by Poppa Tom » Tue Jun 25, 2024 9:45 pm
Open Mind wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 2:10 pm
Arcmode said "Makes you wonder who really benefits from all this waste, disinformation, and confusion."
I worry about the 'one step forward, two steps back' dynamic sometimes as well. Personally, I haven't looked at Mars surface as much as you suggest you have, but I did spend some time checking out claims of evidence of structures on Mars, and so far I don't share the 'certainty' at all with the images shown. I do remember reading about some scan data indicating an enormous high tower on the edge of a crater, that unfortunately didn't have a clear image, and while that seemed compelling, I do have to wonder if its the same kind of glitch as you find in the ocean bottom bathymetry data that triggers so many into thinking they're seeing structure vs an artifact of the scanning process. I'm open to the idea that Mars perhaps did support life in the distant past, but for now, with the available evidence, I wouldn't preach to anyone outside of the tiny group of those of us who have arrived at this openness through a variety of multi disciplinary curiosities.
I'm seeing the same kind of things discussed with respect to the recent discovery of incredible precision in the scans of ancient stone vases pulled from the Pyramid of Djoser centuries ago. The scan data clearly show's a precision level well above anything we could ever expect to achieve by eye, and the implications for this are staggering and incredibly important to further the idea of ancient advanced civilizations. But now each time informed people talk about this, they get into some numerology about the mathematical associations of its measurements that, if accepted, imply a complex design intention that requires advanced design processes, and this is where most people still grappling with the idea of extreme precision, begin to glaze over and become skeptical about the entire thing, because now its not just precise workmanship, but now we also have to accept that they had computers and understood advanced math, etc.
If any of that is true, its beside the fundamental point that needs to be established first - that there is a physical piece of stone work that demonstrates they had capabilities of precision. That alone makes mainstream spin. Add extra layers of confounding stuff to that, and you're literally talking them out of lowering their defenses. I worry that some area's associated with this EU movement, while interesting, are ultimately going to damage the chances of pulling in more 'undecideds'. If you think of it like politics, its like letting the extremists of the party run the general campaign. Its not a good strategy.
Personally, though, I do love Teds talk about dinosaurs and gravity. I'd love a cleaned up and professionally narrated version of his talk on that subject. Absolutely fascinating and compelling, including the square cubed law, the illustrated scale limit, the impossibility of flight of large birds, the idea about how muscle tissue cross section to strength ratio scales identically all the way up from mosquito to elephant, etc. It also might be another example of one of those 'keep it in the closet for now' kind of idea's, but personally, I thought it was very cool. Thanks for that Ted.
`
Makes you wonder why they don't publish all the great shots possible from space. Yet we see blurry images from space and from the rovers-uncanny isn't it.
[quote="Open Mind" post_id=10326 time=1713795022 user_id=30194]
Arcmode said "Makes you wonder who really benefits from all this waste, disinformation, and confusion."
I worry about the 'one step forward, two steps back' dynamic sometimes as well. Personally, I haven't looked at Mars surface as much as you suggest you have, but I did spend some time checking out claims of evidence of structures on Mars, and so far I don't share the 'certainty' at all with the images shown. I do remember reading about some scan data indicating an enormous high tower on the edge of a crater, that unfortunately didn't have a clear image, and while that seemed compelling, I do have to wonder if its the same kind of glitch as you find in the ocean bottom bathymetry data that triggers so many into thinking they're seeing structure vs an artifact of the scanning process. I'm open to the idea that Mars perhaps did support life in the distant past, but for now, with the available evidence, I wouldn't preach to anyone outside of the tiny group of those of us who have arrived at this openness through a variety of multi disciplinary curiosities.
I'm seeing the same kind of things discussed with respect to the recent discovery of incredible precision in the scans of ancient stone vases pulled from the Pyramid of Djoser centuries ago. The scan data clearly show's a precision level well above anything we could ever expect to achieve by eye, and the implications for this are staggering and incredibly important to further the idea of ancient advanced civilizations. But now each time informed people talk about this, they get into some numerology about the mathematical associations of its measurements that, if accepted, imply a complex design intention that requires advanced design processes, and this is where most people still grappling with the idea of extreme precision, begin to glaze over and become skeptical about the entire thing, because now its not just precise workmanship, but now we also have to accept that they had computers and understood advanced math, etc.
If any of that is true, its beside the fundamental point that needs to be established first - that there is a physical piece of stone work that demonstrates they had capabilities of precision. That alone makes mainstream spin. Add extra layers of confounding stuff to that, and you're literally talking them out of lowering their defenses. I worry that some area's associated with this EU movement, while interesting, are ultimately going to damage the chances of pulling in more 'undecideds'. If you think of it like politics, its like letting the extremists of the party run the general campaign. Its not a good strategy.
Personally, though, I do love Teds talk about dinosaurs and gravity. I'd love a cleaned up and professionally narrated version of his talk on that subject. Absolutely fascinating and compelling, including the square cubed law, the illustrated scale limit, the impossibility of flight of large birds, the idea about how muscle tissue cross section to strength ratio scales identically all the way up from mosquito to elephant, etc. It also might be another example of one of those 'keep it in the closet for now' kind of idea's, but personally, I thought it was very cool. Thanks for that Ted.
[/quote]
`
Makes you wonder why they don't publish all the great shots possible from space. Yet we see blurry images from space and from the rovers-uncanny isn't it.