Face on Mars is just a Rocky Mountain [New High Resolution Pictures]

Originally posted by Chance321
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

I get the feeling I'm stepping into a trap, I'm game.

But, yeah, you've got my position right. Yes to face, yes, to intelligent life.

Chance321.....

I'm not that bad, am I?

No.....I just wanted to clarify your position because it's a massive leap "to the side" from the information that's been available for quite some time.

May I ask how much of your opinion is based on Hoagland?

I ask you that because Hoagland himself if softening on this to a very significant extent, as he is with a great many of his previous claims.

I also note that in order to keep producing more content, Hoagland is definitely getting more & more "out there".

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


It is pretty obvious what it is.

I also note that in order to keep producing more content, Hoagland is definitely getting more & more "out there".

What makes you say that?

[edit on 29-7-2010 by zaiger]

Originally posted by misinformational
reply to post by DoomsdayRex

 

Proof that NASA fake's photos: blogs.discovermagazine.com...

You do realise the blog post was made in jest? No? Thought not.



If you doubt me:

Note: this is a composite image that was published prior to this cockpit configuration ever flying. The control sticks and seats are missing. The background was photoshopped from a separate image.

Source

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


Well to give you some idea on how little I follow this , who is Hoagland? This face on Mars thing is just a curiosity to me an check it every once in a great while, like if it catches my eye here. Though, now you've given me something to look up.

reply to post by cllj7


So the government media owned daily mail says to the sheeps

New high-resolution photo of the 'Face on Mars' proves Red Planet's most famous landmark is just a rocky hill

is just a rocky hill just because NASA and media says so? right but i have noticed image altering in the so called new high resolution photo.


1.To much lighting used or light expose used, you dont use this in photoshop unless its a staged hill.

2.The rocky hill doesnt match this hill in any way or in form.
www.youtube.com...


3.Location, Location, Location.
www.coverups.com...

www.marsfindings.com...



Maybe not Maybe, you should stop believing in your beloved NASA, NASA is very well known in cover ups.



The support for NASA nonsense on ATS is really laughably.


[edit on 29-7-2010 by Agent_USA_Supporter]

OK, this is what I did. I copied that photo, then I loaded with Windows Paint program. Once there, I reduced the size of the picture to an estimated size of the famous Mars Face Photo, in order to simulate the same distant in both photos. Maybe you want to try that too.

Result : In my opinion, there is a chance that this new photo could be from another location.

Just because "NASA said so", doesn't means we got to believe it. If It is a different location, you can run any test to that photo and won't be able to debunk it because it's not fake, It might be just another place.

Greetings.

reply to post by zaiger


Zaiger! Zaiger! Zaiger!

I don't get it.....

What's Hoagland on about now?

What's all that s'posed to be?

Cheers mate
Maybe...maybe not

reply to post by Goathief


You're serious aren't you? I had no idea that the Bad Astronomy article linked was satirical - Thanks for pointing that out

Should you have read through the previous exchange culminating in my most recent post, you would find that I was arguing the basis of which claims, evidence, and ultimately conclusions should be either accepted or refuted.

Do I believe that a higher intelligence created a monstrous portrait onto the surface of Mars? Of course not. Do I believe NASA would hide information? Of course.

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


It was a joke, the 2nd black and white photo is of the Trementina Base in new mexico. And the link is just typical Hoagland "PROOF"

Why would anyone think that NASA would all of a sudden want people to think it's definitely not an alien creation? What would they get out of it? What does it matter to them whether people think it's alien made or just a natural formation? Why would they even care if every person on the planet believed there was life on Mars? Doesn't make sense at all does it?

The funny thing is that if NASA suddenly announced that there 'was' life on Mars everyone here would believe them, which really does show that people choose what NASA is telling the truth about based on their own biased point of view.

Therefore there is no cover up and people are just believing want they want to believe.


-edit-I'm not saying that NASA aren't capable of lying or haven't lied, but I doubt they're lying over this.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by Hawkwind.]

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


"I don't think we on Earth are the only intelligent life in the universe..."

I think there is ample evidence to claim that we are not a particularly intelligent life form. As a rule, we gravitate towards self ruin. That's why as a specie we stand little chance in the sense of geologic time. And by that measure, we will be nothing more than an statistical anomaly, an example to the next "ruling specie" of what not to do.

I might go even further to say we are less smart than we were during the Enlightenment. We know more facts, but we process information far worse. Our ability to think critically is shot, having devolved into fanatical reactionists.

even if they were telling the truth, any intelligent person would not believe it. it's not their fault for not believing, its what happen when you've been blurring, air brushing and lying about every goddamn thing for the last 40 years.

Originally posted by zaiger
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

It was a joke, the 2nd black and white photo is of the Trementina Base in new mexico. And the link is just typical Hoagland "PROOF"

Zaiger.....

I am just a humble grasshopper to your kung fu!

Hoagland is so relentlessly "off course", I thought that was all his material.

Do you remember this Hoagland gem?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4f8134adf7a1.jpg[/atsimg]

Cheers mate
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by Chance321
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

Well to give you some idea on how little I follow this

, who is Hoagland? This face on Mars thing is just a curiosity to me an check it every once in a great while, like if it catches my eye here. Though, now you've given me something to look up.

Chance321.....

Well, you're in for a treat.....

Here you go!

Hoagland BS City

Cheers
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by misinformational
reply to post by DoomsdayRex

 

Proof that NASA fake's photos: blogs.discovermagazine.com...

lol wow. just because that guy uses !!!! after everything, thats proof that nasa fakes photos?

reply to post by Maybe...maybe not


lol i do remember that one. The man is great probably one of the best science fiction writters of our time, too bad everyone but him sees it that way.

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by Chance321
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

 

Well to give you some idea on how little I follow this

, who is Hoagland? This face on Mars thing is just a curiosity to me an check it every once in a great while, like if it catches my eye here. Though, now you've given me something to look up.

Chance321.....

Well, you're in for a treat.....

Here you go!

Hoagland BS City

Cheers
Maybe...maybe not

Not all the Hoagland claims are BS.
Maybe on PHOBOS he was right.

a video I dedicate to NASA



[edit on 30-7-2010 by watchZEITGEISTnow]

reply to post by zaiger


What? was that a joke?

reply to post by Lateralus51


Really? Again? The link provided is a satirical article by Bad Astronomy. Phil Plait would be the last blogger on the planet to claim faked NASA photos.

Now, take a look at the top left portion of this post - Notice the member name? Perhaps a person with such a username is prone to satirical or otherwise humourous post intended to incite independent critical thinking...

Make more sense now?

[EDIT] TYPO

[edit on 29-7-2010 by misinformational]