A CIVILIZATION on MARS? 1B/200M Years Ago? (Pt. 2)

[JonClarke]

Mental, you hit the nail on the head. You posted:<br /><br />Zen quoted: "I [therefore] hope that forthcoming American and Russian missions to Mars, especially orbiters with high-resolution television cameras, will make a special effort -- among hundreds of other scientific questions -- to look much more closely at the pyramids and what some people call the Face and the city..." <br /><br />That is exactly what Odyssey 2001 did, and it showed an eroded mesa. <br /><br />Jon - not just once but lost of times in multiple THEMIS images. Also Mars Global Surveyor and multiple MOC images. The refusal to face the factsof medium and high resolution imagery by the Cydonia Clan, amply demonstrate in the past few hundred posts, is clear demonstration that there is no interest in rational, evidence based discussion, but a blind holding on to the false claims of Hoagland and his henchmen. When Mars Express HRSC images are available showing the mesa in glorious 3D they still won't believe it is a natural feature. There may well be some who won't believe that it is antural even after the Chinese and spent people there and climbed all over it.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

cs mate:<br /><br />This is an orthorectified image. Please point out the two nostrils and two eyes. <br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

cs:<br /><br />There is a noticable lack of symmetry to the face in both the details and major features, as this comparison of the orthorectfied image with an overlay showing how the main features of the right side (in black) are no mirrored on the left.<br /><br />the fact is there is nothing in the mesa to suggest artificiality. There is no real resemblance to a face, regularity, symmetry, artificality, or compositional anomaly. There is just a blind adherence in the teeth of the evidence to the belief that somehow this feature is artifical.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

It would help is I uploaded it <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /><br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

Monks mound comes from an area known to have been inhabitted by a range of cultures. Similar cultures were known to have made large constructions. There was a priori reason why it could not have been partly or wholy artificial. Whether it was or not was a subject of legitimate enquiry. And, I must remind you, there was no certainty in the outcome. there have been many supposed artifical features which have proved to be natural on earth.<br /><br />By your logic we would have to regard every feature on Mars as potentially artificial until proven otherwise by detailed ground investigation. Given we have no a priori grounds for suspecting the presence of alien cilvilsations on Mars, this is a singularly unhelpful approach methjodologically. <br /><br />The Cydonia mesa is not symmetrical, not regular, has no orthogonality, is not compositionally destinct from other features on Mars, it does not even particularly look like a face when seen it is as a whole, structurally and morphologically it completely explicable as a natural feature, like the other mesas in the area. This has been demonstrated so many times by so many people it is become tedious. <br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

To the south of the face mesa, visible in this THEMIS image http://themis-data.asu.edu/img/V03814003, is another mesa, most of which was captured by MOC image M04-01903. The original image is at http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/ab1_m04/images/M0401903.html .<br /><br />This mesa has almost all the geomorphic features visible on the "face". There are benches, alcoves, mantled slopes, convex slopes, rises. However because it does not look like anything, there are no woo woo ideas associated with it (that I know of).<br /><br />But wait - it is clearly a pointy headed Mayan warrior seen in profile with a big round eye....<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

Here's the cropped MOC image of the Mayan warrior mesa<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

And here is a geomorphic map. Clearly wrong of course, because I am starting from an assumption that it is a natural feature.<br /><img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />cs-specialist: should this site be labelled a possible artificial site because at least one person thinks it looks like a head?<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[thechemist]

OMG, it's a mayan warrior ! And it 's on Mars, close to the FOM and DM pyramid.<br />Mayans also built pyramids !! Like in Egypt .... <img src="/images/icons/shocked.gif" /><br /><br />Now tell me this is a just a coincidence, you skeptic, pseudoscientific, close-minded subhumans !!!<br /><br />P.S. Hi Jon. The artificiality group does not log in at this time zone, so I thought I could replace them for argument's sake <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br />Wait until I see your pictures ... You art-ignorant geologist <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>I feel better than James Brown.</em> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

I freely confess to be a fan of lying NASA imbeciles! <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <br /><br />But you have to be careful - writing woo woo speak can be infectious. A couple of days ago I wrote a piece proving that aliens constructed the Dalhousie spring complex on a system of equilateral triangles. There were links to aboriginal spirituality, the CIA, mining and oil companies, prohibitted areas, the works. I am not game to post it though <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

Indeed. Any alien face would more likely look like a spider or insect or mantis shrimp - or something completely unrecognisable to us. This is why seeing human faces on Mars tells us more about our psychology than it does Mars - a planetary ink blot, if you like.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[silylene old]

TheChemist: I thought it looked more like a group of depressions formed by a semicircle of sitting naked Titans. Their butt-cheek-prints were quite clear on the top of this mesa! Isn't this obvious to you? Or is your mind so closed that you simply lack an artistic eye? <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />This proves the ancient visitors to Mars came from a low-gravity world, where their size could grow gigantic proportions compared to mere earthlings. And obviously, the visits of the Titans to Earth inspire many legends, including Greek, Norse, Hindu and Babylonian mythologies. Probably only 12 Titans came from the distant starts to visit Earth, but I could only find evidence that 5 of them visited this mesa, based on counting paired butt-cheek depressions. If one looks closely, you can see their heel prints on the Martian surface near the mesa. In fact, JonClarke misidentified a few Titan heal prints on the mesa surface itself as mere "craters". I believe the weight of the Titans can be estimated from the depth of the depressions; building a model of their size and volume from the cheek-depressions ought then to allow us to estimate their density. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>

 

[thechemist]

Silylene,<br />butt-cheek-prints !! <img src="/images/icons/shocked.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br />Now that Jon has traced geomorphically the image, I see clearly a sheep eating grass on a steep angle. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>I feel better than James Brown.</em> </div>

 

[thechemist]

cs_specialist,<br />I am sorry that my low IQ does not allow me to make comments witty enough to satisfy your high standard in humor.<br />I suggest you await the FOM artificiality supporters to comment on JonClarke's image.<br />Usually their responses are wittier. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>I feel better than James Brown.</em> </div>

 

[maxtheknife]

Chemist - "I am sorry that my low IQ does not allow me to make comments witty enough to satisfy your high standard in humor."<br /><br />If that's what you're trying to do, make witty comments, you aren't really serious about testing the theory are you? This isn't highschool or college where we're testing theories that have the answers printed in the back of the chapter. The answers aren't given, which means we have to adhere to the methodology we were taught which promises to lead us to the correct answer. Whatever that may be.<br /><br />We aren't trying to fool you, we're trying to help you.<br /><br />Sometimes in order to help oneself, one needs to do the work oneself. TRACE THE FACE.<br /><br />In response to Jon's images and questions.... Already answered. I specifically asked which questions you all thought I haven't answered specifically and thoroughly. No reply..... Jon then proceeds to ask the same questions again. Hm.<br /><br />The only thing I can think to post at the moment in response to Jon is.....<br /><br />DENIAL: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=denial<br /><br />I've finished the trace. So now, I guess, it took me a total of one hour.<br /><br />Trace it. There's no 'magic' to it. You might actually find yourself practicing 'science'.<br />

 

[thechemist]

Maxtheknife,<br />An experienced field-geologist already provided his analysis of the FOM. The "theory" did not stand the test. <br />Anybody can see whatever he wants in "traced" images. I really saw a sheep in Jon's tracing. He sees a mayan warrior. Silylene saw Titanian butts-prints. <br />Although humorous, these posts honestly attempt to point out how useless "tracing" is in supporting the "theory".<br />Tracing is NOT science by any stretch of the imagination.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>I feel better than James Brown.</em> </div>

 

[maxtheknife]

How many times do I have to say it??? <br /><br />Any ruins left standing in any open enviornment, after x number of years will absolutely show evidence of geological forces. Take the sphinx @ Giza for example.... Weathered by water....hm.<br /><br />I UNDERSTAND AND I AGREE!<br /><br />If you want to test that the face is half lion, half man, TRACE IT....that is a beginning and definitely a valid experiment. <br /><br />Please stop dodging the work and do it.<br /><br />Try it.....if it doesn't kill you, it'll only make you stronger.

 

[telfrow]

<font color="yellow">We aren't trying to fool you, we're trying to help you.</font><br /><br />This may come as a shock to you, but I don't need your help. I was tracing and investigating the Face when you were probably in diapers. I've pondered the question for twenty seven years. I made up my mind, on my own, by investigating all sides of the argument. I don't need you - or anyone else - to "guide" me to (your version of) "the truth" regarding the FOM, politics or anything else. <br /><br />And, as for your comment regarding my (we) being labeled a "pseudoscientist" if I don't engage in your experiment/homework assignment (a dig at me, I suppose, given my background as a teacher)...who fits the description? <br /> http://paul.merton.ox.ac.uk/science/pseudoscientist.html <br /><br />BTW, do the words condescending, pontificating, and sanctimonious mean anything to you? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[maxtheknife]

http://www.enterprisemission.com/ir_analysis.php<br /><br />Why didn't you choose to highlight this feature, Jon?

 

[maxtheknife]

I did the work and shared my results which puts me firmly within the definition of 'scientist'.<br /><br />So far, you've only claimed to have done the work and then you've claimed that your work refutes mine. Not posting your work for review puts you firmly into the definition of pseudoscientist.<br /><br />Telfrow - " do the words condescending, pontificating, and sanctimonious mean anything to you?"<br /><br />Yes. The ground is high and my team owns it.<br /><br />Does the word DENIAL mean anything to you?<br /><br />Show me you aren't a pseudoscientist.... if you dare.<br /><br /><br />

 

[thechemist]

cs_specialist, I'm confused. <br />Max says "do the tracing, find for yourself". <br />You, on the other hand, suggest to leave it to the specialists.<br />Max says an artist must analyze the FOM, not a geologist.<br />You say an image analyst, not a geologist.<br /><br />Myself, I 'd rather rely on the general scientific community, which uses both geologists and image analysts, and physicists, and astronomers, to analyse the data.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>I feel better than James Brown.</em> </div>

 

[maxtheknife]

Why is the 'general scientific community' more qualified to answer this question than you, Chemist? Can you not appreciate and understand art, design, and intent? What precludes you from being able to test the theory as I have? <br /><br />NASA has never traced the face for you.... They have dumbed it down, though....

 

[silylene old]

<font color="yellow">Trace it. There's no 'magic' to it. You might actually find yourself practicing 'science'.</font><br /><br />OK, I took the "FOM picture" and line-traced what I saw, and then interpreted the tracings according to occam's razor to determine the cause, a method which is I learned from earlier posts on this thread is the best scientific process.<br /><br />Clearly, the high resolution photo of the butte shows the imprints of the butt-cheeks of three very large individuals, which I will call "Titans". Also, I see strong evidence of two "butt-slides" formed when Titans slid down the right side face of the butte.<br /><br />It is obvious that the butt-cheek imprints on this butte (pun un-intended!) are very similar in size and shape to the butt-cheek imprints on the butte-picture that JonClarke posted earlier in this thread.<br /><br />Finding the same butt-cheek imprints in two locations gives stronger evidence that a race of naked Titans once visited Mars. And probably they visited earth too, giving rise to legends and mythologies spanning the world.<br /><br />I finally suggest that my tracings are as equally likely as the competing "lionine face" hypothesis. Looking carefully you can see that the butt-cheek imprints #1 and #3 are the source of the non-symmetry of the features of the "lionine face", because the Titans sat in a slightly skewed manner on opposing sides of the butte. Butt-cheek imprint #2 gives rise the the "eye" and the "forehead" of the "lionine face". Finally, the symmetry of the butte itself was heavily damaged by two Titans sliding down the right side. This morphological damage is unfortunate, as it probably obscured older butt-cheek imprints. However, using an anthropological analysis, the existance of butt-sliding tracks indicates that the personalities of the Titans likely had a whimsical or even childlike character. This aspect of their personality argues that they were intelligent, and argues against that possibili <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>

 

[vogon13]

I see a skid mark on #3. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[Leovinus]

Perhaps these are Massive Martian Mammaries instead of butt cheeks. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>