A CIVILIZATION on MARS? 1B/200M Years Ago? (Pt. 5)

telfrow · Jun 10, 2005

Group hug...<img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> (On second thought, never mind....<img src="/images/icons/crazy.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>

yevaud · Jun 10, 2005

Epitath: "Mistakenly began to sing 'Kumbayaa' at a Biker rally..." <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 · Jun 10, 2005

Hi Telfrow... Good find. However, if it's accuracy we're after, we still need much larger scale prints. RCH used prints that were big.... I'm guessing at least as big as a drafting table. He even says "much larger scale reproductions" to verify measurements. What you've posted is the same siimplified graphic representation that he uses in the "Cydonia Geometry Relationship Model" picture. (sorry, don't have the pic handy...) How are you making out, Yevaud?

maxtheknife · Jun 10, 2005

Lololol <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

maxtheknife · Jun 10, 2005

you can use a 9-iron to sink a hole-in-one You can? So THAT'S the club I need to use... <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

yevaud · Jun 10, 2005

Well, two items: GIS software is terribly expensive, so unless you want to spring for many thousands of dollars... I don't know about recent images. However, if the 1975 image has been processed, then there's little point in trying to repeat it on our own. NASA likely did everything we would do anyways. Hence my post (above) about the images on that site, and the comment made by the site's owner. On the flip side: I can obtain a freeware version of ARC, but in the grand scheme of things, Paintshop is probably just as adequate. Still trying to figure a way around the cost issue and locate recent images though. Maybe I can talk an old prof. into allowing me access to the GIS lab... <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 · Jun 10, 2005

Telf: As for the point that's being made, I know what it is...I understand what it is...(I think)...that the only rectified images have been produced by Carlotto, Torun, TVF, et. al., and not by NASA. If I'm right, could we please move on? No, that's not the point being made. I don't think that's true.... <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> I'm surprised you haven't figured it out yet. How you making out Yevaud?

maxtheknife · Jun 10, 2005

Lol,,,, Forget the cost.... Can you get the necessary data from NASA?

yevaud · Jun 10, 2005

That is the issue. To find that out, I've been trying to get a professor of mine on the phone to ask him. He'd have the contacts better than I would. So far, nothing yet. I hope he didn't take off on sabbattical for the summer. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

telfrow · Jun 10, 2005

Max, I'm too busy right now to play games with this. Could you please document the point and let's move on? Edit: Make the point, tell me where I can find the image(s) and let's move on... <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 10, 2005

BTW: Any progress on the full context of the Malin quote? <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 10, 2005

RCH used prints that were big.... I'm guessing at least as big as a drafting table. He even says "much larger scale reproductions" to verify measurements. What you've posted is the same siimplified graphic representation that he uses in the "Cydonia Geometry Relationship Model" picture. (sorry, don't have the pic handy...) I've got that on the drive. So you're saying we can't proceed with this discussion unless we're all working off large draft prints? Even if we find them...we're all supposed to order them and work on them independently? How do we share information? How do we compare work? So what you're saying is, the discussion that has taken place here has reached an end...we can't do any other work, or discuss our positions, unless we're working off those prints. Just a quick question...why wasn't this issue and your position concerning the orthorectified images brought up in - say - Part One? And why did you let us (me) waste the time we (I) did producing my side of the arguement when you knew (apparently) you were going to dismiss everything we (I) did on that basis? (If I sound a little miffed, I am....sorry. You would be too, 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>

telfrow · Jun 10, 2005

And, one last time before my training day begins: If what you're saying is correct, why don't any of the images used on TEM to advance the RCH arguement carry the notation: "Calibrated to orthorectified image XXXXX."? They're presented without any such notations, which leads to the conclusion he is working off the readily available images we've been using. Also, I've heard and seen in print RCH contend all the evidence is on the site, and offer an open invitation to believers and skeptics to examine the evidence and reach their own conclusions....he's even gone as far as telling skeptics to use what's on the site to try and disprove his theory. Again, if what you're saying is true, it's a pretty neat little trick...IMO, it makes his statement disingenuous - at best. <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>

najab · Jun 10, 2005

>Again, if what you're saying is true, it's a pretty neat little trick...IMO, it makes his statement disingenuous - at best.Sounds like you are just now reaching the conclusion I came to a while ago...you may have noticed I dropped out of the discussion? That's the reason.

telfrow · Jun 10, 2005

Slow learner, I guess. <img src="/images/icons/frown.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>

najab · Jun 10, 2005

>Slow learner, I guess.No, just less of an cynic than I am. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

zenonmars · Jun 10, 2005

Good morning tel... Interesting webpage, to say the least! In your post: "According to this site http://www.marsearthconnection.com/proof5.html the following photo is the "original NASA 35A72 Mosaic-Orthographically corrected print..." What is very cool is the quote just under that photo's pop-up box; "This is the original NASA 35A72 Mosaic-Orthographically corrected print. It has within it all the keys to Bart Jordan's thesis. Unless one has physically contructed a model directly over a NASA enlarged photo 35A72, there's no way one could come up with the proof of the numbers and forms." Man, I don't know how many times over the years I wanted to make this sort of sculpture, JUST FOR FUN!!: <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · Jun 10, 2005

Unless one has physically contructed a model directly over a NASA enlarged photo 35A72, there's no way one could come up with the proof of the numbers and forms." So I take it someone from TEM has a model in their office or home to refer to when they post pictures? Otherwise, according to this, photos (orthrectified or not) won't prove the "proof of the numbers and forms." <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 10, 2005

Yes, tel "according to this". I don't particularly agree with that statement, but I sure would like that model in my office! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · Jun 10, 2005

Just checking. You can't blame a guy for trying...<img src="/images/icons/wink.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>

telfrow · Jun 10, 2005

We've already done the overlay on the orthorectified map, Max. Unless now you're saying this isn't it. (Image from TEM) <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_lost_packet_ · Jun 10, 2005

So, since the image that appears on NASA's site is not the original image that first appeared there, which is the image that RCH et al use to prove their numbers, then where is the first, original image? I assume, this is related to BAMF? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Jun 10, 2005

telfrow - We've already done the overlay on the orthorectified map, Max. Unless now you're saying this isn't it. (Image from TEM) Methinks the mysterious word "BAMF" is about to come up. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

maxtheknife · Jun 10, 2005

Read the bottom caption, Telfrow..... It says: diagram of relationships observed in Cydonia by Hoagland, Torun and others. This simplified graphic representation is intended for illustrative purposes only. Any attempt to verify the claimed values should be based upon larger scale, orthographically-rectified reproductions The gentleman in your previous link said the same thing. Bigger is better and more accurate.... Can we get the necessary data to confirm RCH's, et al,,,, geometric model from NASA? That is the question on the table..... According to Yevaud, it should be readily available. Sorry, I've been busy today..... <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" />

yevaud · Jun 10, 2005

Eh. That's like 2 "F's" there, buddy. Hoser. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> You know, I have a question for everyone: I see these supposed relationships between various objects. Now the way I was taught, simplicity is always key. So I look at these dozens of lines linking things to each other, and I ask myself, why? Why? The single thing no one's mentioned or really discussed is, why should these relationships be important. Are we all wasting our time scrutinizing chance alignments, thinking they have significance? I am beginning to think that these are way too complex and "busy" to be artificial. Can anyone answer me why an ancient Martian civilization would consider some pile of rocks to be so important that they'd align things so precisely with respect to them? And why so many? Where is that elegant simplicity one would expect? Why? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

A CIVILIZATION on MARS? 1B/200M Years Ago? (Pt. 5)

telfrow

Guest

yevaud

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

yevaud

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

yevaud

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

najab

Guest

telfrow

Guest

najab

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

telfrow

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

yevaud

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page