A CIVILIZATION on MARS? 1B/200M Years Ago? (Pt. 4)

telfrow · Jun 3, 2005

...the angle from the Teardrop, to the apex of the D&M, to the little ruined tetrahedron has disappeared. Nope, but that presupposes a teardrop exists on the FOM...and that's an issue we haven't finished addressing. Can you provide a high res photo that shows the exact location? If you're using the pic I think you're using, RCH does not indicate the D&M's axis of symmetry. The photos I used are clearly labeled and all came from TEM. I clearly cite the article. If you're trying to suggest that the angle of 19.5 disappears, I respectfully object. It does not. And I submit it does Max, and I've done my part of the work to demonstrate why I believe that's so. Now it's incumbent on you to demonstrate the angles are, indeed, still there....and at the other locations. <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>

zenonmars · Jun 3, 2005

Oh Jon Jon Jon.......... The words "Phil Plaitt" have not crossed my lips in my entire SDC history until I responded to Lost's exchange with Max, about 2 pages back. It is verifiable fact that Phil has refused to debate Richard on live radio, and he has said that the particulates of the Enterprise Mission's work are too numerous and that he is unfamiliar with much of what Richard would bring up in such a debate. So najaB does not threaten to ban me again, I will simply add that the above information seems incongruous with "Phill Plait has carefully researched Hoagland" and yet, there it remains. "But all this is a diversion isn't?" Ah, perhaps, but it is Lost's and Max's if it is. Max seems to reference Plait quite a bit. Proably from the old Iapetus threads, when Plait was quoted continuously by the "old guard" here. I personally don't pay much attention to fellows who are afraid of public debate. "The issue is not Phil Plait" Ya got that right, buddy. "Attacking Phill, just like you calling me a data weasel or Max calling me a pseudoscientist, is called shooting the messenger." Snap out of it please, Jon I have NEVER called you a data weasel. I jokingly called telfrow a data weasel when he "ransomed" an upsidedown image of the D&M. It was a giggle, and he has responded in kind with the cutest little weasel picts! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> And as for Max, if I were him I would use the phrase "scientician" or "Professional skeptic", or "disinformation artist". But I am not him. Cannot speak for him. Shooting the messenger? Wow. The messenger is Richard Hoagland, and the question is are you guys EVER gonna run out of ammo? "You will <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · Jun 3, 2005

Zen: It's pretty simple, really. If you want to talk about those points, open another thread. That way, you can discuss them without "disrupting the normal flow of dialogue" in this thread. And, if you - or Max - want to discuss Plait, open another thread. <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 · Jun 3, 2005

BTW Max... I respectfully object It's not a legal proceeding. There is no judge and jury. Don't you mean "disagree?" <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 · Jun 3, 2005

Yep... still there. Nice try though <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

JonClarke · Jun 3, 2005

I second that. Zen You are being inconsistent. You are the one disrupting the flow with red herrings, not me. If you wish to discuss them, start new threads. On this thread discuss the issues, which is the evidence for artificiality. So far it hasn't stood up. What additional evidence can you come up with? 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>

maxtheknife · Jun 3, 2005

Like you don't know what I'm referring to as the 'teardrop'? Spare me <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> The photos I used are clearly labeled and all came from TEM. I clearly cite the article. Yeah, you know I posted before the pic came up.... <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Here's the other one.... 19.5 is still intact.

JonClarke · Jun 3, 2005

Max Let's go there? Good idea. Mind you I would settle for going anywhere on Mars, so I'm not fussy. As it is not likely to happen in our lifetimes, we have to settle with the evidence we have. So let's work with than. There is a fair bit already - Mariner 9, Viking, TES, MOC, GRS, MOLA, HEND, THEMIS definitely, HRSC, OMEGA, MARSIS probably in the near futue, maybe SHARAD and MRO imagery soon after. That should be enough to work with. Thanks for the Erjavec and Nicks reference. I have read some Erjavec's stuff, but it is an work, so I am not sure whether this is one of them. Do you have a link? 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>

telfrow · Jun 3, 2005

Like you don't know what I'm referring to as the 'teardrop'? Spare me. Being condescending isn't going to get us anywhere, Max. Of course I know what you’re referring to. But, if you’re going to contend that the angle of 19.5 degrees still exists (your photos aren't up yet), we have an opportunity, by agreeing on the exact location of the “teardrop” and the other points in question, to determine exact locations and exact angles using high res images. <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 · Jun 4, 2005

Lol, Jon... I would have to insist on Cydonia then <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> I think everyone should read it.... but sorry folks, I can't link it.... I'll break it up into two sections..... You already have the intro and conclusion w/ refrences.... Here's part 1 of the body..... Admittedly, we were unable to completely eschew the technology of the day because the rationale is developed on the basis of NASA imagery and Geographic Information System plotting techniques. Be that as it may, we began and closed using readily available data developed by others, and logically synthesized the data in such a manner as to reasonably assert that the explanations for many features on the Cydonia region of Mars differ greatly from the explanations given by our public agencies and supported by the mainstream media. Just a cursory inspection of the data reveals that geologic and geomorphic processes on Mars are highly complex, and not as readily explained as some would have us believe. Not surprisingly, our findings are not new. On the contrary, it will be shown that many credible serious investigators have already demonstrated the efficacy of our interpretations; interpretations that for whatever reason seem to be summarily dismissed at best, and, in the modern day tradition, "debunked" at worst. We are told by NASA that the Cydonia features are nothing more than exhumed, eroded remnants of a prior terrain. As the reader will discover, there is much evidence to show that the features in evidence at Cydonia are the products of more than simple denudation. Regardless of their origin, the features and their relationship to one another spatially and temporally are sufficiently complex to warrant closer scrutiny. Only through continued serious evaluation can we come to understand the Cydonia features and, perhaps more importantly, translate a heightened understanding to reevaluation of some of earth's geomorphic processes. The Cydonia R

maxtheknife · Jun 4, 2005

Part 2.... The Cliff (N, M-12) is an elongate mesa 18 km N65E of the Face, apparently overlaying an ejecta blanket of a 3 km impact crater (M-13). The Cliff contains a thin, almost linear central ridge running the length of it. NASA has relied on the Cliff's relation to the nearby impact crater (M-B) in an attempt to explain its origins. Mr Q (McDaniel, 1993) has stated the adjacent crater to be a tuff ring or similar volcanic feature. This statement is erroneous on even the most basic level. Cursory observation of this crater immediately indicates its formation from impact. The impact is surrounded by rampart-style ejecta ("Yuty-type") and displays all of the features of a rampart crater, including characteristic overlapping sheets of ejecta with lobate margins, raised rims along the ejectamenta's outer edges and the extension of ejecta about two crater diameters away from the impact. Though it has been determined to date in this analysis of Cydonia that there is more geomorphic evidence suggesting (at least isolated) volcanic activity than recognized in previous studies, this crater is of unquestionable impact origin. Malin (McDaniel, 1993) indicates that the Cliff is a product of stratigraphic superposition and differential erosion. In this current study, the detailed analysis of the variety of geomorphic features in Cydonia does not support a primary reliance on differential erosion as a means of landform development. Evidence of differential erosion is present in Cydonia, but not to the degree that Malin suggests. Additionally, if the Cliff is a relic mesa derived from an extensive preexisting surface, there is no supporting evidence for that, either in the crater or on its ejectamenta. Also, no evidence has been found for the remnants of this preexisting surface in association with any of the other ejecta blankets of significant impact craters ( /> 1 km) in this area. To date, the Cliff appears to be an isolated event. Another argument

maxtheknife · Jun 4, 2005

You're right..... I'm sorry.... things are gettin hot in here. "Who are you that is so wise in the ways of Science? How do you KNOW she is a witch?" "We are no longer the Knights who say NEE! We are now the Knights who say ecky ecky ecky brrrrrr ding! Bring us a SHRUBBERY!" "It's but a flesh wound! Come back here, I'll BITE YOUR KNEES OFF!" <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

JonClarke · Jun 4, 2005

Thanks Max. Do you have an attribution for the material? 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>

bobw · Jun 4, 2005

Thanks for the info on ventifacts, Jon. I'll look for some plates and make a fool of myself again later <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Jun 4, 2005

a_lost_packet_ -...To be quite honest, I don't think either would have wished to put this much work into discussing one particular of RCH's idea.... Maxtheknife - That my friends, is the problem. That stupid/childish attitude puts them firmly into the category of 'pseudoscientist'. You guys cannot rationally defend this accusation, you have not since I made it way back in Iapetus part 1. You can only elevate yourselves above it as Telfrow has done by actually doing the work. Extraordinary implications require extraordinary efforts. Plain and simple. ... Max, let's put my statement in the context in which it was written; Specifically: a_lost_packet_-To be quite honest, I don't think either would have wished to put this much work into discussing one particular of RCH's idea(s). [sic] For good reason, I might add. .... Plait's unraveling of RCH's ideas is very specific and does not require intimate knowledge of the mythology. (Emphasis added.) There. That's much better in context isn't it? You don't have to have specific knowledge of all of the RCH-mythology involved in order to offer commentary on his ideas. You just have to have knowledge of the area that you are choosing to investigate and be able to substantiate your criticism or support. In Phil's case, he more than substantiated his criticisms of RCH without having to reconstruct the mythology. I am not trying to derail the thread. I am only responding to your post in which I felt you had taken my statement out of context. In the interest of keeping this thread on track, let's drop the Plait subject and move forward. Phile Plait's commentary regarding RCH is not being used by anyone, that I know of, in discussing the case of "artificiality" in this thread. All work being done, to the best of my knowledge, is the sole property of <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

telfrow · Jun 4, 2005

As you said, Max, nice try. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> That's an interesting take on the situation. One that is contrary to RCH's theory that the 19.5 degree angles are "embedded" in the geometry of Cydonia, specifically in the geometry of the "pyramid," but interesting. Let’s be honest - you and I both know that the 19.5 degree angle from the "pyramid" to the "FOM" is the result of the extension of the "arm" of the "pentagon" on the "pyramid." Specifically, the line from the [extrapolated] “peak” of the “pyramid” to the “tear” on the FOM. So now you're saying those angles can exist independent of the actual geometry of the "pyramid" – as long as they emanate from the “peak.” No offense intended Max, but that makes creating 19.5 degree angles pretty simple, doesn’t it? You'll be able to pull 19.5 degree angles from anywhere at Cydonia and use them to support the theory without the burden of that pesky pyramid geometry (A little flash back to an earlier thread <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />.). So here are a few 19.5 degree angles to get you started (actually they're about twenty degrees, but close enough, eh?). The red ones emanate from the “pyramid,” the yellow ones from “Tholus” and the blue ones are just some random 19.5 degree angles I found laying around the plain. (Note none of the lines are "random" - they all intersect a feature. But that could be because given enough distance, they were bound to intersect something sooner or later...) <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 · Jun 4, 2005

Telfrow: Let’s be honest - you and I both know that the 19.5 degree angle from the "pyramid" to the "FOM" is the result of the extension of the "arm" of the "pentagon" on the "pyramid." Specifically, the line from the [extrapolated] “peak” of the “pyramid” to the “tear” on the FOM. Notice the pentagon overlay is not on the image you posted. Like I said, I'm vexed that RCH hasn't made this seemingly major correction. My take is not contrary to RCH's theory about 19.5 embedded.... it's still there. The only thing that changes is the function of the axis of symmetry for the D&M. That cannot be denied (at least w/ current data). We all agreed on the placement of your pentagon overlay....why's that? 'Cause it fit. That alone puts the odds strongly in favor of AOC. Telfrow: So now you're saying those angles can exist independent of the actual geometry of the "pyramid" – as long as they emanate from the “peak.” Yes,,,, it was the peak that was crucial wasn't it? Not the axis of symmetry. An angle requires 3 points, which are,,,, the ruined tetrahedron, the Teardrop, and the APEX of the D&M, which has not changed! Further, the 19.5 angles that are relevant to the discussion are the ones that pass through or are tangent to other anomalous features in the area.... like the Teardrop and the 'ruined tetrahedron'. How many of the lines that you drew pass through or are tangent to other possible artificial objects? Those are the interesting ones w/ regards to AOC and ought to be scrutinized. It is not a requirement that every interval of 19.5 have significance. Incidently, maybe this will help our earlier discussion... note: True north and angle approximated by Maxdnyf. I tried to scan the pic w/ true measurements, but it was barely readable.....

maxtheknife · Jun 4, 2005

Whoops, again.... For like the thrid time,,,, this is the pic I mean to post! lolol <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

maxtheknife · Jun 4, 2005

Jon... Re: Attribution... already noted. A GEOLOGIC/GEOMORPHIC INVESTIGATIVE APPROACH TO SOME OF THE ENIGMATIC LANDFORMS IN CYDONIA James L. Erjavec and Ronald R. Nicks

telfrow · Jun 4, 2005

'Cause it fit. That alone puts the odds strongly in favor of AOC. “Fit” is a relative term in this case Max. It lined up pretty well with E; but doesn’t follow the ridge line or terminate at the center of D; terminates “nowhere” at C; B is “extrapolated” and may not exist; and A isn’t even close to following the apparent ridge line. And don’t forget – the “peak” is “extrapolated” as well. Again, you and I have very different definitions of “fit,” my friend. <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 · Jun 4, 2005

Lost... I go into specific detail itemizing exactly how unspecific Plait is. He's all talk and zero work. Hence, this little exercise.

maxtheknife · Jun 4, 2005

Well, by all means.... Change the scenario and see if it works. The anchor points we all agreed on is working so far... That's all that's requried to substantiate AOC. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

telfrow · Jun 4, 2005

Well, by all means.... Change the scenario and see if it works. Want to be a little more specific there Max? I'm sorry, but you lost me with that one. <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>

bobw · Jun 4, 2005

Max, I think Jon was looking for the journal in which the attributed material was published. I have read that the quality of a scientific paper is directly propprtional to the number of others who cite it. I pasted the title into google, with quotation marks, and only got two hits. Is this from Nature or something? MARTIAN REVELATION RADIO SHOW 3-1-04 GUESTS: JIM ERJAVIC, FRANK KNIZE ... Erjavec, JL and Nicks, RR, 1996, A Geologic/Geomorphic Investigative Approach to Some of the Enigmatic Landforms in Cydonia, in The Monuments of Mars, ... www.martianrevelation.com/radio55.html - 19k - Cached - Similar pages Planetary Research ... Erjavec, Jim "A Geologic/Geomorphic Investigative Approach to Some of the Enigmatic Landforms in Cydonia" (with Ronald R. Nicks), a chapter in The Case for the ... db2.cyberweb1.com/21stcenturyradio/tree/tree.asp?Cat=12 - 41k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages Martianrevelation and cyberweb1? They're not my idea of reliable sources. I will not even surf there for fear of trojans. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · Jun 4, 2005

Further, the 19.5 angles that are relevant to the discussion are the ones that pass through or are tangent to other anomalous features in the area.... like the Teardrop and the 'ruined tetrahedron'. How many of the lines that you drew pass through or are tangent to other possible artificial objects? Those are the interesting ones w/ regards to AOC and ought to be scrutinized. Max, I think you missed, or ignored <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />, the point of my post of the Cydonia map with the angles on it. If your only criteria is that an angle be 19.5 (20) degrees, you can pretty much find them anywhere if the area involved is large enough and there are a sufficent number of targets. For example, here's a sat photo of Dasht-e Kevir (Great Salt Desert) in Iran. <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>

A CIVILIZATION on MARS? 1B/200M Years Ago? (Pt. 4)

telfrow

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

telfrow

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

bobw

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

telfrow

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

telfrow

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

telfrow

Guest

bobw

Guest

telfrow

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page