Human Skull on Mars

AS long as rovers are taking pictures on mars this is going to go on forever, why cant you people understand the human insight to pick out familiar things in picturs and the degree that the angle and light play out on an image. Our minds want to see faces, from birth we are programmed to see faces. With a static picture at a certain degree and with the right lighting almost anything could be a face or a skull. This is so overdone I do not understand why people waste their time.

Right on center of that pic, is there a stone floating ?

Originally posted by Fibonacci11235
could you link to the site or the picture youre talking about?

was it marsrover.nasa.gov...




[edit on 22-5-2008 by Lightunseen]

At Fibonacci's picture I really do see a face. But I also see that this face has a nose and lips. After all these years in the surface of Mars, this head has nose and lips?

JALIEN is absolutely right. The brain is desined to see known figures in anything, from clouds to rock formations. Hey, in my house there was a figure in the wooden ceiling that looked like a vampire

reply to post by west aussie


Hi west aussie,
I would also like to say to not get discouraged. These images can be tricky and it gets tough to discern what your looking at.

The rover Spirit has been sitting in the same spot for some time now so you can easily find a lot of pictures from that area to compare with. I like to get as many images as I can find of one area/object and compare them with each other. The different angles, time and lighting helps a lot in understanding what your looking at.

There is a lot to learn from images like these but it take time and the one thing I have learned is that there is usually just enough detail to show something odd but not enough to confirm what it is. It is rather addicting though.

It does look like a skull however it could also just be the rock formation. I know people want to believe it but i think that it could just be coinsidence!

Originally posted by star in a jar
reply to post by spikedmilk

 

in the center of the picture you can see what looks like a ghostly image of an face.

Optical illusion or a result of some obfuscation effort to the original high quality image perhaps, or... a ghost?

Well, when I posted this image for W.Aussie, I did nothing to alter the image with exception of the lines/splitting it up into quadrants. But if you see something, by all means kindly mark it and post it for us please. thanks.

reply to post by Devino

These images can be tricky and it gets tough to discern what your looking at.

No it doesn't. Your looking at rocks, plain and simple. If you see something else, that is nothing more than the unique condition of being human.

As long as we foolishly entertain such rubbish as seeing shapes in clouds and claiming that is evidence of our desires it makes us no better than religious folks. And Ufology should not be a religion.

Its the mere action of entertaining such utter rubbish such as this that ensures that this subject will remain in the domain of idiocy. You can argue (unsuccessfully) that we need to put up with image interpretation such as this in order to find the one or two needles in a haystack, but that is a rubbish argument, and one second of thought should tell you why. If everyone is too dense to see why I say this, then plain and simple, your a part of the problem that relegates Ufology into most people's trashcans.

If you look close enough on many of the pictures of Mars you can almost
everytime find something that you think is nott normal, in this case a "scull" are we really so desperate for proof? Just wait, truth will always find a way out.

Unfortunately, those images have too much noise, but has they have photos from the three filters (L4, L5 and L6) for red, green and blue, we can see it in colour, not true colour but close enough for me.



Complete image here.

I think that I can see marks from the rover wheels over that area, and if that is the case it means the rover was on that area before, so I will look for photos from when it was there.

reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts


Why do you need to be so devisive? I've been on this site long enough to see you pull this stunt in numerous threads. There is absolutely no harm in looking through photos and posting interesting results. Yea you can say they're all rocks, blah, blah. But so what? Even if they are all rocks what's the harm in looking at them?

Plus, you blame people like west aussie, who are just casually persuing the UFO/extraterrestrial phenomenon and mean no harm to the field with their curiosity. I would blame the crazy frontmen of ufology, like a billy meir (sp?), who do the UFO community a gigantic disservice with unabashed hoaxing. People honestly trying to advance ufology without trying to make money are the last people to blame when it comes to the public's perception of the ufology field.

I saw a skull.. a dog.. and a little human figure sitting on a rock,, try and tell me there is no life on mars.. there were roads and buildings,,, trees,, and forests.. a creature that looked like a rat.. how can anyone say there is no life on mars. pyramids,, statues, large pit mines,,, they got a good life there on mars.. wish i was there..

reply to post by Ryan Lloyd

I agree. I have seen many odd things but the mind does like to recognize familiarity in the shapes it sees. I have seen human forms in wood grain before but it does not mean the wood was genetically altered so the rings grow in such a way to make that shape it just happened naturally.

So I have to see my verdict is out on this.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Man you complained so much at the start of this thread i'm glad you finally found the image and we can start looking at what that is. A skull or a rock.

I'm not sure if its a skull but those are 2 pretty defined holes i'm not sure how they could be made naturally.

[edit on 22-5-2008 by Beefcake]

Welcome to 2007. That ROCK was posted many many times on marsanomolies and other sites like this one. To post up a title like "I FOUND A HUMAN SKULL" is just plain posting lies.

If it's a rock, then why is it the only one with any type of roundness to it?? and why is it so distinctivly different from ALL the other rocks. it's clearly different and what could be casting two tiny shadows on the same rock?? that in its self is a find!

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts

 

Why do you need to be so devisive? I've been on this site long enough to see you pull this stunt in numerous threads. There is absolutely no harm in looking through photos and posting interesting results. Yea you can say they're all rocks, blah, blah. But so what? Even if they are all rocks what's the harm in looking at them?

Plus, you blame people like west aussie, who are just casually persuing the UFO/extraterrestrial phenomenon and mean no harm to the field with their curiosity. I would blame the crazy frontmen of ufology, like a billy meir (sp?), who do the UFO community a gigantic disservice with unabashed hoaxing. People honestly trying to advance ufology without trying to make money are the last people to blame when it comes to the public's perception of the ufology field.

100% agreed. There is no harm in looking or speculating.
If we don't look, if we don't speculate and research things real discoveries can never be made.

Oh ya and Billy Meir has done more to hinder the forward advance of disclosure of real UFO activity with his sad sad hoax than anything else. what a mess!

Originally posted by west aussie
reply to post by Blaine91555

 

Cheers Blaine, but the other image on sol 1526 is much clearer.

All the images from Sol 1526 are the same resolution, so it does not really matter. Without altering the original data through filtering and algorithms, there is nothing there other than a lighter colored, rounded rock with a couple of dark shadows that resemble eye holes on a skull.

I spend around 30 hours a week in Photoshop and perhaps the same in other graphics software. I could make it look like about anything you want by moving it around between filters, but there would be no reason to believe it resembled accurately what is really there. That handful of little squares is all there is and their ain't no more

Perhaps some day if people keep looking? Nobody would be more thrilled than me if someone turned up the smoking gun.

reply to post by rocksarerocks


I don't think that saying that is a lie, unless he (or she?) knows that is not a skull or if it was pointed to him by someone else.

It's the first time I have seen someone claiming that there is a skull in that photo, so, to me, he really did found it, although I don't think it's a skull.

And I think that you should not shout in that way against a fellow member that has only posted his opinion.

Originally posted by NephraTari

Oh ya and Billy Meir has done more to hinder the forward advance of disclosure of real UFO activity with his sad sad hoax than anything else. what a mess!

Oh no!!!!!!!!!!! Not the BM words!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are right; "what a mess!".

reply to post by rocksarerocks


I think it is obvious there was no subterfuge intended here. What is your point, other than chest pounding.

There is no way to prove it is a skull, but then again; there is no way to prove it is not