Civilization on Mars

[mague]

You really should read what hirise is.
http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/phobos.php

The picture was digitally enhanced.

If this is an artificial object then look at the small crater in the big one. The big one is 9000m. The small one like a few hundreds of meters. It should have caused a hull breach. But there is no breach visible and nobody would build a metall sphere with a hull hundreds of meters thick. Its just not realistic.

[tholden]

You really should read what hirise is.
http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/phobos.php

The picture was digitally enhanced.

If this is an artificial object then look at the small crater in the big one. The big one is 9000m. The small one like a few hundreds of meters. It should have caused a hull breach. But there is no breach visible and nobody would build a metall sphere with a hull hundreds of meters thick. Its just not realistic.

There's no shortage of digitally enhanced space images which look like desert areas and rocks. I'm assuming that when one digitally enhanced image looks like a pile of rocks and another looks like a space station made of metallic strakes which reflects light like a mirror, it's probably because the camera for the one was pointed at a pile of rocks and the other at an ancient space station before the shutters were tripped.

The thing WAS stoutly made...

[Sparky]

The images are compelling, if they are valid. They show a layout involving boulevards, farming blocks, city blocks and thouroughfares like we'd find here. If they are real.

I observed similar artifacts on my monitor during a viewing of "Deadliest Catch". Am I to conclude that such things exist on and above the Bearing Sea? Someone who has REALLY studied photography would be able to explain these artifacts. I have seen no credible evidence of cities, made of glass or otherwise, faces, or unnatural geometric structures, offered by credible sources. What is obvious is the credulity of otherwise intelligent people to believe this nonsense.

I realize that your post is meant to be a large measure of snark, but this time you may have out-snarked yourself. I have been involved in the creation of the largest earthworks on planet Earth--the Mississippi River levee system--and I know what it looks like on the drawing; I know what it looks like when it is completed; I know what it looks like from aerial survey's; and I know what it looks like from space. Maybe we should direct one of the more powerful space camera's towards Mars.

Whether or not there is an ancient civilization on Mars is a question that I cannot answer right now. But I do know that Nature does not create these types of angles on this scale. So if Nature didn't create these types of angular features, they what is responsible for them?

I personally don't see any contradiction in some of the human genotypes coming from Mars or from other sources, I am sure that it all didn't begin here.

I replied with my opinion, which is what others are doing. Your presumptuously dismissive argument of, "snark", did not address what I said. These are probably artifacts! Not actual structures! I have observed these artifacts and know that there are NO actual structures associated with them in the photos!

To argue for life or signs of life with such flimsy evidence is from a delusional belief system. Belief that ignores any and all evidence to the contrary!!!

I can't explain how these artifacts are produced. I can only point out when someone with an over active imagination and a nonsense based belief promotes nonsense! Some here are as bad or worse than "standard cosmologists", when it comes to distorting data and explaining it with hair brained theories!

Kell? Snarky? Look in the mirror!

[hex]

Some of those anomalies seem to be bitmaps mapped on 3-d surface, without blending the adjacent pixels. This results rectangular house like structures - but they are not houses they are pixels.

Lot of those images are not photograps but composite renderings, combining various data in one image. like that metallic looking Phobos or Demos, that has fancy false colour textures mapped on smoothed/low detail contours

Some of those anomalies can be explained as pareidolia - indeed, I recommend reading the Wikipedia article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia


"A well-known example of pareidolia: A satellite photo of a mesa in Cydonia, often called the Face on Mars. Later photographs from other angles destroyed the illusion."

"From the late 1970s through the early 1980s, Japanese researcher Chonosuke Okamura self-published a famous series of reports titled "Original Report of the Okamura Fossil Laboratory" in which he described tiny inclusions in polished limestone from the Silurian period (425 mya) as being preserved fossil remains of tiny humans, gorillas, dogs, dragons, dinosaurs, and other organisms, all of them only millimeters long, leading him to claim "There have been no changes in the bodies of mankind since the Silurian period ... except for a growth in stature from 3.5 mm to 1,700 mm."[5][6] Okamura's research earned him a winner of the Ig Nobel Prize in biodiversity."



Metaresearch pareidolia




"profile face"




And sometimes nature just produces artificial looking formations, like Giant's causeway

[hex]

NASA Photo Shows Humanoid Figure on Mars

Is it Bigfoot? A Tusken Raider from the first "Star Wars" movie? Or just a rock?

British newspapers went crazy Wednesday morning about an image from Mars that appears to show a humanoid figure descending a shallow hillside.




http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,324800,00.html

[tholden]

good links:

http://bearfabrique.org/History/index.htm
http://www.enterprisemission.com/Phobos2.html
http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/
http://www.mactonnies.com/imperative40.html
http://www.keithlaney.net/The_Face_on_M ... n_Mars.htm

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/20 ... llite.html

http://www.enterprisemission.com/about.htm
http://www.enterprisemission.com/spirit2.htm
http://www.enterprisemission.com/ir_analysis.html
http://www.metaresearch.org/solar%20sys ... nf_nyc.asp
http://www.rense.com/general20/eisenhowerWH.htm
http://metaresearch.org/solar%20system/ ... /proof.asp

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DoZHWi1_oA

[mague]

Nobody is going anywhere Trust me.

The question is not if there are remnants of a civilisation. That might be true for Mars and is almost certain for some planets somewhere out there.

The current state is, that no human being is able to reach Mars in a health state other then critically ill. But that is not the question either.

The question is if mankind survives its own idiocy.

Advanced civilsation I
Advanced civilisation II
Advanced civilisation III

Thats how we treat our own weak and 1.5 - 2 million other species and the planet itself.

Is anyone crazy enough to think there is any species out there caring to meet homo sapiens sapiens ? Thats why the UFO do not land on time square to say Hello in public. They avoid us like the plaque and just grab a few litres water for the heavy water production. The conspiracy is that they give a *beep* about talking to our leaders or the public. I wouldnt talk to maggot infested zombies either. But that not the question again.

The question is: if we keep messing with anything we can get hold of and if we keep on wasting the money and the brains of the best educated people and the resources, are we able to survive this ? Or do we get down like the people in the movie Rimarupa who died because they needed stone heads on the beach ?

And the answer is that then, when humans are gone the Aliens can get the planet legally and the flora and fauna will most probably welcome them as saviours.

So who with a sane mind wants the *beep* event leave atmosphere ?

[tholden]

The question is if mankind survives its own idiocy.

Advanced civilsation I
Advanced civilisation II
Advanced civilisation III

Thats how we treat our own weak and 1.5 - 2 million other species and the planet itself.

You're asking for several very long stories if you want real replies to any of that... Most of the grief you refer to is generally most in evidence where market economies are least in evidence...

We basically have four or five big problems to resolve and all but one of those are well understood; the one which is most critical and least well understood is the nature of money itself, what if anything should back it, who should have the authority to coin it, whether or not fractional reserve practices should be legal, and what kinds of activities governments should be permitted to use for the purposes of spending money into existence assuming we were to move to the sort of system which Ellen Brown advocates:

http://www.webofdebt.com

My own belief is that a large industrial economy like ours requires some sort of a main project which is economically and morally defensible, and I see that main driving engine for our economy in the future being space exploration, particularly Mars and Phobos. Driving engines which have been used recently include what I call "War Incorporated", the prison/industrial complex, the "War on Drugs(TM)", and an insane housing bubble. I like the idea of a Mars race a lot better than any of that.

And, assuming all of this comes to pass, and the push into Mars gets to be as big a deal as WW-II was, then the Thunderbolt/EU crowd will NOT want to be on record that all of the stuff people are investigating up there are just figments of their imaginations.

[kell1990]

The images are compelling, if they are valid. They show a layout involving boulevards, farming blocks, city blocks and thouroughfares like we'd find here. If they are real.

I observed similar artifacts on my monitor during a viewing of "Deadliest Catch". Am I to conclude that such things exist on and above the Bearing Sea? Someone who has REALLY studied photography would be able to explain these artifacts. I have seen no credible evidence of cities, made of glass or otherwise, faces, or unnatural geometric structures, offered by credible sources. What is obvious is the credulity of otherwise intelligent people to believe this nonsense.

I realize that your post is meant to be a large measure of snark, but this time you may have out-snarked yourself. I have been involved in the creation of the largest earthworks on planet Earth--the Mississippi River levee system--and I know what it looks like on the drawing; I know what it looks like when it is completed; I know what it looks like from aerial survey's; and I know what it looks like from space. Maybe we should direct one of the more powerful space camera's towards Mars.

Whether or not there is an ancient civilization on Mars is a question that I cannot answer right now. But I do know that Nature does not create these types of angles on this scale. So if Nature didn't create these types of angular features, they what is responsible for them?

I personally don't see any contradiction in some of the human genotypes coming from Mars or from other sources, I am sure that it all didn't begin here.

Sparky>I replied with my opinion, which is what others are doing. Your presumptuously dismissive argument of, "snark", did not address what I said. These are probably artifacts! Not actual structures! I have observed these artifacts and know that there are NO actual structures associated with them in the photos! <Sparky

How do you "know" this? You don't and you can't, based on the available evidence.

Sparky>To argue for life or signs of life with such flimsy evidence is from a delusional belief system. Belief that ignores any and all evidence to the contrary!!!<Sparky

I can clearly see what is before my very eyes, which is what I would urge others to do. Look at the evidence.

Sparky>I can't explain how these artifacts are produced. I can only point out when someone with an over active imagination and a nonsense based belief promotes nonsense! Some here are as bad or worse than "standard cosmologists", when it comes to distorting data and explaining it with hair brained theories!<Sparky

Ok, [color=#0080FF]"Sparky', it's actually spelled "Bering Sea" and not "Bearing Sea" It's "hare-brained" (hare refering to a rabbit) not "hair-brained."

I wish someone would take a very close look at the image provided by THolden. Pay particular attention to the section in the upper left- hand quadrant, near the center of the photo, which shows a series of 5 arches near the center of the image, which may be connected to vertical borehole to the rear of the arches. Are these arches mere "artifiacts" or are they something that we should take a much closer look at?

So one of two things must be true here: This entire episode is a fantastical, conspiratorial, non-sensical visage, or there is an actual image of some previous civilization on Mars here. Yes, I know that is outside the boundaries of ordinary thought, but either there is some very fancy computer pixilitation or some other other computer "compression" going on here, or there is evidence of a previous civilization here.

In my opinion, what is observed is the remains oF a previous civilization, not incoherent with Hindu mythology. If this mythology is correct, then human civilization goes back many thousands of years than we now suspect.

[phyllotaxis]

For the record, I always thought Phobos looked more like a planetary ejection of a molten metal/metalized mass- perhaps after passing through a massive hyper-hot plasma region-- that could certainly produce a blob of metal that relatively raindrop-size (as compared to large planets.) with those characteristics. Perhaps.

As for the discussion on the contents of the Mars photos- I would suggest everyone arguing about it can put your views to even more constructive use by lobbying for telescope allotment to continue to view the areas of interest with increasingly refined and clear instruments. Whether these data formations are analog datastream flaws or some kind of manufactured content, all will be revealed when we can "turn on the closet lightbulb" and get a clear, unambiguous view in hi-def maximum optical quality.

Whichever way it goes in the end, getting too upset over it with each other won't upgrade the pictures.
Working together to get some fresh eyes on the locations seems more useful.

Kindest regards--

[mague]

My own belief is that a large industrial economy like ours requires some sort of a main project which is economically and morally defensible, and I see that main driving engine for our economy in the future being space exploration, particularly Mars and Phobos.

We are on the same boat here but with a different point of view.

My concern is that such a project, once past the point of no return, might ruin most of us. Ever read or watched Contact where The Machine was ruining world economy ?

My project woul be to get rid of depencies. We need to develop a lifestyle that is supporting dignity of all life forms. Most technology only caused problems rather then to solve them. Just a few week ago i read that many plastics release molekules the body is accepting as hormones. It has many effects but basically is "castrating" men and women. We need to go back to (handmade) ceramics, need to find ways to retune our economy to "organic" technology where poeple create high quality goods with their hands, not with machines.

We had cultures that did reach heights in knowledge and mind. Pyramids, Maya astronomy, chinese apothecaries just to name a few. We still calculate with arabic numbers using mathematical solutions some greek people described long ago. Nothing of this ever needed techno-economic depency. It might even be that such a depency is preventing us from real discoveries since ist forcing a certain degree of slavery on mind and matter.

Personally i am convinced that a civilisation that reaches a certain density of harmony will find ways to travel easily. Maybe its allready encoded in us but requires a dense field of "perfect world" to decode itself.

[tholden]

You're asking for a very long story with this one and it's hard even picking a place to start...

One sort of a prerequisite homework assignment for such a discussion would amount to some sort of an understanding of the history and nature of money and the best start point for that on the web is Ellen Brown's site:

http://www.webofdebt.com

Ther's also a short piece which might be helpful:

http://www.xat.org/xat/moneyhistory.html

We have a half dozen or so big problems which we need to resolve and all but one of those is fairly straight-forward; money is the one which is counter-intuitive and difficult for most people to get their heads around.


Other than that... When you use terms like "the dignity of all life forms".... Are you including disease pathogens, rats, cockroaches, ticks, chiggers, biting flies, mosquitos, poisonous snakes, white/bull/tiger sharks and all of those kinds of things in the equation?

[tholden]

In fact.... There's one particularly egregious case of a creature apparently being created with the specific intention of visiting harm upon humankind and that would be the funnelweb. As I read it, a cat or dog could be bitten by one of those things with little harm but a human dies from it and again as I read it, on a scale of one to ten for bad ways to die, that one is at least a nine. The funnelweb may have been created as a means of keeping humans and/or hominids out of certain areas.

Again the question: does "the dignity of all life forms" include the funnelweb?

My own view is that things like the funnelweb are what small gauge shotguns were invented for, but I'd be open to any sort of plan for removing the thing from the planet using chemistry and/or bioengineering techniques. I don't have any reason to think the balance of nature would miss him.

[tholden]

As for the discussion on the contents of the Mars photos- I would suggest everyone arguing about it can put your views to even more constructive use by lobbying for telescope allotment to continue to view the areas of interest with increasingly refined and clear instruments.--

As I see it, the pictures we have are clear enough. The only remaining question is whether we get the first look at whatever's inside Phobos and/or one or more of those Cydonia megaliths, or whether somebody like Maxmoud Axmadinajad does.

[Sparky]

Sparky,

I have observed these artifacts and know that there are NO actual structures associated with them in the photos!

kell,

How do you "know" this? You don't and you can't, based on the available evidence.

I observed artifacts while viewing "Deadliest Catch". I know they were artifacts, not structures in an on the Bering Sea...hex explained it well enough....

btw, though i can not spell well, hairbrained is acceptable spelling. And yes, I do make typos.

As to topic and evidence presented to support that argument; Nonsense!