Fossilized Spines and Vertebrae of Big Creatures in Curiosity Sol 109!

These are the most Believable pictures yet. Some others I thought were a stretch, but not those of the vertebrae which could in fact be lag it. I think some here could not be convinced no matter what so keep up your posts, I for one enjoy them.

I've missed to post also these....

Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by Arken

 

It is probably possible to get higher res pics of those anomalies, and i would be surprised if NASA does not have them already. The question is, when will they release them?

Being such a religious country as the U.S is, it might have something do with "national security" that they still have not confirmed officially all their findings of life on other planets. Because that would possibly start some panic in those bibletards... when they realize their religion is just another lie.

Ya why do you think the pope step down to old to deal with all that sh!t.
Interesting time

Well, obviously, there's the issue that if NASA finally gets to admit there are signs of, at least, past intelligent lifeforms on Mars, that'll HAVE to be part of an agenda of sorts. With all the denying and silence they're already guilty of, it'd be surprising they say a word on anything otherwise.

Here's the best they'll do... call a pyramid rock, completely out of place with its surrounding, just "unusual"...

Jack Matijevik

The NASA is to today's scientific community what the Roman Catholic Church was during the Dark Ages and Renaissance... What contradicts or is inconsistent with their conservative view on the universe is deemed an "heresy", or better, a "tin-foil hat conspiracy theory".

Like we'll be having tons of authentic UFO observations right here on Earth, but al what NASA's gonna do is to rehash the same old crap on the mathematical possibilities of life elsewhere in the galaxy! duh!

The kind of people who wouldn't see a mammoth even if we'd bring one right in front of their noses...

Originally posted by Arken
Paleontologists need on Gale Crater. Seem that the Rover Curiosity litterally "walk" among an huge "carpet of bones". These astounding images cropped by Sol 107, 108, 109 and 141, confirm my weird and worst thoughts. What lies on the bed of this ancient martian lake are nothing more than "fossilized bones" (spines and vertebrae) of some sort of carcasses of big creatures that, times ago, swam in that lake.
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Detail cropped.

I have never... EVER... said (or even so much as thought) anything on these Funny Rock On Mars threads but--"Sorry dude, just a rock." But this one... Okay this one is weird.

I am not a paleontologist, but I am an avid fossil hunter/rock hound, and in that image it sure looks like a pattern that is more biological than geological.

It is possible it is a trick of light, but this time I can't say "just a rock". Not for sure. You have my vote for intrigued, and it's a hard vote to get. Good find.

reply to post by Arken

Your new title shall read: "Astro-Paleontologist"



Amazing work - you just blew my mind.

If you pan out on the surrounding area from Sol 109, there are lots and lots of erosion channels cutting through the rocks. I think in the case of the first picture, the "bones" were likely created by this sort of erosion.





This is the most interesting feature in my opinion...



It looks like that hole could be for an axle.

I think, in these cases the way the rocks "look" is no where near as important as thier configuration and position on the ground.

Let's analyze some things here:

1. What is the potential for intact skeletal fossils to be just laying around on the surface. Do fossils on earth appear at the surface of dry lake beds?

2. Are these "rocks" mainly scattered about or are we seeing complete structures and skeletons, IE do they "look" like animals we would recognize from our past/present.

3. Are the of consistent shape/size, we should be able to make a basic analysis of the more "creature" looking formations, the rocks should scale in size accordingly, not seemingly random.

4. The coloration, is the yellowing effect we are seeing legit or is it doctored, which images show the "truest" color.


With no way of getting any other information, answering these questions would certinaly help to determine the possibility of them being fossils.

fascinating images. A bit more compelling than the "crature"

Nice find.

reply to post by roadgravel

The question might be, who in control of NASA, wants things kept low keyed or covered up. It's not going to be the average working there making those decisions.

This is the real problem inside NASA/JPL.

Who really rule the Agency?

Who make this decision?

I'm sure that the majority of the NASA's Researchers are tired and frustrated to submit to the "Rule of the Silence" and they are ready to spread publicly all their incredible discoveries....

What say NRO?

reply to post by Arken


I'm not calling rocks on this one. I'm not calling vertebrae either until someone scoops one up and brings it home, but honestly, I'm leaning toward fossilized vertebrae. This is the first one I've seen where I feel pretty good about it being a legit find. I don't think i've posted in any of your others, because if I decide "rocks", I usually just click off.

S&F, and even if a lot of them are nothing special, its awesome that we've got a resident member researching these so thoroughly. Keep up the good work! There was a term in use in the swing (dance, not -er) scene in the 20's-50's, "collecting the no's" - meaning, if there's a yes out there, even if its 1:1,000, you have to keep pressing on, collecting your 999 no's to get to the "yes" (in the swing scene, of course, that referred to picking up women.) So again, i'm glad you're out there taking the time and collecting the no's. Maybe this is the big "yes" payoff! You deserve flags for every thread on the rover pics for that alone. They'll be there from me from bow on, as I think even the ones determined to be nothing have plenty of value in the analysis thereof.

Originally posted by vind21
I think, in these cases the way the rocks "look" is no where near as important as thier configuration and position on the ground.

Let's analyze some things here:

1. What is the potential for intact skeletal fossils to be just laying around on the surface. Do fossils on earth appear at the surface of dry lake beds?

2. Are these "rocks" mainly scattered about or are we seeing complete structures and skeletons, IE do they "look" like animals we would recognize from our past/present.

3. Are the of consistent shape/size, we should be able to make a basic analysis of the more "creature" looking formations, the rocks should scale in size accordingly, not seemingly random.

4. The coloration, is the yellowing effect we are seeing legit or is it doctored, which images show the "truest" color.


With no way of getting any other information, answering these questions would certinaly help to determine the possibility of them being fossils.

Ssshhh you can't ask sensible questions like this, the answers may reveal that these are in fact, rocks!

Just S&F and be gone!

Perhaps someone who has a bit of professional knowledge in this field could at least answer your first question though!

reply to post by dogstar23


Thank you.
Great compliment from you.

You are always welcome.

Originally posted by ausername
fascinating images. A bit more compelling than the "crature"

Nice find.

I agree...this is a Fassilized crature.

Originally posted by timetothink
Nice pics.....those look like spines to me.

I'm usually with the it's a rock crowd, while I secretly hope it's not a rock.

So either something was living on mars or they just found more fossils in whatever desert they are faking the landing from?

Why "fake" fossils? Just wondering whats the rational?

Sure looks like bones to me but I'm not an archeologist.

im sorry but bones only take 8 -10 years to completely decompose in that type of environment.

If those are bones they must be bones made out of rock if you catch my drift

Originally posted by vind21


4. The coloration, is the yellowing effect we are seeing legit or is it doctored, which images show the "truest" color.

I would also like this question answered. I read through this thread and unless I missed something, Arken never distinguished whether or not he highlighted the "bones" or if it was manipulated later, as one post suggests.

Thanks for this thread, Arken. S&F

So many people want to believe that Earth is unique and special, but I don't believe this.
Why are we on Mars to begin with? Because scientists believe it was like Earth at one point. I also believe this and don't find it strange at all that the red planet would have a mixture of rocks and bones. It makes sense to me. Some people are so boring that they can't see past their own little bubbles and try to understand that fact will always be stranger than fiction.

Keep 'em coming, Arken! You're great!

I'm usually with the "it's a rock crowd" and it could well be rocks but it could also be a fossil, I would love to see a picture from the other side.

With all the amazing places life has been found on Earth I can't imagine it not being found on Mars and pretty much everywhere in the Universe. It's just a matter of time and efforts like yours.

Star and flag for you....keep up the good work.

Well it is more plausible then the other post were they called this area a boneyard for spaceships. Would be nice to see more detailed pics