The Mars Anomaly Thread

[Anaximander]

Hey Folks,

You might have seen some of the Moon anomaly stuff I've posted on the boards here before, but I haven't posted any Mars stuff here yet.

Just like the old moon, there is no shortage of curious objects and features on the Red Planet.

You heard the theory that Mars once had an Ocean right?

That would mean you would expect to find fossilized life forms...

....Like Sea Stars - embedded in rocks:



(Now this just looks like a sea star. For many, it is probably the only sea star looking thing you've ever seen embedded in a rock on Mars; a place that may have once held oceanic life. Something to Think about)




Some people have theorized that Mars may also been home to intelligent life. If so, we would expect some signs of civilization - of these, the most likely to survive to our day would be those things carved from hard stone. Well a fellow going by TSAD over on the Mars Anomalies Forum may have found such a thing. It was quite the find:

Check it out:



Tsad shows us what it reminds him of:



Elvis performs an enhancement:




Images from PIA12203 ('starfish') and sol 2020 (above)





Now here's one that I find particularly peculiar. It looks like a piece of machinery or equipment, but if it is - then it isn't from any probe we've been told about.

It actually looks like it has been there for quite a while:






Here is another neat one for you guys. It is from sol1539 and I've only seen one like it so far on Mars:

 

[dyingsun]

To be quite honest, I really enjoy your contributions on here, but all I see on these pictures is a rock/stone.

:edit: The 'well' structure i find really interesting as well.

 

[Anaximander]

Let's hope you are right.

Edit: This one's for you - it's a shiny 'rock':

See more here:
Spirit Metallic Sphere - Alien Anomalies

 

[dyingsun]

Now that is something interesting.

 

[Dana]

See more here:
Spirit Metallic Sphere - Alien Anomalies[/QUOTE]

Hey Anaximander, i hereby dub you Allan Sturm's official replacement even if he does eventually return. I to have really been enjoying your moon/mars anomalies posts. I too may not have the eye to see many anomalies but there are a handfull that make me think they just may not be camera artifacts or the mind trying to make paterns. Like the "spoke wheels" picture of Lunar anomalies, what the heck is that? And now this "metallic" orb again i don't know what I'm looking at. Are these stereo pictures in the gif animation? So great Job, Don should have you on the show as an official guest

 

[dyingsun]

I have to agree with Dana, but what we don't know is that Anaximander is Mr. Sturm in disguise, with pictures to boot.

 

[Kandinsky]

I'm not a huge fan of the Moon/Mars anomalies, but this is a nice thread and a couple of images are interesting.

Hoagy and Skipper put the boot into the subject and left a bad taste in the mouth. I recommend a website that has pages of fascinating anomalies...Pegasus Research Consortium John Lear has a page on the site, but don't let that put anyone off. Mike Singh's Mars images are worth a look. I can't vouch for their authenticity...just worth a look.

It's always worth chasing up the PIA numbers and digging through the NASA or ESA archives for the original TIFF images. All too often, people posting Mars/Moon anomalies (cough...Hoagland...etc) give inaccurate PIA numbers or references to cartons that don't exist.

 

[Tom From Hong Kong]

Given the state of photo technology these days -- and indeed, in existence over the past two decades -- we should be able to generate much better photos than have been released to the public. I started out a skeptic on the subject, but have become more open minded over time, particularly given some of the controversies that surround the private company in charge of the Mars photos during the most recent Mars missions (e.g., photos held back for extended periods of time; selective releases of what is without question public property).

Also, I am always baffled every time I see a photo with a "fuzzy" section in it -- I doubt the absence of clarity is created by difficulties during transmission, or defects in the cameras employed.

So, if true, someone got to Mars or the Moon before us -- so what? Life will go on regardless, and only religious fundamentalists and the scientists with a rigid world view will be psychologically damaged by the fact. We're all adults -- play through it . . .

 

[Anaximander]

Hey Kandinsky,

Withholding of image numbers is annoying, but it used to be that if you found an anomaly and word made it to print and then somehow to those responsible for the images, well those images would sometimes be pulled, cleaned up and relabeled 'original'.

Thankfully the internet seems to be to putting a stop to that. Pulling a switcheroo is much harder nowadays.

...But that doesn't stop people from witholding. I guess once you've been burned, you don't wanna get burned again. Sometimes it is better to say nothing about the image and ensure it sticks around unaltered for future researchers. Sometimes that is more important than the feeling of satisfaction one gets when another poster replies: "I just checked. It is really there".




Do you know if anyone ever gotten ahold of the image number for Dick Hoagland's 'Shard'?

If not, I think he's been sitting on that since the early nineties. That's got to be a record.

Edit:

I just checked my copy of Dark Mission. Hoagland says it is from LO-III-84M.

And I just obtained the image for myself - it is there but 'the cube' is not readily apparent in this one. -This is from is a small size jpeg, I'll have to get the big one later.

 

[Anaximander]

[
Hey Anaximander, i hereby dub you Allan Sturm's official replacement even if he does eventually return. I to have really been enjoying your moon/mars anomalies posts. I too may not have the eye to see many anomalies but there are a handfull that make me think they just may not be camera artifacts or the mind trying to make paterns. Like the "spoke wheels" picture of Lunar anomalies, what the heck is that? And now this "metallic" orb again i don't know what I'm looking at. Are these stereo pictures in the gif animation? So great Job, Don should have you on the show as an official guest

Hey Dana,

1)Glad you like the images. They can certainly give one something to ponder, that's for sure.

2) I am not Allan's replacement. However, thank you for the dubbing.

3) And yup, those are stereo images.

 

[Xylo]

Some of those pics I find interesting: in particular the "well head" photo.

I went from being a doe-eyed believer in all of these photo anomalies (ala Hoagland) to being skeptical of every photo that presents "geometry" in it (due to learning about pixellation in enlarged jpg images.)

Now I'm a skeptic that isn't sure of much that's presented. The evidence that intrigues me is usually stuff that, for the most part, shouldn't have a geological answer; the well-head for instance. I don't know what it is. It doesn't appear to be a play of light and shadow. For all purposes it seems to be a masonry well head- which shouldn't be there.


The "Dragon Head" photo is interesting but could formed via natural processes, like the following image:





I don't see the starfish, or any radial symmetry in the first photograph. Could be that I'm just not seeing something, or it could be that I can't wrap my mind around it so all I see is a rock. I'm not playing either: I've tried to see a starfish.

With the "metallic sphere" photos, all I see is a rock with a highly reflective white surface. Maybe Mica or Quartz? I guess I'd want someone to explain to me why it couldn't be a white highly reflective rock before I'd question it.

 

[trainedobserver]

I agree there are very strange looking things on Mars that are really interesting. Arthur C. Clarke was fascinated some of the satellite images that show what appear to be vegetation of some kind and of course the mysterious 'glass tubes' (which may not be tubes at all but furrows).

There is something that always pops up my mind when I see images that seem to be showing mechanical parts of some kind. That is that both the US and Russia have been crashing spacecraft onto the surface of Mars for decades and who knows what the atmosphere has done to them. What percentage of these mechanical looking things could be accounted for that way? I just don't know. While you could perhaps attempt to cross-reference some of the photos with known crash sites but I don't know how far that would get you.

There is enough that is just unidentifiable and strange that I think it's worth getting some boots on the ground to investigate. I think that is that is the only way we are going to really 'know' anything for sure. Regrettably, I don't there is a will to do that in this administration. The first boots on Mars will probably belong to some private venture and anything they find will be 'proprietary' and we won't hear about it anyway.

 

[Anaximander]

With the "metallic sphere" photos, all I see is a rock with a highly reflective white surface. Maybe Mica or Quartz? I guess I'd want someone to explain to me why it couldn't be a white highly reflective rock before I'd question it.

Why don't you be chum and help find us another 'rock' which looks like it.

If it's natural, the processes which produced it has probably left more objects with similiar characteristics in the vicinity.

You've got the image number and the links to the pertinent image data

If the things are natural there should be plenty of examples which pop up when you do your google search. The criteria is obvious enough I hope.

*And I'm not putting you on. I really would like to see some other examples like it, and if we both work together we will have a better chance of success. *And me explaining to you what you think needs explained isn't going to expedite the process any.

 

[Xylo]

Why don't you be chum and help find us another 'rock' which looks like it.

If it's natural, the processes which produced it has probably left more objects with similiar characteristics in the vicinity.

You've got the image number and the links to the pertinent image data

If the things are natural there should be plenty of examples which pop up when you do your google search. The criteria is obvious enough I hope.

*And I'm not putting you on. I really would like to see some other examples like it, and if we both work together we will have a better chance of success. *And me explaining to you what you think needs explained isn't going to expedite the process any.

First off, I'm only showing my natural skepticism.

It's not up to me to disprove your assumption, if anything that should motivate you to more vigorously defend it. Besides, if I did find anything that was quite similar it would have to be another photograph from Mars, or the Moon to meet the photographic conditions.

That being said, I usually find your posts to be quite interesting, including this post, though I usually refrain from comment. A debate over beliefs will never be won until we do, as was said above "get some boots on the ground."

As to your explaining what needs to be explained, yes it would expedite the process, because the brain's interpretation of images is subjective.

 

[Anaximander]

As to your explaining what needs to be explained, yes it would expedite the process, because the brain's interpretation of images is subjective.

Frankly I think you are being obtuse.

The explanation you seem to need isn't going to help you find other examples of shiny spherical rocks with which to compare the find posted here; it will not expedite that process.

As you already have the criteria and means to begin the search for comparative examples, I can only assume you have not begun because you would rather not.

That's fine and dandy.

I'm here to post images which I find curious and state what they look like or what they remind me of along with some colour commentary. I'm not here to answer your questions, and I won't be devoting all that much time to that task. Sorry, I'm just too old for that - so keep your expectations low.

That being said, If you find me claiming that anything is actually something and doesn't just look like something or might be something - let me know. I don't use all those 'maybes' ,'might bes' and 'looks like' for nothing.

 

[Xylo]

Frankly I think you are being obtuse.

The explanation you seem to need isn't going to help you find other examples of shiny spherical rocks with which to compare the find posted here; it will not expedite that process.

So I'm being obtuse when I ask for you to explain why you assume this is a metal sphere? Hardly. You're making an assumption and I'm asking for you to provide supporting evidence.

As you already have the criteria and means to begin the search for comparative examples, I can only assume you have not begun because you would rather not.

That's fine and dandy.

I'm here to post images which I find curious and state what they look like or what they remind me of along with some colour commentary. I'm not here to answer your questions, and I won't be devoting all that much time to that task. Sorry, I'm just too old for that - so keep your expectations low.

That being said, If you find me claiming that anything is actually something and doesn't just look like something or might be something - let me know. I don't use all those 'maybes' ,'might bes' and 'looks like' for nothing.

Anytime. But be prepared for a slew of questions because, quite frankly, all of us are subject to the brains interpretation of what our eyes see- and a great deal of the time our brains will invent an interpretation because it makes sense based upon our experience. Since I don't have the obvious experience that you do in photographic study, I would hope that you'd educate me in such endeavors.

 

[Anaximander]

So I'm being obtuse when I ask for you to explain why you assume this is a metal sphere? .

Are you trolling me?

Because nowhere in this thread did I say it was a metal sphere, so if you read that in this thread somewhere you better get your eyes checked. Or quite trolling.

Actually anything you can find that stops you from reading things which weren't written is something you oughtta invest some time in. It would have saved us alot of time just now if you'd read only the things which were written in the thread.

 

[Xylo]

Let's hope you are right.

Edit: This one's for you - it's a shiny 'rock':

See more here:
Spirit Metallic Sphere - Alien Anomalies

Hmmmm let me see....You edited the post to say it's a "shiny rock" but you also say at the end of the post: SEE MORE HERE with a link entitled Spirit Metalic Sphere...

So yeah I guess I am trolling you if you think that it's completely illogical to make an inference based upon your previous post.

For the record, you were the one that started throwing adjectives around. I've not called you obtuse, nor a troll, nor have I insinuated such. In fact I've been the one asking you for more information and trying to discuss the images you posted. Apparently you think that posting a few images is not worthy of a supporting discussion. Yes, they are some interesting images; I think they are more than worthy of a critical discussion.

Was I critical of the images? Not any more critical than one needs to be. I think this field needs more critical thinking and discussion as to rule out as many explanations as possible. Instead of throwing adjectives and silly comics around maybe you should realize this.

 

[Anaximander]

Hmmmm let me see....You edited the post to say it's a "shiny rock" but you also say at the end of the post: SEE MORE HERE with a link entitled Spirit Metalic Sphere...

Xylo,

Don't pretend you don't know how the linking system here works.

You know full well that the link shows the title given to it by someone other than me. And if you'd followed that link that particular fact would have been further reinforced.

*Also, if you have any accusations of back editing you'd like to make, please take them to the mods. It is an issue I'd be glad to have them clear up for you.


As for now Xylo, I'm about done with you.

You've pretended I've said things which I haven't.

You've pretended I've made assumptions which it is quite evident that I have not.

Now you're pretending you don't know how the linking system works.

To be frank, this is not the kind of behavior which I accept when it comes to people whom I associate with - even on the internet. Furthermore, I have not seen anyone else on the dark Matters board engage in such behaviour except for you.

So I'll be placing you on ignore.

Shortly after I do that, I'll be back with more images, and you can reply to my posts but I won't be able to see yours. I'll check your posts after a few days and if you've to straightened out your act then I'll take you off the list and we can see where you go from there.

 

[Xylo]

Xylo,

Don't pretend you don't know how the linking system here works.

You know full well that the link shows the title given to it by someone other than me. And if you'd followed that link that particular fact would have been further reinforced.

*Also, if you have any accusations of back editing you'd like to make, please take them to the mods. It is an issue I'd be glad to have them clear up for you.


As for now Xylo, I'm about done with you.

You've pretended I've said things which I haven't.

You've pretended I've made assumptions which it is quite evident that I have not.

Now you're pretending you don't know how the linking system works.

To be frank, this is not the kind of behavior which I accept when it comes to people whom I associate with - even on the internet. Furthermore, I have not seen anyone else on the dark Matters board engage in such behaviour except for you.

So I'll be placing you on ignore.

Shortly after I do that, I'll be back with more images, and you can reply to my posts but I won't be able to see yours. I'll check your posts after a few days and if you've to straightened out your act then I'll take you off the list and we can see where you go from there.

That my friends is the epitome of avoiding a discussion as well as the epitome of passive aggressive behaviour.