Ancient Mars

Well I read this entire thread and reviewed a lot of the links and I must say I am intrigued. Its interesting that as of yet no one has disproven the theory regarding evenly distanced objects. It seems like that entire theory is dismissed and disregarded.

There really isn't any evidence of equidistant geological formations. The sand lines were somewhat equidistant but on a microscopic scale. The objects shown in the photo at the begining of the thread are much farther apart. With wind and sandstorms roaming around I find it hard to believe that there would be any kind of equidistant sand dunes of that scale on Mars.

Assuming that there is or was no life on Mars we would have to assume the equidistant formations are related to the quality of the photography or the angles from which the photographs were taken.

If we remove the general assumption that life doesn't or hasn't existed on Mars we can conclude that the formations are a possible indicator that intelligence has existed on Mars at some point and warrants further research.

There is no definitive evidence to point to either conclusion. Our assumption that we are the only life in the universe is almost as old as the assumption that the Earth is the center of the universe. We as a species are only just shedding the age old "wisdom" that we are a one in a billion chance. Remember before the planet spotting telescope was put into orbit, a lot of scientists believed our star having planets was a one in a million chance. They discovered that is not true.

Conventional wisdom is a hinderance to science. Science has been working on the assumption that there is no life elsewhere in the universe or if there is it is too far for us to see. With that in mind scientists will subconsciously seek to prove their own assumptions. As the assumptions are shed, which is currently happenibg, science will br able to take a more neutral approach to the issue.

The ramifications of knowledge of life outside of our own planet are unfathomable. Who knows what changes it would cause to us as a species. Science is scared of extreme changes in their dogma as much as religions are.

Originally posted by dbloch7986
There really isn't any evidence of equidistant geological formations. The sand lines were somewhat equidistant but on a microscopic scale.

What do you mean by that?

The objects shown in the photo at the begining of the thread are much farther apart.

How do you know that?

With wind and sandstorms roaming around I find it hard to believe that there would be any kind of equidistant sand dunes of that scale on Mars.

I think it's easier to have equidistant dunes with wind.

Originally posted by dbloch7986sand dunes of that scale on Mars.
Assuming that there is or was no life on Mars we would have to assume the equidistant formations are related to the quality of the photography or the angles from which the photographs were taken.

Hmmm well we are not talking Earth, but the Wynds of Barsoom

They do funny things up there



Full Size Original Source

I really like the Terraced Mounds



Malin Space Systems

reply to post by dbloch7986


i am on the ideér about what we have been told of wisdom and knowledge, and from our history and books and granparents and out parents. that we are 1 too a 1 billion chance, and that could be all false if there was/are life on Mars?.

undless we are the martians or the martians is like humans but not us.

i think many of the video + link of video all slow some creppy stuff. If u let your mind try too see after any small chance that there is something in the picture.

Originally posted by zorgon

I like this picture, is there a version where it isn't all done up in color? I don't really care for these kinds of pics, it looks like a cartoon and makes it hard to look at imo. I went to the source image but it was just the link to the pic and nothing else.

Thanks

reply to post by Skyfloating


The "unenhanced" photo, at 100% zoom (and not 400% as in the image posted by zorgon.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/78044fde557bb68b.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by ArMaP


Thats still one of the best Mars photos Ive ever seen. The "Face on Mars" is the famous pic but there are others that would be deserving of more attention.

Heres a few more some right from ATS that should go in this topic.

Statue on Mars:


The Coin on Mars:


The Wooden Beam on Mars: I still wonder why that weird white light is in the same spot or whats reflective there.






These are some of the strange ones I found and I will look more tonight. Thanks for this awesome thread.


Just an Awesome Image from a game :

OK, the Japanese observation of the Martian explosion is put up on my blog. I am tied up with parenting and have trouble over recent times getting a solid train of thought together on external information. However, it would seem that this individual was somehow linked to the "UFO's Are Real" paper the circulated, as well (although I cannot find a free copy of it yet).

It might be worthy of its own thread. Since i am merely a spectator I am not going to be the one to do it. But I sure will chime in with what i find/found when it is done.

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
I like this picture, is there a version where it isn't all done up in color?

Sure, here you go.

Opportunity - Panoramic Camera - Sol 207

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by Skyfloating

 

The "unenhanced" photo, at 100% zoom (and not 400% as in the image posted by zorgon.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/78044fde557bb68b.jpg[/atsimg]

Any scale on that? Scale = clarification! Also whats the link for that image?

Thanks!

As always Sky, a brilliantly assembled and written piece.. so S&F for the effort and info.

A few years back I read a book called "The Mars Mystery" by Graham Hancock who postulated that a Deep Impact scenario would account for the observed damage to Mars. I have to say it was a brilliant read and the theory very plausible in explaining the huge rip (Trench) or scar from the impact with Mons possibly created from the shock wave as well as the topmost kilometers of ground being blown off..but I don't see this hypothesis in the mainstream discussions of the Planet's history.

At the moment I think it the best theory going on what may have killed all life off the planet, and it's water, etc.

very interesting, i too have been doing alot of searching on this topic and one day i read an article on glass tubes on mars when i ytubed it theres some strange glass looking tubes on the surfice , very interesting

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
I like this picture, is there a version where it isn't all done up in color? I don't really care for these kinds of pics, it looks like a cartoon and makes it hard to look at imo. I went to the source image but it was just the link to the pic and nothing else.
Thanks

Well NASA has all those Rover pics in nice color

But I can oblige you...

Image ID - 1P138831332EFF2809P2260L5M1.JPG



Image ID - 07-OSS-02-Dunes-B202R1_sm.jpg



These were originally pulled up by Bluebird who seems to have vanished suddenly from ATS. I see I need to update her section to the Mars Rover direct links..


Oh wait here is one..

marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...
marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...
marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...
marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...
marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...
marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...

I will find the other set

Edit to add:

Here is the other one...

Ripples in the Ripples This image taken by the Mars Exploration Rover Opportunity shows the dunes that line the floor of "Endurance Crater." Small-scale ripples on top of the larger dune waves suggest that these dunes may have been active in geologically recent times. The image was taken by the rover's panoramic camera on sol 198 (Aug. 14, 2004). Image credit: NASA/JPL/Cornell
marsrover.nasa.gov...

marsrover.nasa.gov...

FULL SIZE

Originally posted by scott,aussiewhen i ytubed it theres some strange glass looking tubes on the surfice , very interesting

ytubed? There is more to the world of research than ytube

You mean these?





Of course many will tell you they are merely sand dunes

I can't believe that most of you try really hard looking for Mars anomaly's to prove nonsens, but don't try as hard looking at the slit in the hybrids eyes! something is wrong with this picture.

And talking about pictures I have found another face in the Inca city on Mars, it looks like NASA tried to brush it but let a huge part visible.

I wounder if they did that in purpose hmmm.

WAKE UP!!

reply to post by zorgon


A few years back I saw many different NASA pics of those tubes, some full and some emaciated looking. And all running for hundreds of kilometres, which supposed the tubes were massive in cross section too.

But since having Internet again these past two years I haven't found any pictures of them... maybe looking in the wrong places?

IMO No... Mars has been associated with many war-like names simply because of the planet's brilliantly red color. It has been red for a really long time as I understand it, before we even came out of Africa most likely. Soo.. Not saying it isn't impossible that it is a distant memory, but just not very likely. As for your evenly spaced geographic anomaly, it is very interesting and I have no idea what natural phenomena would have caused that. Have you ever seen a pyrite cube?

Originally posted by Tayesin
But since having Internet again these past two years I haven't found any pictures of them... maybe looking in the wrong places?

As time passes old data gets lost, the old timers die off and soon what was once fact becomes rumors... and no one left alive to verify any of it

They are too busy with 2012 now... old Mars and Moon images don't hold the charm anymore, and the latest missions from NASA and others leave some to be desired



The Martian Tubes
www.thelivingmoon.com...

The Martian Tubes Part 2
www.thelivingmoon.com...

In the end... ENTROPY will get me too

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by witness63

 

OK, i will dig into this tonight.

It is interesting because there are reports of similar things happening on the moon and Mars going back for quite some time. I believe the 1800's saw several reports of explosions on the moons, etc.

Zorgon likely has it at his fingertips. My memory is not as good as his. But I am going to dig into this tonight. It has got me interested.

This thread just went up on David Ickes forum:

"Nuclear knowledge is widespread in space. and, consequently, there is no reason to think that it was not available on earth. As far as space is concerned, we have already looked at planet x. mars also exhibited nuclear explosions. On december 9, 1949, the distinguished Japanese astronomer Tsuneo Saheki witnessed through his telescope what appeared to be a tremendously powerful explosion on mars. Saheki who has studied mars since 1933, reported that a "brilliant glow" lasting several minutes followed the bewildering explosion; then a "luminous yellow-grayish cloud" appeared. The dimensions of the cloud were estimated at a 694.4-mile diameter, with a height of nearly 40 miles. Saheki said: "It was undoubtedly an artificial atomic explosion, even more powerful than the H-bomb. That could have been set off by highly advanced beings..." On four occasions between 1937 and 1954, astronomers at Osaka observatory noted brilliant light flashes on the Martian surface. Volcanic eruptions were ruled out, as the light flashes were far more luminous and intense than any volcanic activity. On the first and second explosions the brilliant light was observed for 300 seconds (each), and 5 seconds each for the remaining two explosions. Mariner photos of recent martian craters can be interesting in this respect. In his thesis A Visitor from Outer Space, Aleksandr Kazantsev, a journalist and engineer, said: After the great opposition of earth and mars in 1956, AA Mikhailov, director of the Pulkovo observatory and corresponding member of the USSR academy of sciences, reported to a gathering of scientist at the Leningrad Scientist Club in Lesnoye that the pulkovo observatory had registered an explosion of tremendous force on mars. Judging by the fact that the consequences of the explosion had actually been observed through telescopes...the explosion had to be attributed to a nuclear explosion rather than anything else. It is difficult to imagine a nuclear explosion on mars that was not deliberately caused. It is very likely that the explosion was made for some constructional purpose. Thus, the pulkovo observatory observations can serve as one of the proofs in the favor of existence of rational life on mars." ^im wondering though that they ruled out volcanoes but did they rule out meteors here or was there deliberate misinfo going on at that meeting, hum?? This is from the book Did spacemen colonize the earth? by Robin Collyns from 1974 i just found it in my fathers library a month ago but im liking the old book alot, enough that im tracking down this guys other books. he also mentions an ancient serpent race who waged war in the past! I wonder if he is still around though?

from: www.davidicke.com...