof of alien visitation:
just think about the moon landing that was a different celestial boddy and we were the aliens. of courz this is considering that the moon landing wasnt faked.

Take the pic and zoom it wayyy out and it will appear just like the old original "face" did.
Also, I noticed years ago that it appeared to be a gray when you turn it upside down, just do a google for "upside down mars face."

Originally posted by selfless

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

In short not only is the brain specialized in general pattern recognition, it's highly specialized for seeking out and identifying faces, but the 2 processes are completely seperate.

Regardless, that doesn't prove there is no artificial structure on mars, it's only one possibility.

It wasn't meant to debunk the actual face itself. It was to explain why you think you see a face. Your brain is hardwired to look for faces. Even if you dont want to look for a face, that part of your brain begins searching for one as soon as you open your eyes.

Now combine that with your convictions that aliens visit here (and there), and there you have it. It's important that you believe aliens visit here as well, and this face is part of your viewpoint. If you simply assumed that maybe ancient aliens constructed that long ago before the planet collapsed then perhaps you'd be more open to the science and reason I'm presenting you with. Since I'll assume you believe aliens flew there and built that, tell me how or why did they go to all of that trouble to build that face on a planet with virtually no atmosphere or water? If they flew there and did all that in the past then it seems pretty obvious that they'd have come here too, and populated this prime planet instead of waste a perfectly good planet by throwing us "monkeys" down here for an entertainment show ala the South Park "CANCELLED" episode.

I don't trust NASA either, and it's important here that NASA isn't the only ones offering images and angles. Even if it did look like a face no matter what/image, it still doesnt mean that aliens built it as in a HUGE completely dry surface its basically inevitable that face like shapes would be present, especially considering how our brains want to see faces. This one just doesnt add up. It cancels itself out once you get a crisp image and everything else that's been discussed here tonight.




Following your logic, that thing looks like a face therefore it must be a face, and not only that but intelligent aliens built it.

SO... following your logic, the faces in the smoke during the WTC disaster must have been caused by G-d and/or Satan. So since this threads logic got us to this point, then it begs the question: why would God allow aliens to fly here? Or does that mean they're satans minions?








See what the mind tells people what they think they're seeing?


[edit on 16-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Hey buddy, don't go saying my mind sees what it wants to see because i made it clear that my mind is open to all possibilities towards the face on mars.

It doesn't matter to me if there is an artificial structure there or not to me.

But remember that just because we can see clouds and make out images in them doesn't mean there isn't any artificial structure on mars.

50/50.

But you refer to aliens visiting here as fact. That right there discredits any claims you make about being neutral or open minded.