• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Interesting features on Mars?

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Goggs Mackay

Goggs Mackay

Administrator
Staff member
_62085970_para_nasa_624.jpg


Look at photo on the right - just to the right of the larger part of the lander, the ground is showing some strange rows of regular 'indentations' on the surface. Also, check out the smaller lander object and go up at about 0130 on the clock face. There are two 'dots' which could be two similar sized holes in the ground. Now look slowly directly above the two dots and a few features of the indentations line up perfectly.

It's like there is some evidence of something artificial?

Anyone else see it all? Any explanation/agreements/disagreements?
 
I pulled the raw image from the NASA website. I will be looking into the pic after my dads funeral.some one should monitor the enterpise mission website to watch for digital trickery by hogland.
 
goggsmackay said:
It's like there is some evidence of something artificial?
Click to expand...

I think it is unlikely. When you are looking at these photographs or photographs of the moon you have to remember how the lack of any sense of scale can really be disorienting and deceiving. You are looking at mountain ranges there and the dots are gigantic.
 
goggsmackay said:
Don't spoil my fun!
Click to expand...

I'm sorry! It's obviously a refinery the size of Connecticut.

I've spent a little time chasing some of this stuff and I've discovered what I think is a major contributor to the "artificial object" notion. Most if not all of these objects are found or thought to be found in large photos taken from great distances of alien landscapes under sometimes stark and unusual lighting conditions. The objects are almost always gargantuan in scale. My working theory is that viewing photos taken at different times under different conditions should show them to be natural formations. This has been the case so far. So far, everything that I thought might be indications of artificiality has looked otherwise from a different angle when I can find another photograph of it.
 
You are of course correct. The natural world is full of examples of very large scale fractal geography.
The bits in the Mars photo are nonetheless quite strange - shapes on a very large scale which don't seem to be fractal in order. I was listening to a C2C about fossils on Mars? Now, I don't know how anyone can judge something to be a fossil by looking at phots of the ground. Some of the phots from Mars missions of the last decade do show some very weird looking rocks and stuff - when I look at where Curiosity landed I'm think 'Boring'! I know they have geological data to gather and experiments looking for biological signs of life but there has to be far more interesting places on Mars than some large featureless crater?
 
Back
Top