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

zenonmars · May 21, 2005

Steve, you naughty, naugty boy......... Perhaps I can re-post some of my notions from a different thread about these attitudes I detect, from space science enthusiasts: "You know, folks, I am amazed. I am relatively new here. but not new to the issues spanned by these boards, or the personality types I have encountered here. I have noticed that the folks who have the biggest "problems" with any particular given issue on these boards, are the ones who make the majority of contrary posts. This baffles me. There are literally hundreds of given thread subjects here at SDC to choose to interact with. And as soon as the nay-sayers find an issue that they have contention with, they begin an all-out frontal assault on the posters, the "bad science", "nonsense", "pseudo-science", "snake oil salesmen", etc. And it always ends with urgent pleas to the Moderators to move the entire thread to the "loony bins" -- (used to be Seti, now is Phenomena). Where I come from, a man simply avoids the people and issues that he finds distasteful. You wont find me in any Gothic poetry rooms, or any Baptist politics boards. Why? Because these issues do not interest me. And yet here we have a thread about a very interesting idea and it was purposefully kept away from the precious "legitimate" space science threads. And what do you do? Well, I think you know what you do. Calling for a thread's "end" is the most telling stategy of all. Ok. Let me get this right. One thing you guys are NOT, are pseudo ("fake") skeptics. "Pseudoscience" is yelled every time a fringe idea is foisted here at SDC. You guys are not plain-ole-regular-skeptics, either. Nor are you any sort of self-appointed defenders of "real" science, as "real" science certainly does not need you. You know what I think you guys are? I think you guys are "professional" skeptics. Let's see. You do not dodge threads you have contentions with, you rabidly seek them out. You do n <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · May 21, 2005

A note about tracing. Here is a crop of of your tracing of the "human eye" area of the FOM. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

telfrow · May 21, 2005

And here's a crop from M16-00184 (Adobe PhotoShop, AutoContrast adjustment only): <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

telfrow · May 21, 2005

Examine the terrain. Look at the features. Try tracing the same patterns again. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

telfrow · May 21, 2005

Here's your impression of the mouth area... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

telfrow · May 21, 2005

And a crop from E2001532 (Adobe PhotoShop-AutoContrast adjustment only). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

maxtheknife · May 21, 2005

maxtheknife · May 21, 2005

Pick a pic, and trace it yourself..... Why are you trying to discredit my efforts w/o trying to reproduce the results yourself? Some teacher you must have been.....

telfrow · May 21, 2005

Some teacher you must have been..... Nice, Max. Very nice. I'm wounded. <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> (Is this the part where I start crying and have you put in an independent study program?) I have produced them. And they looked a lot like yours. A lot like yours. Satisfied? The vast majority of that stuff is on floppy. Unfortunately, neither of my laptops have floppy drives. I haven't bought a portable floppy drive yet to transfer them to disc. If you'd like to send me a money order, I'd be glad to go get one tonight. Otherwise, it'll have to wait. What I am posting are crops I remember using to examine the areas I pointed out. These are some of the pictures that led me to believe my tracing efforts were taking me in the wrong direction. I'm not trying to discredit your work, Max, I'm just here to help you. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

djd1 · May 21, 2005

Clearly, the high resolution photo of the butte shows the imprints of the butt-cheeks of three very large individuals. Most intelligent trace i have seen so far. silyene, thanks for the good laugh.

zenonmars · May 21, 2005

Steve, by the way, Are you comparing Max's posts in a Mars Civilization thread to something like the first post in THIS? : http://uplink.space.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=seti&Number=223848&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart= <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · May 21, 2005

Jon: When the crop of M16-00184 (previous page) is finally posted, could you take a look at it and tell me what you see in and around the "eye"? I see some interesting formations...including the "pupil" and the area below it. Thanks in advance... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

JonClarke · May 21, 2005

Max That is a good tracing of the mesa. I am really, really please you did this, as it shows you are engaging the actual data. You are also starting to answer my questions by showing what you see. I think there is about an 80% congruence between wthat you have shown and what I showed in my sketch. You have chosen to highlight different features to that I have and to represent others somewhat differently, but if you were a student ansd this was a class exercise I would give you a good mark for it. the one thing am not sure what you were trying to represent with the stippled pattern. What really stands out to me in your sketch is that it does not realistic look like a human or feline face, not even an eroded one. You also have correctly captured the no orthogonality of the major linearments and the lack of symmetry. Given that you and I see much the same thing, why do you think this is a real face as opposed to a ntraul mesa that looks a little bit like one under certain restricted conditions? Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

JonClarke · May 21, 2005

My did I not highlight "the road less travelled"? because it is a plain feature and not directly connected to the mesa. Mch the same as I did not include some of the craters on the plains. But what of it? the northern plains of Mars have many troughs at vaious cales similar to this one with small dunes in their trough. What is so remarkable about this one? Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

JonClarke · May 21, 2005

cs amte, you wrote: "The "test" is nonsense. Maybe he's an experienced field geologist, but he's clearly as much of a rank amateur at digital image analysis as everyone else here. Mark Carlotto is a professional who makes his living by doing it." Good one - all field geologists learn image analysis from day 1, it is an essential part of their job. Currently I work mainly with a range of spatial data. This includes digital elevation models (shuttle and airborne radar, ground survey, and airborne laser), old fashioned aerial photos, panchromatic, colour and IR, gamma radiometrics, AEM time-depth slices, and satellite imagery (SPOT, ASTER and Landsat). All involves image analysis and a range of software. I would not claim to be a specialist, but I do know enough to that Carlotto's methods are definitely odd and his interpretations are not justified by his data. You still have not answered why you think the mesa is symmetrical when it clear is not. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

JonClarke · May 22, 2005

cs_specialist wrote: It would be nice if the geologists could at least agree on precisely _what_ sort of "natural" landform the Face is. They can't seem to decide between a mesa created by erosion, a volcanic dome, or the ever-popular "pile of rocks." These are not mutually exclusive terms. A mesa is any sort of small to medium sized slteep sided, flat topped landform. Some are formed by igenous activity. Colloquially, a pile of rocks. Furthermore, disagreement over the exact of origin of a feature does not mean the some others cannot be precluded with a high degree of certainty. For example, at a recent conference there was debate over whether the Bedout feature was an impact crater or a fortuitous strutural alignment. Nobody suggested it was volcanic, or formed by solution collpase. Jon Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

JonClarke · May 22, 2005

Colin I have always looked at the data. My post of 20/5 was the second time I posted the same image, the first time was on the 16th. I have been doing "deep analysis" of the Martian surface of the past three years - and have published them too. As for the features you ask about.... By "serpentine curves" I suspect you mean the edge of the mesa, formed by a resistant layer. Some scalloped edges form by subsurface fluid sapping, others landslide activity. It would be difficult to test without ground studies. The terraces are simply the top of resistant units. As I said in my original gemorphological post on the 16th these could be due to volcanic, sedimentary or weathering features. Rounded hills result from degradation of soft materials by a range of processes including water, wind, and mass wasting. Exactly which process would probably require ground observation. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

JonClarke · May 22, 2005

Hi Telfrow It would be good if you could post the image and highlight what you mean. I think the "eyebrow" or perhaps the top of the "socket" is a south facing slope, the "pupil" is a protruding rock. Both are part of a larger alcove. The floor of this has some interesting branching patterns of light material, perhaps some sort of mass wasting deposit. Is this what you meant? Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> 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 Arthur Clarke </div>

mental_avenger · May 22, 2005

max says: Sometimes in order to help oneself, one needs to do the work oneself. TRACE THE FACE. If you want to test that the face is half lion, half man, TRACE IT....that is a beginning and definitely a valid experiment. I think that everyone here can see that, under certain conditions, a low resolution image of the infamous Cydonia Mesa resembles a human face. That is really not the issue here. High resolution images quickly dispel the image as a definite “face”, and we are left with trying to determine if the available information can be used to make a definitive determination of “artificiality’ vs “natural formation”. Clearly it cannot, otherwise this discussion would not be taking place. Therefore we are left with individual speculations about the nature (and origin) of the formation. You keep prompting other members to “trace the face”, but you provide no criteria for such an endeavor. In fact, you provide no valid scientific basis for such an endeavor. As has been pointed out many times, the “tracing” seems to be highly subjective. What to “trace” and how to determine “what to trace” appear to be intimately related to the bias of the observer. It is interesting to note that “tracings” by the “believers” appear to ignore the topographical origins of the artifacts in the images. For instance, a “dark” area, whether the result of the shadow of a prominence, the shadow of a depression, or the change in soil composition, seems to be treated the same, as long as it appears to support the agenda of the believer”. I did the work and shared my results which puts me firmly within the definition of 'scientist'. While you may consider it to be “work”, most responsible people would consider it a waste of time, under the circumstances. So far, you've only claimed to have done the work and then you've claimed that your work refutes mine. N <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space. </div>

telfrow · May 22, 2005

The floor of this has some interesting branching patterns of light material, perhaps some sort of mass wasting deposit. Thanks for the information. Sorry I wasn't more specific with the question - still suffering from jet lag, I guess. It was the area under the "pupil" I was interested in - the branching. Given the protusion of the "pupil," and the cliff face, and the fact the other side of the depression is the higher ground of the "cheek," I was curious if what we're seeing could be "fill" or "waste." The area also seems to connect to the "lion eye" on the other side. Do you think this waste area is the result of natural collapse, weathering or both? BTW, thanks again. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

yevaud · May 22, 2005

Yes, I recollect being accused of those things. The odd thing is, I have no real track record of "hounding" people, or "stalking" them, or preferentially seeking out these threads and "persecuting" people in them. And for the record, I have asked a thread to be locked *once* in 5 years. I had dropped this issue, pissed off though I was. Bad enough I get accused of that crap, but now here you are, *reposting* it in another forum, in some form of justification. Swell. Some piece of F'ing work... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

yevaud · May 22, 2005

Yes well, it's an interesting dichotomy that the post in reference was reposted to justify someone's intellectual honesty, yet the post itself is nothing but a pack of out-and-out lies. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

maxtheknife · May 22, 2005

Lol, Telfrow.... Thanx for proving my point. I think I did a pretty good job. BTW, if the FOM is artificial....what do you suppose the optimum viewing distance would be?

telfrow · May 22, 2005

Yes, you did. If you ignore the elevations and topography. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

centsworth_II · May 22, 2005

"Well, I can only say that JonClarke's work in his post of 5/20... reaches to 'masterpiece' rising to artistry or pure ART." -- colin098 You see that Maxtheknife? JonClarke IS an artist and thus qualified to speak authoritatively on the FOM. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

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

zenonmars

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

telfrow

Guest

djd1

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

telfrow

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

mental_avenger

Guest

telfrow

Guest

yevaud

Guest

yevaud

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

telfrow

Guest

centsworth_II

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page