Mars the anomalies The moon too.

[MeteorWayne]

hence the ellipses at the end of my last post. I just didn't know where to go <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[zenonmars]

lost, <font color="yellow">"You have GOT to be freaking kidding me. Get a grip, seriously. Let me guess, it's only visible when YOU want to see it."</font><br /><br />No, lost, i have never seen it. Except on processed NASA data sets. <br /><br />Jon, if Andrew wants my respect, he can knock off this stuff:<br /><font color="yellow">"i think you are just all wasting your time trying to tell the "anomalie believers' the truth. <br />You know & I know that there are no glass domes, huge towers, etc. <br />This sort of thing & conspiracy nonsense makes me extremely angry & upset."</font><br /><br />However, I respect his right to post it. I am fairly thick-skinned. I guess I am amazed that I am automatically included in that "tin-hat" catagory. But maybe slowly......very slowly......I will convince some folks that this is a serious study for at least a few of us. <br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[sunforger]

What we need to do is get Dragon in office, have him do his time, then blow all this stuff outta the water. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" />

 

[MeteorWayne]

Actually, if you know Dragon, he treads very carefully in astronomical areas where he is unsure.<br /><br />On the other hand, with his obsession with common sense, he's a bolide in the political community <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />This thread is not worthy of any seroius attention. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[zenonmars]

And therefore, I am requesting all such tin-hat discussion to jump over here:<br /><br />Link <br /><br /><i>**edited long URL into a link to prevent it from pushing the post outside the limits of some browsers. Please do not post long URL's. Convert them into short links. The format is [url =http://uplink.space.com/ubbthreads.php] Link [/url] without the space between ‘url’ and ‘=’.**<br />Come on folks, this isn’t rocket science.</i><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<font color="yellow">ZenOnMars - And therefore, I am requesting all such tin-hat discussion to jump over here:</font><br /><br />Why? This thread is basically one large tin-hat in and of itself. Besides, IIRC, there are still unanswered questions here. Do you intend to keep up with this thread or are you ditching it?<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[mental_avenger]

Zen: <font color="yellow"> No, lost, i have never seen it. Except on processed NASA data sets. </font><br /><br />I am genuinely interested to know what you consider “processed†NASA data sets. If you are referring to the raw data, there is no processing. If you are referring to any published NASA image, they are all highly processed. Without between 6 and 10 separate processing steps, there is no image to view.<br /><br />Zen: <font color="yellow"> I guess I am amazed that I am automatically included in that "tin-hat" catagory. </font><br /><br />Not by me. Far from it. I am simply amazed that you are so willing to accept what has often been proven to be bogus interpretations of certain images, as sufficient justification to vigorously pursue the search for ET Alien connections to what appear to be natural formations. While I would love to see proof of ET Aliens anywhere in this solar system, I think a more rational reasonable approach would be more productive in the long term.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p style="margin-top:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space.</strong></font></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

ZenOnMars:<br />As in those nuts who said 'we entered Iraq under false pretense looking for WMDs that weren't there, pretended to create democracy when simply securing one of the world's biggest oil supplies to ensure that that oil would never get pumped in order to drive US gas over the $3.00/gallon mark"? Yeah. Those types are loonies.<br /><br />Me:<br />Its one thing to suspect a conspiracy between humans involving human activity and the concensus of public opinion on general government wrongdoing suggests to me that this is not a nuts vs skeps issue. But its an entirely different thing to suggest conspiracy such as ET coverups. I have always said I cannot know for certain there is not an ET coverup, I'm just not convinced and if there is one person who was unable to convince me of anything, its Hoagland.<br /><br />This because I first heard of him in the late 1980s from a book he wrote about the face on mars. He came across to me as very knowledgeable and with a strong understanding of how the scientific process works. I took the face seriously until I started questioning some of the claims he was making even then.<br /><br />Fast forward to today and he has made what I consider to be outrageous claims with poor quality evidence to back them. incredibly huge monoliths on the moon? One of Saturns moons being an ET base and so on. This looke suspicious to me. Suggestive that he wrote his FOM book and after it sold for awhile, he had to come up with something to stay in his self made profession. He has a small industry of his own and if the picture of him and the woman was taken at his home. He's not doin all that bad.<br /><br />My other big problem with Hoagland is that he alledges NASA is covering up his big discoveries and yet without NASA, there could be no Hoagland as we know him today. His profession as it were, depends on images only NASA can provide at this time. Hoagland himself cannot prove even his own allegations and so he relies on NASA imagery for his whole <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

<i> have never seen it. Except on processed NASA data sets.</i><br /><br />A reproduction in a book, even by NASA of a poor quality Soviet print is not a data set. It is a poor quality reproduction.<br /><br />Don Mitchell's data is much closer being a data set. There is some metadata available and the image numbers correspond to the actual returned frames.<br /><br />The only Zond 3 data set held by NASA is this one. http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/MasterCatalog?ds=PSPG-00621 Have you seen it?<br /><br />Noite that the images are found in a translation of a book. The images are thus many stages removed from the original data. <br /><br />Jon<br /><br /> <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>

 

[zenonmars]

lost: <font color="yellow">"are you ditching it?"</font><br /><br />No, my friend, I am going nowhere.<br /><br />Fast. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />But I will chime in with relevant info as I deem needed. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[zenonmars]

Jon: <font color="yellow">"We have only Hoagland’s say so that this is a tower. That does not inspire confidence, given his history of misrepresentation ..... Why should I trust anything this guy says, without corroborating evidence? Why do you trust him?"</font><br /><br />Because, Jon, Richard has consistently listened to and consulted <i>professionals</i> in all fields of science, especially when dealing with NASA image data.<br /><br />Take geologists, for example. You Jon, are a geologist, correct? So is Ron Nicks. <br />Now I am sure you know this fellow, and probably disagree with his every idea, and yet it would be kind to at least <i>admit</i> that eliciting opinions like these is the prudent, SCIENTIFIC thing to do:<br /><br />While you guys dwell on <i>"Hoagland sees tanks and toasters on Mars"</i> criticisms, you never research the "expert" opinions solicited by TEM to support these "wild claims" This is a portion of what geologist Ron Nicks wrote about the annomalies that the Pathfinder rover captured on its mission to the "ancient flood plain":<br /><br /><font color="yellow">"Nature produces some amazing and wondrous geometry and symmetry, but for the most part those geometries and symmetries tend to occur singularly or at best as a doublet i.e. two symmetries or geometries within the same item. For example: A tree, in general has obvious bilateral symmetry and when cut down one only has to view the rings of the trunk to see well developed circular geometry. Yet, one of the items that I chose to group as a 'canister' has orthogonal symmetry (rectangular handles--horizontally opposed), radial or circular symmetry, and a parabolic nose at the end of a cylindrical object with a base at right angles to the longitudinal axis of the item. <b>If these things are indeed a byproduct of some poorly known geologic process, I am at a loss to identify a terrestrial analog.</b><br /><br />Continuing, I looked closely at later images such as 80904, and to my dis</font> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<font color="yellow">ZenOnMars - While you guys dwell on "Hoagland sees tanks and toasters on Mars" criticisms, you never research the "expert" opinions solicited by TEM to support these "wild claims" </font><br /><br />Are you saying that you believe there are tanks and toasters on Mars? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[yevaud]

<i>While you guys dwell on "Hoagland sees tanks and toasters on Mars" criticisms, <b>you never research the "expert" opinions solicited by TEM to support these "wild claims"</b></i><br /><br />Now how would you know that? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

Ron is entitled to his opinion, just like everyonbe else. Whether be can convince fellow scientists depends on the evidence. Show us the evidence, please!<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>

 

[telfrow]

Ron Nicks of Terracon. Consulting geologists.<br /><br />So, Zen, since you've offered this individual up as an expert, please provide more information on him. What is his area of expertise? Educational background? Credentials? Has he published anything outside TEM? If so, where? When? Googling him brings up only the TEM articles and conferences.<br /><br />Here's the photo from the Twin Peaks article.<br /><br />I'm sorry, Zen, but I find it difficult to believe a <i>serious</i> geologist would label something he saw in a photo as "pointy stuff." <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <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>

 

[a_lost_packet_]

Hmm..<br /><br />"Pointy Stuff." Intriguing. Yes, I see it now. This definitely should be investigated by professionals. Preferably, the guys in short white jackets.<br /><br />This is exactly the type of "evidence" RCH proudly displays on Enterpri$eMi$$ion - "pointy stuff." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

Yep, no mention of "Ron Nicks" on Google scholar except this stuff. No mention at all in Georef, the standard geological database. No mention in the Terracon web site. Maybe "Ron Nicks" is a pseudonym. The young earthers do that sort of trick from time to time. Maybe TEM people do it too. Probably keeps them from suffering the consequences of publishing such "research". Of course it makes it impossible to determine their real expertise. Perhaps just as well.<br /><br />Jon<br /><br /> <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]

Extraordinary! Fancy all those PhD's on the pathfinder team missing the earth-shaking implications of "pointy stuff" in their images. It should have been a paper in Nature.<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>

 

[garfieldthecat]

Ok, a little game concerning those highly symmetric rocks impossible to form naturally (I still don’t see any symmetric form in those blurry pics of Martian rocks but whatever…)<br /><br />See this shiny, metal looking formation made of perfect cubes (definitely pointy stuff)? Wonder what it is? Maybe some clue about an ancient civilisation covering the earth, or maybe pieces of an abandoned spacecraft?<br />

 

[garfieldthecat]

some more

 

[garfieldthecat]

and to finish... the one who finds gets an honorific geology degree <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />

 

[yevaud]

Golden Feldspar or Fool's Gold. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[garfieldthecat]

And the award goes to Yevaud <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> !<br /><br />These are crystals of pyrite and bismuth, 100% naturally formed and yet pretty common on our good old Earth. This just to illustrate that geologists have to deal with geometric forms on a very regular basis (actually, look at a piece of rock in a petrographic microscope, you’ll be surrounded with geometric forms of all kinds), so a geologist who would find odd to discover geometric forms on Martian rocks would be a weird one.<br /><br />Secondly, I’ve been looking on Hoagland’s site (yeah, I’ve got that much of curiosity <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />) to find those proofs of “artifactsâ€. All I found were blurry enlargements of rocks from martian missions’ photos, with quite astonishing interpretations. Give you some of titles of it, just for fun: “the safeâ€, “the bowlâ€, the stoveâ€, and my favourite of all: “An Unmistakable Machined Fittingâ€!!!<br />http://www.enterprisemission.com/spirit2.htm<br /><br />Doesn’t it remind you of some old interpretations of Mars pictures (Schiaparelli comes to my mind)?<br /><br />

 

[3488]

Hi garfieldthecat.<br /><br />I have a nice piece of pyrites like the example you showed on the third image you posted.<br /><br />Hi Yevaud, Jon Clarke, telfrow & a_lost_packet.<br /><br />I agree with you. A 'geologist' that calls rocks on Mars imaged by Mars Pathfinder as 'Pointy Stuff', <br />tanks & toasters, etc does not fill me with any confidence what so ever either. <br /><br />The labelling on that Mars Pathfinder image you found <br />telfrow, is a real hoot. It is so funny, or it would be if <br />the reasoning behind it was not so pathetic.<br /><br />'Pointy Stuff' what ever next????????<br /><br />I despair, I really do.<br /><br />That rock labled 'mechanism' to me looks like a large basalt boulder.<br /><br />Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<font color="yellow">Jon Clarke - Yep, no mention of "Ron Nicks" on Google scholar except this stuff. No mention at all in Georef, the standard geological database. No mention in the Terracon web site. Maybe "Ron Nicks" is a pseudonym. The young earthers do that sort of trick from time to time. Maybe TEM people do it too. Probably keeps them from suffering the consequences of publishing such "research". Of course it makes it impossible to determine their real expertise. Perhaps just as well. </font><br /><br />Ron Nicks is an actual person and a member of at least one professional geologist association. I tracked down his name, his affiliation and his home address (it was included in his membership information.) For privacy reasons, I will not mention any of these in this forum. However, if you would like that information since it is within the public record and you are a responsible professional, I can PM it to you per your request.<br /><br />Basically, it appears he only works for the company listed, is a member of a statewide geological association and apparently restricts himself to commercial work. <br /><br />Of course, absolutely none of that has anything to do with nor does it support his assumption in discovering "pointy things" on Mars. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>