Some images from Mars

Thank you everyone for your kind replies; and thanks to ArMaP for the enhancements.
hsur2112, you are right:
to outline what caught my attention would have been like to "force" the next to spot what i've spotted, so it would have been, somewhow, unfair.
It seems that the "star" of this set of images is MOC wide angle image M12-02879

it has been found the most interesting one by ten of you

i'll try to explane what caught my attention on each one of the pictures, but now i'll focus to M12-02879.

Image caption: Red WA of 'striated' terrain SW of Hellas

Aprox. widht of the object (rough calculation)


Derived values from Ancillary data:

Longitude of image center: 324.31°W
Latitude of image center: 66.56°S
Scaled pixel width: 233.17 meters
Scaled image width: 168.87 km
Scaled image height: 255.85 km
Solar longitude (Ls): 310.45°
Local True Solar Time: 13.75 decimal hours
Emission angle: 5.35°
Incidence angle: 50.66°
Phase angle: 48.44°
North azimuth: 98.60°
Sun azimuth: 65.50°
Spacecraft altitude: 371.46 km
Slant distance: 372.92 km

www.msss.com...


Whatever it is, is HUGE

Thanks again for the replies mates.

To look upon photographs of Martian landscape and project preconceived ideas about civilisations, lost or found, is far too easy, but understandable. Most of the time it is done without the use of a critical eye and under the influence of western culture.

Mainly, many of us are wish-fulfilling; bringing to completion a concept that has fascinated and inspired our collective psyche, through both writers and civilisations, for centuries. Such is its filtration into our way of thinking that if you speak of the ETH and UFOs to any sceptic not adverse to using sarcasm as a tool, you will undoubtedly be subjected to the phrase:

'You believe in Martians, then? Little green men?'

The notion that Mars is, or was, inhabited has long been in the public eye. Giovanni Schiaparelli's miscenception that he had observed canals on the Martian surface was a popular notion, and seemed until disproved that life certainly had made its mark on the Red Planet.
H.G.Wells is probably the concept's most famous promoter, albeit in fictional form. His story; "War of the Worlds", strikes such a chord about our species interaction that it constantly inspires new dramatisation.
Even Johnathan Swift made what appears to be a lucky (albeit incerdibly incisive) guess about two of Mars's moons; Phobos and Deimos. Though he didn't name them, as their actual existence had yet to be discovered (1877), he mentioned the existence of two moons in "Gulliver's Travels" (1726).
Staying in the literary vein, other writers who have used Mars as a backdrop for their work include such influential authors as Edgar Rice Burroughs, Robert Heinlein, Ray Bradbury and the late, sadly missed Arthur C. Clarke.

If we go further back, Mars was a God;

Mars was the Roman god of war, and the son of Juno and Jupiter. As the word Mars has no Indo-European derivation, it is most likely the Latinized form of the agricultural Etruscan god Maris. Initially the Roman god of fertility and vegetation and a protector of cattle, fields and boundaries, Mars later became associated with battle as the growing Roman Empire began to expand, and he was identified with the Greek god Ares. He was also a tutelary god of Rome. Unlike his Greek counterpart, Mars was generally well liked and rivaled Jupiter as the most honored god. As he was regarded as the legendary father of Rome's founder, Romulus, it was believed that all Romans were descendants of Mars.

en.wikipedia.org...(mythology)

Mars also appears in the Vedic pantheon, with almost the same attributes as found in western mythology.

Mars: Mangal or Kuja are the Vedic names for fiery Mars. The main deity is Subrahmanya or Skanda. He is the adolescent Kumara, the son of Pleiades (Kartikeya), lord of the armies, the spear-holder, the spiritual warrior. According to Parashara, Kartikeya is the chief deity associated with Mars and was Shiva and Parvarti’s second son. In yoga, Skanda is the power of chastity and the virile seed. By making his sublimated seed rise through the central inner channel of the subtle-body (susumna) up to the sixth chakra where it is consumed, that the yogi becomes the complete master of his instincts. He is often depicted riding a peacock and carrying a spear. Rudra, the God of storms, is also mentioned as reflected the Mars archetype of the warrior.

www.dennisharness.com...

Is it so surprising, then, that we look upon these photos of a planet that has for so long held such mystery and eagerly search for signs, any indication, that the stories may hold some truth?

No, it's not.

What our past has bestowed on us is an almost burning desire to find life, extinct or thriving, on Mars. As yet, and despite the millions of man-hours spent pouring over every pixel sent back from the Red Planet, we have no conclusive proof.

And therein is the key word: yet.

Even though it is impossible to regulate how individual researchers decide to study Mars (there are a few members on ATS who will advocate bizarre methodologies), or even how they present their findings (which in some cases can be viewed as damaging to the cause), the really important fact is there're thousands of us looking.

And the more of us that look, the quicker we'll discover something undeniable.

The photos Internos has offered us are the tip of an incredible iceberg. Most will more than likely be exposed as simulacra, natural formations etc; that is the beauty of ATS. We can seperate the wheat from the chaff. But I feel strongly there will be a growing number of exceptional images that will, hopefully, evade the debunker's and denier's efforts.

My personal thoughts on these images?

IMHO, Mars was inhabited, millenia ago. What we are seeing in the few strangely symmetrical shapes littering the Martian surface are cyclopean ruins. Many others may well be disguised by a possible "alien" concept of symmetry.
They're battered, bruised and in a state of complete collapse, but nevertheless pay tribute to the skills of their ancient builders.

Maybe, one day, we'll thank them for their abilities to construct edifices that not only withstood the tests and ravages of time, but also the unrelenting onslaught of inward looking isolationists intent on admiting that we humans, as sentient beings, are unique.

reply to post by sherpa

I thought this was strange.

From image M11-01691

That must be a Great Chthonian. Lovecraft knew!
The entire beast is 13 pixels wide. 1024 pixels = 2.84 km, so its tentacles are 10 m long.

I have calculated that the the top of the tube (picture 2) is 4103.79 meters, give and take. It is 2 millimeters wide. The width of the picture is 8 cm. And according to the data, the actual width is 704 pixel where one pixel is 233.17 meters.

Great pictures. Two things I would like to point out. First, is whenever a picture is zoomed in, we loose quality. So things that may be a circle look like a square. Second (and this one bugs me) we have higher quality pictures of Mars...

But that rock formation in the 2nd picture is interesting. Possible cave with a pillar that was damaged somehow? I'm not a geologist, but would to see what could create it without water with a Martian atmosphere.

Originally posted by internos
It seems that the "star" of this set of images is MOC wide angle image M12-02879

it has been found the most interesting one by ten of you

It should be found the most interesting by most of the viewers. Even to my sometimes overly critical eye.....it jumps right out of the picture. I tend to get curious about anomalies of this sort when I cannot map a mental object to the feature......in other words, it's different from seeing "faces in clouds" in that, it looks odd, but I don't know what it is. I feel comfortable that I'm not using wishful thinking and making it what I want and hope it to be.

All of that being said....."nuclear power generation cooling tower" comes to mind. Of course, I suppose it could be something as mundane as the remnants of a volcanic cone, with softer materials eroded from its sides. Regardless, it is weird looking and seemingly out of place.

Cool pics, as are all from the red planet. I have never seen any evidence at all for a civilization on mars. If there was a past civilization it's remains would be buried feet under the surface.... So until we start excavating the soil at mars we will NEVER know period. Don't get me wrong I totally believe mars at one time was teeming with life just as earth. But this was probably millions or maybe a few billion years ago (or hell who knows maybe as little as a few thousands of years ago) and more than likely was simply organisms and not full blown advanced civilizations.

Keep digging though, I will always spend the time to observe what you all have found.

it"s a"soul catcher"!!,seriously though et is cleaning up the surface of mars and the moon getting them publicly ready for us in 19 yrs.when georgew promised us said trip

Originally posted by MrPenny
Regardless, it is weird looking and seemingly out of place.

Depends on whether you look at it as a whole or think of it as two parts: A crater (with the well known dome type formation inside) and the "white dust" surrounding it (going more north than south, how dunes normally behave). As such, its not all that weird, is it?

That said, it is a FAR more interesting feature than the stupid diffuse blurry images that's interpreted as anything from a reptilian soul catching processor to an intergalactic whorehouse.

Great pics!
Man, I can't wait until we actually go there.
*checks watch* What's taking so long!!??


I would love to see what Mars was like ________,000 years ago.

Originally posted by merka
A crater (with the well known dome type formation inside) and the "white dust" surrounding it (going more north than south, how dunes normally behave). As such, its not all that weird, is it?

Ah ha...now I see that. The shadows and highlights are giving the illusion of greater depth than is actually there. Thanks....now it's now so weird..you're right.

Do you think...............?


Anyway, this may be a stupid quesiton, but could it be an eruption of some sort?

The more I look at it the more creeped out I get.

Originally posted by hsur2112
Anyway, this may be a stupid quesiton, but could it be an eruption of some sort?

The more I look at it the more creeped out I get.

Nah, it's called a central uplift (in the link they call it a central peak). Happens in complex impact craters.
www.solarviews.com...

Lighting is playing a role in this one, still an interesting photo though.

[edit on 19-3-2008 by ThatsJustWeird]

reply to post by merka


That is also my opinion and why I don't see it as anything special, for Mars.



As this has proved so popular, here are more images from that area.

M07-02776


M03-03085


E07-00102


E12-00802


R07-01976


R04-01958


R06-01291


E07-01437


E10-02125


R09-04369


This one shows the east side of that crater.
R06-01290

Maybe there are more, but these were the ones I could find.



Edit: I forgot to say that these images are directly from the MSSS site, they are not from the IMG files as the images I posted before.

[edit on 19/3/2008 by ArMaP]

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by merka

 

That is also my opinion and why I don't see it as anything special, for Mars.

 

As this has proved so popular, here are more images from that area.

I liked the one with the "Jack 'O Mars":

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to

As this has proved so popular, here are more images from that area.

ArMap, the image #4, #9 and #10 that you have posted are not simply of "the same area" but exactly of the same formation. If you don't specify it, the people may think that there are three more identical formations: but you have posted three times images of THE SAME formation, then other random images of the same area showing formations that have NOTHING to do wih it.

So, if your purpose is to prove that that specific one is an ordinary formation, please post some formations ACTUALLY identical, but from elsewhere, rather than more photos of the same formation claiming that they come from "the same area". Because looking at your post, it looks like you have spotted three identical formations, while it's THE SAME one. I barely see a VAGUE resembleance in pic#1:

but there's a difference betweeen a vague resembleance and an exact match.


Ed to add (don't want to make another post for this):

======================================================================

As i said before, i'll say what caught my attention on each one of the
photos that i've posted in the first post:
MOC wide-angle image M11-04182

Perhaps i'm the only one, but i think i see a triangle here, this
caught my attention in this image.

As i said in the OP, i DON'T think that these are evidences of
civilization, (i REPEAT it just incase someone did not notice it).

Now, an artificial formation, a natural formation and a common
formation are three different things.
If this one is an common formation, then it should be easy to find many
formations like this one

Well, if someone would find them, please kindly post them here because
i'd be really interested to these "common" triangular formations,
thanks.

[edit on 19/3/2008 by internos]