Mars Weird Anomalies!

Originally posted by Druscilla

Fun stuff, but, likely all of it's Pareidolia

Pareidolia - wiki

Basically; seeing what you want to see.

But, if you get a picture of this "object" from space:





... do you say: This is Pareidolia? Yeah, you have to say YES.

So...

marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...







Where is the difference? Both pictures looks artificial.

(nay, "statue" of Mars looks more artificial than sphinx

)

reply to post by Matriculated


I'll agree with most of what you said, especially about the Viking missions having revealing surprising info about Mars. First, it was the denied positive results from the "search for life" experiements. Second, was confirmation of that life by the several evidences that the little satellite Phobos displays. The Viking orbiters showed the best set of images ever released of the little moon. Never have they released as many or as important as those they originally, casually and evidently unknowingly released about the mysterious grooves on Phobos.

Those grooves are the result of Phobos--orginally an asteroid as they well know--having been moved into its neat little orbit around Mars. The grooves were caused by debris slipping along the surface of Phobos as it was positioned by velocity and angle of attack changes to match the desired orbit.

Ever since they've been trying to keep their early slip of showing the grooves undercover by only showing a few select images of the grooves from subsequent missions. In effect, recognizing the grooves of Phobos as artificial proves intelligent life on Mars without question.

reply to post by OrionHunterX


These are very interesting pictures. I would like to know the size and scale of the features. I also want to see close ups of the 'glass tubes' and other anomalies ....

reply to post by theitalian


We've see the "big foot" statue on ATS before and it was deemed a "natural rock formation". However I've always been skeptical of that because it actually looks like a statue...

However we have not see the whole area around the statue before. (Or at least I haven't) So it does add a little more credibility that it is indeed a statue.

-SAP-

Originally posted by carlsmith
well i wouldnt know but isnt there a phrase for that `parelia` or something where your eye sees what it wants?

Paredolia.........
2nd...

reply to post by OrionHunterX


Thanks for the thread! Those pictures are very interesting, dont know what they could be though. I have always found mars to be just so mysterious. I just cant wait until we can finally achieve a manned mission to mars to find out what all these things are for ourselves.

Paredolia? perhaps,
But it does depend on the ambiguity of the pictures, and the source material Mike had at the time does lend itself to interpretation. That's the thing, even though the pictures of buildings look like buildings, or even ruins of buildings, they still need to work mechanically, and have to have at least some associated infrastructure around them to indicate that this is a building that 'people' inhabited and needed, could go in and out of, and be able to use, and I'm not sure you see this in those Mars pictures.

Originally posted by pitchdragon
reply to post by ReAwakened

 

thank you

by the way they should explain me something !!!

i find this picture on HiRISE, very beautiful one, there some awsome pictures
on that one you can even see a dust !!!

A large (approximately 200 meters or 600 feet across) cloud of reddish dust has been kicked up at the base of the scarp. Fine tendrils of bright wisps are visible farther up the cliff face—these may be individual falls of material, before spreading out as the avalanche plummets downward.

So they can have picture of an avalanche in Mars and some very details part of mars and blurry and not detailed picture from the Moon , Nasa has released lately picture of the American flag on the moon ! blurry pixelate one, is it a joke ? i mean now with the satellite imagery we can see someone tanning on his garden !!! i had many answer but, i'm not convinced, i'm not saying they are hiding something, i'm just saying all this sound wired ! and seriously if i can put a city on mars i can also earse it ! should i trust people who can also manipulate picture as they want ? why i will give all my trust to people who can say whatever they want about a subject we cannot verified ? because it's Nasa ? the military Nasa ! no one can really say what is happing behind there wall...

for me that picture seem's like water guiser...but it's just me saying it... btw, i believe Mars it's on a stage of terraforming... it will take the place of Earth... and Earth the place of Venus...

again, is just me...

It is all very interesting to sent marsrovres to flat planes and a multimilion dollar curiousity lab-on-track to laser rocks but if I had any say in it it would be easy decision where to sent these "eyes and ears".

The US militairy and NASA must have detailed and convincing explanations why we are wasting our time looking at these pictures. They have no interest whatsoever to sent their robots to these ultra interesting Mars sites.

Originally posted by mardukiscoming
Very good thread.Some of those photos were new to me.While I agree that life existing in the past on Mars is just an unproven theory,I can't help but notice in these photos a number of straight lines and 90' angles.These are things which do not happen in nature.

That's obviously not true,as anyone that has really looked at what Earth has to show us.

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
Guys, here’s some of the better stuff that most of you on ATS may not have seen. Some of them in fact have never been seen before!

All these images have been reproduced from the Mars album of Mikesingh (who was a popular member on ATS once upon a time).

Now there is that theory that Mars probably was inhabited several hundred thousand years ago and the civilization disappeared gradually as most of the water and atmosphere slowly disappeared. If that was the case then these anomalies seen in the images lend credence to this theory as most do seem to have been made by design thousands of years ago.

What, then, are your thoughts on Andrew Basiago? The similarities are striking.

Mars Anomaly Research Society

That statue on Mars looks like a mermaid to me. My eyes probably just depict it that way.
I'm not sure if someone already mentioned this, but NASA's rover Curiosity is set to land on Mars August 6th. Let's wait and see what it finds.

reply to post by OrionHunterX


Very interesting. I am looking forward to observing better HD images. It's difficult to really see the specifics. But I also admit these features could very plausibly be physical structures of some kind...

Well, i see nothing but natural rock formations. Though the picture with the "skull" is interesting but the rest is nothing unusual.

Do Thank You for all the pic's in one place so we could look at them ourselfs. Sure alot of mind images, refrenced from our mind to make a picture. Hell have a rock that would blow your mind, got the same answere, mind *ucked is what they call it! Really though, its just an expression for people who DON"T have an idea! Since I have my own ideas on the matter, telling you what I see can help! Missing one picture of the ////////// line rows all over the place connecting the places you have shown. Also NASA now admits that there is water, why the hold out? Heres what I think, in plain terms, some of you won't like, here I go! Thats what happens to PEOPLE who mess with DNA, WAR, GEAN SPLICING, ETC....What if the great floods of the bible and others were from Mars! Yes far out there but stories told long ago do have some TRUTH!

I know some people are using that Indian Head in Canada as proof these pictures mean nothing
BUT, There are a few explanations for the Indian head
1. It was artificially Made buy humans. Therefore it is likely an indian head.
2. It is unexplained

People can say we see what we see want to see, either way unless there is proof it is still unknown.

Neither proves the mars pictures right or wrong.

Correct me if I am wrong anybody but I believe that the mars statue picture has been debunked. Think about it people, if you have an ENTIRE PLANET of natural landscape taken from IN THE AIR i'm sure something sooner or later combined with shadows and an awkward angle will look like some sort of man-made image.

I can't tell a lie though, that picture of the skull with the pathway to the dome-like object is BEYOND intriguing. Would love to see a good analysis of the pic from people with more technology than me - the average computer user.

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
Are you sure what NASA is telling us is the truth?

Do you think they are lying? Why?

Probably Mars is still wet, and habitable by certain extremophiles?

Is that a question?

Whatever happened to that report of immense amounts of methane seen emanating from surface cracks?

Was that what the report said? I thought that it said that, in the atmosphere, there was much more methane than it was supposed to be, but with not specific sources identified, only general areas.

Does that mean there's some sort of plant/microbial life under the surface of Mars producing that methane?

Some people say that there are chemical reactions (no life involved) that also produce methane from rocks like the ones on Mars, but without any real confirmation of what's happening there.

Here's what NASA dishes out. Mars looks red, lifeless and foreboding in this NASA image:

Sidney looks red, lifeless and foreboding in this image.

Why NASA has to indulge in this is apparently because the red filter on the cameras is supposed to enhance resolution and also reduce the amount of data required to be transmitted back to Earth. At least that's what they say.

Do you have a link to some place where they say that? I remember reading why they usually use most the red filter, but I don't remember exactly what was the reason presented.

And no, using a red filter will not make a photo redder that it should be, as to make a colour photo you also need to use an image from the green and another image from the blue channel (or use some kind of synthetic colour, like in HiRISE photos).

Are we back to Mars anomaly threads again? I thought we had our fill of these a couple of years ago.

At the risk of sounding negative on the UFO/Aliens Forum (heaven forbid), I think it's sad that some people are so desperate for there to be -- or have been -- some kind of life on Mars that they'll allow their wishful thinking to turn them into complete, blithering idiots. That they'll see all kinds of faces and statutes and monuments lying around on Mars without any regard to their geological contexts or size or horrendous blurriness.

Just knock it off, people. Really. Give me a chance to perhaps foolishly believe that you're smarter than that.

Originally posted by wmd_2008


Funny how all these pictures dont look as weird if you download them yourself.

Mr singh and his cohorts tend to over process or zoom to much, that area doesn't look strange above.

As for all the Mars face posts, well I remember seeing it on the news when first announced it was taken form a great distance and was low res compared to todays images so it's not what we thought hard cheese

Excellent images of the area of that face are available to anyone serious who want's to know truth. Clearly some are not interested in the truth as much as they are in saving face.

You are right in that many on this topic either don't have a clue how to use their software or in many cases pretend they do know. As better images come out, it's obvious most are just normal features.

Sadly there is a fanatical crowd that still likes to post the old, ruined by improper usage of interpolation images either to deceive or because they honestly just have the software and not a clue how it works or that they are creating the evidence out of thin air.

For the most part these images are in dozens of existing threads and I'm starting to realize why all the old posters are drifting away. It's like bubblegum, chewing the same old debate over and over again. What is missing here are the more recent photo's of the same locations where you can clearly see what is there. That screams to me they simply don't want to show those. It's like walking a person to a mirage and them still insisting it's water when they are standing on top of it and know it's dry desert.

In general-

I'll never see this cutting and pasting other peoples work in a new thread as enlightening in any way. It would have meaning and actually deserve the flags if this included recent, high resolution images of the same locations.

My favorite to be critical of is the two inch high so called statue. Most don't even know that is a tiny rock, very near the camera and would never take the time to find out because they don't really want to know.