#1 Mars

Just some thoughts about what I have seen on this thread:

Egyptian helicopters: people should remember that those hieroglyphs are known, there are many people capable of reading what is written, and those people have been saying all the time that the "helicopter" and other things like that are the result of using the same rock to write another text. Those who can read the hieroglyphs can read both versions, the original and the superimposed ones, and both texts make sense, or so they say, I can not read those things.

Cydonia and other things like that: many people that talk about the photos from Viking and Mars Global Surveyor look like they do not know that there is a newer satellite orbiting Mars for two years, and that it has sent thousands of high definition (25 centimetres per pixel) photos, and on those photos we can not see anything that confirms the "findings" on older photos (but some people find new "anomalies" ).

NASA lying: from what I have seen, the "marketing" side of NASA is not to be trusted (as any other marketing section on any organisation), they change photos to make them more appealing to the public, but on the scientific side I have never seen anything that I could consider as fake or altered in any way. Also, if I can changes photos without leaving any trace of what I did or of what was on the original photo I am sure NASA can do it also, specially if they have been doing it for the last 40 years. And I also think that it is very unlikely that they would let something pass, this type of work would not be the work of just one person, it is a type of work for which there should be at least two supervisors, so all must let something pass for it to reach us, if they do it at all.

Bad Astronomy and Richard Hoagland: I don't like either!
Both look too convinced of their own importance, and if one thinks that science (and for that, the science he knows about) can explain everything, the other ignores so many things (specially about photography, the base of his work) that it is even sad sometimes how easy it is for someone to just say some things and those things are accepted because nobody really knows what he is talking about or if what he says is really how things are.


As for structures that look artificial, I haven't seen any, either on Mars or the Moon (or other celestial body), and the famous "Egyptian statue", to me, it's just the combination of some factors; a flat vertical rock, a smaller rock that broke over the first rock, etc., but I have written too much about it in other threads that I think I will not post it in this one once more, specially at this time (02:05 AM here in Portugal).

reply to post by ArMaP



h please. Articles , such as those found on badastronomy, arebased on actual SCIENCE and DATA.

Mars conspiracies are based on finding patterns in photos and a conspiracy theory that says NASA is lying.
If I were chinese i would call it the poo poo platter.

Originally posted by NavalFC

Originally posted by Balez
I can only agree with bfft!

There is no evidence for anything, there is no "debunking".
You can not debunk anything that has no facts, but are only conjecture from the begining.

There could have been intelligent life on mars, or mars have never harbored anything more than microorganisms.

This is what we know about Mars today, it is in all posibility a very dead planet.
With all the pictures that we see, we really do not know what is on them.
Eyes are easily fooled.

Or it could be that what our eyes see, is exactly that.

Now stop claiming that mars pictures have been "debunked", when it is impossible to do so.

I wonder... Too much baileys?

well you and him need to actually do some research, as their is plenty of evidence as I just cited in my response to bfft

Just because the evidence points to a conclusion that YOU dont like doesnt mean its just conjecture. That is a logical fallacy and oneoften used b creationits in the ID debate "the evidence doesnt agree with me so Ill just dismiss it!"

I guess I can chalk this one up to you not knowing me very well.

I can assure you that i have done plenty of research. As a matter of fact, I belong to a research group that has dedicated hundreds of hours to research. Most often, "new" releases of "new" understandings only support what our group has said for quite some time.

Now, I am a Sooner fan and the game is on. However, i will return later to address your previous post.

In the meantime, feel free to click the link in my signature to see some of the research that the Pegasus group has up on the website.

And, if you wouldn't mind, try to be a little less condescending. That sort of attitude is my primary complaint about badastronomy, and really doesn't wear well on you.

edit to add:

ArMap:

NASA lying: from what I have seen, the "marketing" side of NASA is not to be trusted (as any other marketing section on any organisation), they change photos to make them more appealing to the public, but on the scientific side I have never seen anything that I could consider as fake or altered in any way. Also, if I can changes photos without leaving any trace of what I did or of what was on the original photo I am sure NASA can do it also, specially if they have been doing it for the last 40 years. And I also think that it is very unlikely that they would let something pass, this type of work would not be the work of just one person, it is a type of work for which there should be at least two supervisors, so all must let something pass for it to reach us, if they do it at all.

You should look into what ISIS is (from LANL), and what it does. You don't have to lie about things that never hit your servers, you know.

[edit on 6-12-2008 by bigfatfurrytexan]

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
ArMap:

You should look into what ISIS is (from LANL), and what it does. You don't have to lie about things that never hit your servers, you know.

Thanks, I will do that, and maybe I can add it to my collection of software named ISIS, I know that programmers are not very good at making names for their programs, but this case is ridiculous, I know at least three different software packages with this name.

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
ArMap:

You should look into what ISIS is (from LANL), and what it does. You don't have to lie about things that never hit your servers, you know.

Thanks, I will do that, and maybe I can add it to my collection of software named ISIS, I know that programmers are not very good at making names for their programs, but this case is ridiculous, I know at least three different software packages with this name.

It is illegal to possess this one. I am not even sure that it can be had without access to secure servers....but i have heard quite a bit about it.

Originally posted by NavalFC
Do you even know what conjecture means? Something tells me you dont:
Pronunciation
noun, verb, -tured, -tur⋅ing.
–noun 1. the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof.
2. an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation.
3. Obsolete. the interpretation of signs or omens.


Nothing of what I said is conjecture.

This is what i mean. Condescending remarks do not earn any extra credit, and certainly will not endear others to your views. Taking the approach used above will not help.

However, i did bold the part of your definition which applies to your statements. "Guess; Speculation"....they seem to describe it quite well. The reason: because you only can base it off of other information, and have no direct knowledge (and many gaps in evidence).

First lets start with evolution, yes evolution is a proven fact.
I know what your going to say "but its only a theory"
Well, what you and many others seem to forget is that te word theory in Science means something much different then the word theory in normal speak between people. The only way it could be consiered any stronger in scientific terms is if it were the law of evolution, a term reserved fr things that are able to be expressed through mathematics. The gross majoririty of the scientific world considers evolution a PROVEN FACT no matte how much people like otherwise, an HAS manage to trace back the lineage of evolution completely from the origin of life to sea creatures to land creatures to us. And contrary to what creatonists try to push, the fossil record is chalk full of transitional fossils illustrating a clear line of descent, and indeed the genetic record is as well, as by examining chromosonal fusion, retro viral integration and other things from the genetic record science has established a common decent. So trying to say that "evolution i just a theory" or "hasnt been proven" is bull#. and dare I say, CONJECTURE..especially when evolution is still occuring to this day

You should not use fowl language on this site, as it violates TAC, which you agreed to when you signed up for membership. I would suspect if you don't right that, your experience here will be shortlived.

What you refer to as evolution may, in fact, be genetic drift. However, from a scientific standpoint I do not believe that evolution is written in stone. The primary flaw? The assumption that change happens gradually and continuously over long periods of time. No account for cataclysmic change, and no account for rapid change.

What evolution amounts to, from my perspective, is the attempt of man to label and understand that which is far more complex than he can imagine. Our points of reference derive from a relatively brief and unusually calm period in which our higher form of society currently has developed within.

Since the time of Darwin's travels to Galapagos, we have discovered so much more, and learned that slow and steady is not the way of nature. Despite our desire for it to be so.

Genetic drift certainly DOES happen. I will not deny that. But "evolution"? That is a huge leap of faith.

Now onto Mars, yes a planet losing its magentic field would cause the effects described. Trying to say the solar wind is just negative ions is foolish, as the solar wind does have an effect on un protected things. Its called the solar wind for a reason and our magneitc field is what protects us from Solar wind, and from the Suns radiation. Infact in areas on Earth where the magentic field is weakest you can see a phenomenon called aurora, whre the sky is filled with lots of colors as cosmic rays from the sun strike the Earths atmosphere..

The aurora's are caused by "pinching" of the magnetic lines in the polar regions. But this has nothing to do with what i said.

As well, the solar wind has very little to do with the discussion, but if you wish to dwell on it for a moment, we can discuss it. The solar wind is more than negative ions. It is positive and negative ions. From a the perspective of chemistry, its effects could range and electrolysis of a planets oceans is certainly not improbable. Especially if the water in those oceans was a salty brine (as on Earth). You DO realize that the "charged" part of the ions (anions and cations) is important, from a chemical standpoint, correct? And this may explain why we see clouds in the Martian sky.

But, what does this have to do with the possibility of life still existing on Mars? High radiation means nothing. Life can thrive in ANY environment, as we have seen with our own Earthbound "extremophiles".

And we know ths happened on mars, why? its called evidence. using measurments from ancient martian meteotrites that have landed on Earth we have established that at one time Mars had a strong magneic field, and this coincides to the period of time when Mars would have been an Earth-like planet.

And passing through our VERY highly charged atmosphere would not effect the meteors that we assume come from Mars?

Furthermore, the asertion that the same thing that happens on Mars would leave the Earthbare in 10,000 years.. That is pure nonsense as man man made structures have survived thousands upon thousands of years, such a structures and objects from ancient egypt, ancient messopotamia and sumeria and ancient grease.

Especially if the Earth had no atmosphere after the solar wind took it and our oceans were gone. Without oxygen oxyidation and rusting of metal can not occur and thus metals such as steel and others wont be broken down.

Ancient man seemed to build better than us. But even their monuments (after only a couple thousand years) has needed quite a bit of maintenance and renovation.

However, we use reinforced concrete. The "rebar", as it begins to oxidize, swells outwards. As it swells, it creates issues with pressure on the surrounding concrete. Which causes it to crumble. I would assume that a lack of magnetosphere would impact this as well, greater amounts of oxygen would be available in the atmosphere after the electrlytic process.

I would also suspect that if we had the windstorms seen on Mars (which, to me, indicate some level of electric capability as well as atmosphere), that after 10k years we would see significant deterioration of landmarks. To the point that they could easily be unrecognizable. Sand abrasion.

Biological material such as human remains and such would likely have been long gone, but however evidence of our civilization would remain well beyond that, and indeed if someone did come here, he evidence of us would be CLEAR. You wouldnt need to find little pictures in pattern and such BS as people do with mars. The science is very clear

Ahh, but we haven't "been there" yet. All we have are images and pictures.

You are correct, many of the images from Mars are percieved incorrectly. However, there are so many more that are left without explanation.

I would also add that we are talking about a scale of time far exceeding 10k years. Personally, i would put it in the range of about 100k years. But that is arbitrary, and my reason for that time scale is not something I am going to go into here.

I would also add the the science is only very clear because it excludes that which it cannot explain.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
It is illegal to possess this one. I am not even sure that it can be had without access to secure servers....but i have heard quite a bit about it.

Maybe we are not talking about the same thing.

After a search with "ISIS" and "LANL" as search words I found this site, from which we can download the programs that make ISIS (Intelligent Searching of Images and Signals), and it's not only available but also open source, with the code available to anyone interested in it.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
What evolution amounts to, from my perspective, is the attempt of man to label and understand that which is far more complex than he can imagine. Our points of reference derive from a relatively brief and unusually calm period in which our higher form of society currently has developed within.

The problem is what you have just said above applies to all human knowledge.

Although we have advanced a lot in several subjects, we are still trying to understand what surrounds us (and ourselves), with our limited references.

People should remember that science is not something rigid, it is constantly changing itself while the information is gathered and understood (and sometimes re-understood), like our personal-level knowledge, we start knowing very little and we learn while we live, sometimes with our mistakes, sometimes with other people's mistakes, most of the times just by the "processing" of the data we can get with the help of our knowledge in other subjects.

Mars may have many particularities that we do not even understand as such, or it may "work" exactly as Earth, we are studying it for so little that we can consider that we are still as a three year old child learning to understand the world.

I would also suspect that if we had the windstorms seen on Mars (which, to me, indicate some level of electric capability as well as atmosphere), that after 10k years we would see significant deterioration of landmarks. To the point that they could easily be unrecognizable. Sand abrasion.

From what I have seen on the photos, the abrasion does not look too strong, probably because of the thinner atmosphere and the smaller gravity, I don't know, but the rocks look sharper than most rocks we have on Earth, but I am not a geologist, maybe if you ask a geologist that you know he can explain if I am right or wrong about this.

reply to post by ArMaP


and that is my whole point.


For someone to come here, chuckling and snorting about how sure they are that things are as science states they are, is foolish.

RE: the geologist....he may be tied up. Haven't heard a lot from him lately. I think he is slaying dragons are something.

Skeptics already look stupid man, what better testimony than (P.Harry S. Truman, P.Gerald Ford, P.Reagan, P.Jimmy Carter, General Douglas MacArthur, Major Gordon Cooper, Stephen Hawkins, Astronaut Donal Slayton, Astronaut L.Gordon Cooper, John Lear, Robert Dean, Lt. Philips j. Corso) the list of all this high rank people goes on and on. still I didn't mention Police Off, Governors, School Teachers, Fisher men's, Doctors, and regular people like you and me. now do you think they look stupid now?
Did I mention The U.K-UFO disclosure? France, Peru, Spain, Russia, Skeptics should ask themselves this, what is so important up in space that India, China, Russia even Hugo Chavez is exploring out in space.

cause them phony digital photos from Mars? or the hoax on the Moon? why even with all this budget problems whe have in U.S today and still whe have money to spend on more missions out in space? (SPECIALY MARS) yea skeptics have all the answers. (THE WETHER BALLON, CGI or Bug in the cam lens's ) whe humans think that whe are on top of everything that there is no grater technology then ours and some think that we are alone in the Universe thats all "BULL" some think that whe evolutionized from the monkey but they don't believe in Big Foot so yea there a ho bunch of people that still think that our government looks out for our benefits and the future love ones as well. Well let me tell you this? why a war that we didn't need that cost the lives of thousand of our American troops and not to mention innocent people from Iraq and U.S... Hail P.Bush... Hail NASA YEA WAKE UP PEOPLE!!

[edit on 8-12-2008 by BIONICLE ALEX]

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


First off, no, evolution is not a huge leap of faith, it is readily observable and explainable.
Just a couple of examples:

1. A disease is exposed to anti biotics, killing most of the bacteria, leaving those behind who had the genetic variation needed to resist them. they reproduce, giving birth to a drug resistant strain. evolution has occured.

2. a forest environment where creatures live who eat the berries on the trees by reaching/climbing high as they can and reaching for the berries.
in that species thoe with the longer necks will be more ikely to reproduce then those with shorter, as they can not get to the food as easily..after a long period of time you evnetually get a long enough neck, due to genetic variation witheach generation while a longer neck is selected for, a creature with a long enough neck to where no climing is necessary


3> and this is a actual one. bacteria that is able to eat Nylon. As Nylon is man made the bacteria had to evolve to be able to digest it. The environment it was in changed, and with it the selective pressure


amd as far as magnetism no, its the same princpal that they have used to trace Earths magnetic field history: by measuring the magentite in ancient pottery.
www.youtube.com...

good video on one theory regarding mars magenticfield.

as for your architecture explanations, concrete is only one of our materials we use in modern day. Seel, wood, fiber glass, titatium, etc etc.

These will not be given to time that easy.

and as for mars, humans havent been there but numerous unmanned space craft have, so theirfore the assessment regarding photos remains the same: If the same thing happened to Earth, the fact that a intelligent people was here would be obvious.

Originally posted by BIONICLE ALEX
Skeptics already look stupid man, what better testimony than (P.Harry S. Truman, P.Gerald Ford, P.Reagan, P.Jimmy Carter, General Douglas MacArthur, Major Gordon Cooper, Stephen Hawkins, Astronaut Donal Slayton, Astronaut L.Gordon Cooper, John Lear, Robert Dean, Lt. Philips j. Corso) the list of all this high rank people goes on and on. still I didn't mention Police Off, Governors, School Teachers, Fisher men's, Doctors, and regular people like you and me. now do you think they look stupid now?

Considering that people can be sceptic about any subject, which subject are you talking about?

Did all those people you mentioned commented the photos from Mars?

Or are you talking about something different?

Did I mention The U.K-UFO disclosure? France, Peru, Spain, Russia, Skeptics should ask themselves this, what is so important up in space that India, China, Russia even Hugo Chavez is exploring out in space.

Did you read the documents "disclosed" by those countries? And the fact that you fail to see interest in space exploration in itself, that does not mean that the interest does not exist, even (or mostly) economic interest.

cause them phony digital photos from Mars? or the hoax on the Moon?

Which phony photos? What Moon hoax?

why even with all this budget problems whe have in U.S today and still whe have money to spend on more missions out in space? (SPECIALY MARS) yea skeptics have all the answers.

The next mission to Mars was "rescheduled" to 2011 instead of 2009, and there are no certainties about it, it may even be cancelled.

(THE WETHER BALLON, CGI or Bug in the cam lens's ) whe humans think that whe are on top of everything

Some do, while some have the idea that there must be some creature(s) that is much more advanced than us, and these have as much proof of that as the other have that humans are the "top of everything".

that there is no grater technology then ours and some think that we are alone in the Universe thats all "BULL" some think that whe evolutionized from the monkey but they don't believe in Big Foot

And some think that we are not alone in the Universe, and they think that we evolved from something that looked like a monkey (the supposed origin is not a monkey, as some people think) and they believe in the possibility of the existence of Big Foot and other undiscovered creatures, but that has nothing to do with photos from Mars.

so yea there a ho bunch of people that still think that our government looks out for our benefits and the future love ones as well.
Well let me tell you this? why a war that we didn't need that cost the lives of thousand of our American troops and not to mention innocent people from Iraq and U.S... Hail P.Bush... Hail NASA YEA WAKE UP PEOPLE!!

I think you should stop a little and think before you post, the idea is to post about the subject being discussed, so, even if what you said may be related to the subject (Mars photos) you should try to write it in a way that makes it easy for other people to understand what you want to say, if you fail to do that your posts may be ignored after the first sentences.

But, after saying all that, welcome to ATS.

Originally posted by NavalFC
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

First off, no, evolution is not a huge leap of faith, it is readily observable and explainable.
Just a couple of examples:

1. A disease is exposed to anti biotics, killing most of the bacteria, leaving those behind who had the genetic variation needed to resist them. they reproduce, giving birth to a drug resistant strain. evolution has occured.

2. a forest environment where creatures live who eat the berries on the trees by reaching/climbing high as they can and reaching for the berries.
in that species thoe with the longer necks will be more ikely to reproduce then those with shorter, as they can not get to the food as easily..after a long period of time you evnetually get a long enough neck, due to genetic variation witheach generation while a longer neck is selected for, a creature with a long enough neck to where no climing is necessary

that is called "genetic drift". It doesn't explain how a creature goes from the ocean to land, and then back to the ocean again (whales, for example). Further, any studies that proclaim to identify a creature as being an ancestor are purely guesswork based on physiology.

Let us not forget the "brontosaurus" debacle.

3> and this is a actual one. bacteria that is able to eat Nylon. As Nylon is man made the bacteria had to evolve to be able to digest it. The environment it was in changed, and with it the selective pressure

did it evolve to eat it, or did nylon just meet its dietary needs well enough?

I am not saying that creatures don't evolve or drift genetically. I am saying the theory of evolution is a leap of faith. Going from single celled organisms to humans is a HUGE leap. There are not many similarities, believe it or not.

amd as far as magnetism no, its the same princpal that they have used to trace Earths magnetic field history: by measuring the magentite in ancient pottery.
www.youtube.com...

good video on one theory regarding mars magenticfield.

as for your architecture explanations, concrete is only one of our materials we use in modern day. Seel, wood, fiber glass, titatium, etc etc.

These will not be given to time that easy.

and as for mars, humans havent been there but numerous unmanned space craft have, so theirfore the assessment regarding photos remains the same: If the same thing happened to Earth, the fact that a intelligent people was here would be obvious.

have you looked through the site linked in my sig? there are many images there that are not so easily explained. And NASA seems loathe to investigate them more fully.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


No it is not pure genetic drift. Its called evolution, were in do to pressures put on organisms by their environemt certsain genes get passed one while some dont, this coupled with the fact that organisms reproduce with variance, changes an organism over time, it is not just "genetic drift"

In population genetics, genetic drift is the accumulation of random events that change the makeup of a gene pool slightly, but often compound over time. More precisely termed allelic drift, the process of change in the gene frequencies of a population due to chance events determine which alleles (variants of a gene) will be carried forward while others disappear. It is distinct from natural selection, a non-random process in which the tendency of alleles to become more or less widespread in a population over time is due to the alleles' effects on adaptive and reproductive success.[1]

So genetic drift and natural selection are two different things. one is based off of random events, (drift) and one is based of selective pressure exterted by the environment! methinks you need to bone up on evolution.

as far as your trying to dismiss the nylon, NO it wasnt just meeting its diet, as without the process of evoluton the bacteria would not have possesed the enzymes required to digest nylon, and sense nylon was man made and never existed before, the geentic information to do so did not yet exist, so clearly the result was that of evolution and not just gene drift, as the environmental changes: ie nylon being the new food source forced selective pressures upon the bacteia living in nylon factories.

And your so called images are easily explained by hoaxes and pareidollia.

Originally posted by NavalFC
And your so called images are easily explained by hoaxes and pareidollia.

I find it hilarious how you call these images hoaxes obviously without even looking at them.

Because if you did take the time to look at them you would have known you are claiming OFFICIAL NASA images to be hoaxes.

This demonstrates you are not a serious skeptic of the UFO and Alien phenomenon but just some run of the mill debunker.

reply to post by Fastwalker81




Do you even know what pareidollia is?


Even in official NASA photos pareidollia can happen.
Pareidollia is nothing more then a person looking at something and seeing a familiar pattern in it. Seeing the familiar in the unfamiliar

Notice also I did not specify that all the images were hoaxes. Just because you linked me to a set pf photos doesnt mean that those are the only photos that people make when ever they bring up this issue, as if only YOUR url was the ONLY one people ever bring up, GIve me a fricking break.

So again, I stand by my conclusions. In the issue of the so called martian cover up, ths is comes as a result of hoaes and pareidollia.


Again, I find it funny, isntead of trying to come back with any real "evidence" you try attacking me. Classic strategy I have seen employed here all the time. If you cant attack the argument, attack the arguments originator. Very classic of you.


[edit on 9-12-2008 by NavalFC]

reply to post by NavalFC


Hey Naval maybe I'm just following you around. But in this past thread here. The last reply you left, when you presented this website of Universetoday.com, well towards that bottom of that page that says information. Here let me high light for you,

Enjoy a NASA article about the face on Mars, and information on the Mars face from the MSSS team.

Well do you see where it says "information". Well when I clicked there the same page I put up to support my argument of the Martian face. Here it read like this do you remember?

They point out that 40.868 equals arctan (e / pi); alternatively, one of the advocates notes that the ratio of the surface area of a tetrahedron to its circumscribing sphere is 2.72069 (e = 2.71828), which, if substituted for e in the above arctan equation gives 40.893 degrees, which is both within the physical perimeter of the "Pyramid" and within the above stated precision. Other mathematical relationships abound. The advocates of this view argue that "no scientific study of these features has been conducted under NASA auspices" and that NASA and the conservative science community are conspiring to keep the "real" story from the American public.

Yeah, you sort of uh... pointed out the same evidence, that I did but It's ok though... Just dont let it happen again


Edit add an additional

[edit on 9-12-2008 by Solo954]

reply to post by Solo954


I didnt point out the same evidence. I was going on the fact tht th photos you linked me to were not that high of resokution. they werent. they were rather LOW res. Yes the photo i linked you to, a high res photo taken by the same space craft (but "conveniently" left out of your link..a proponent web site)

clearly shows that the formation is not artificial and not a face.

reply to post by NavalFC


I think I remember clearly about posting the link Naval. You see her on ATS people like to read references that can back up peoples claim. Were open minded to things and we light to understand instead of hate.

Originally posted by NavalFC
Do you even know what pareidollia is?

I'm not a child so tone down your comments.

Even in official NASA photos pareidollia can happen.
Pareidollia is nothing more then a person looking at something and seeing a familiar pattern in it. Seeing the familiar in the unfamiliar

Nice try, if it is not a hoax then it is surely an illusion. Give me a break.

Notice also I did not specify that all the images were hoaxes.

Indeed, you specify that all non hoaxes are illusions. And you expect people to take you seriously.

So again, I stand by my conclusions. In the issue of the so called martian cover up, ths is comes as a result of hoaes and pareidollia.

Do you have evidence for your bold claims that NASA images are hoaxed? I didn't think so...

Again, I find it funny, isntead of trying to come back with any real "evidence" you try attacking me. Classic strategy I have seen employed here all the time. If you cant attack the argument, attack the arguments originator. Very classic of you.

The evidence is presented in the form of images. But of course these are all hoaxes and illusions according to you. So you just reject the evidence if it doesn't fit your beliefs. Very scientific.

And please don't spout nonsense about me attacking you. I pointed out your behaviour on these boards. You claim you are only interested in evidence yet when it is presented and doesn't fit your view you reject it. That is unscientific as a great believer in science like yourself should know.