Mars: Ancient Art Discovered

The photo you posted doesnt show 3_D by either red/cyan nor polarized lens 3-D glasses. Ive got both cause we use them for topo maps and reservoir analyses.

The photo in the article of the "head" with a bonnet" is just a flat surfaced concretion/ Im thinking that its a Na Sulphate or CA.Al Sulphate (sorta like gypsum) and its weathered out of its matrix and is laying there in the wind. I see the pock markings on the top and a layered look in the area that looks like a bonnet.

Whats your opinion? Do you feel that this is proof of a bonnet wearing race of aliens who have a deep need to create statuary of their women?

They coulda done a better job


WAIT, They are cave dwelling bonnet wearing ancient ones whove learned to live off the blueberry pellets.


Remember the "fossil" that was displayed in the rock from a Rover photo? That one was jiggered by some wag to enhance a shadow that made the imprint look like a spirifer. Then JPL came through with the real fotos from a number of different angles and views.

DO you actually think that all those scientists at Ames, Houston, Livermore, U of CAl, and JPL are in on some plot to keep this information from you that aliens are great artists besides being technologically advanced? Cmon,

I know a couple and most of them are just like you and me, they have hobbies, are listeners to Howard STern, like/or hate Rush Limbaugh, have families and like to drive fast. They couldnt get together to keep a secret about someones affair, let alone alien life.

The more I look at the "Bonnet lady" the more Im convinced that its a concretion , just like a storm roller in Devonian shales or sherulites and septaria.

Yes it is.
The 3D anaglyphs are at the Proof site.
There are two different 3D views of "bonnet lady" on the first page there.
You must click the thumbnails to see them.



I do actually think, that they are forbidden to talk to the press about such matters. This is a standard procedure in most companies and organizations.

Since you have 3D glasses, it would be interesting to hear your opinion after you will have a chance to look at the proof site http://marslife.us/proof/

Best,

es

what nonsense. can't you make your point without lying?

So? In June and July of '04 you tried to flog the same stuff. Hint: it's still BS.

There is a series of journal articles about these things. Noone has "inconclusively" shown that many of these concretions are direct evidence of alen handiwork. Noone has tried to hide anything either. The fact that the Rover photos are all available invites anyones comments, including the squirrely ones.
What weve been able to see so far are examples of specific mineral concretions that do show acombination of melted spherules and those that are built up by layers . Those were called the "blueberries" and were studied to death by spectrum analyses.
The "fossils" were bogus and Im wondering whether this "lady in a bonnet" isnt just a larger concretion cause you can see the layering in her face and forehead.

As for the others of the "proof" page, nothing rocks my boat as "conclusive".

Ill be seeing a colleagues who works at Sandia next month , Ill ask her about whether there are any catalogues that duiscuss the formation of these concretions in detail.

OK
Explain what:

"K(~H|A) is estimated as probability of having a white, egg shape rock, of size larger than base_size/10, on top of the black base rock"

has to do with determining the probability of life on Mars or in New Jersey.

Since you understand it why don't you explain in detail how they have reached the probabilities they have and why their assumptions are valid.



RL
You have implied on hundreds of post that FMs interpretation of glaciation, sedimentation, etc,etc, etc are completely erroneous. The man works in the field yet understands not even the basics? Ok if "scientific charlatan" bothers you how about "scientific boob.'

Although I can understand why you would be over here. Parados has been beating you to within an inch of your life on the other thread. I had to stop watching it was getting real ugly.

By the way since you're here care to go back to the other thread and answer those questions I had for you. Next week will be 2 months I have waited for the answer.

I think I'd like some of what he seems to have been smoking. (The Man In The Moon, I mean.)

It appears, that everyone votes NO.

It would not be possibly the case, if people were using own brains, would it?

Sort of herd mentality prevails situation.


e s

Or maybe youre just so gullible that you bought 2 toll bridges from the NEW YORK PORT AUTHORITY

Did you believe these, too?


The famous Saint in a piece of toast:



This was found in an ultrasound of a pregnant woman:

Now i'm pissed . . . i offered to sell him a bridge, and he didn't even respond . . .

I know, it is hard to admit the unflattering truth



eS

She looks a lovely lass you must admit.

If somebody is going round again she looks okay.

Better than any of these Celebs. One would be well advised to steer away from that lot.

Sure, and the herd mentality believes the earth isn't flat.

The herd mentality also refuses to believe that a monster ate the moon last night during the lunar eclipse before shitting it out whole again.

That was a cool sight, that eclipse--especially when the moon turned red.

I saw the eclipse, it was pretty cool. I heard it only happens like once every 200 years.

Oh, and on topic. No, I don't think that's alien artwork. That's just... goofy. Notice how it conveniently looks like all our aliens in movies? I'm not saying it's a hoax by any means, but the odds that, if alien life were on another planet, it would look like they do in our movies, is just laughingly unlikely. That's why it's funny to look at that pictures. lol

But ya... I believe if we find any life on Mars it'll be from Earth, not from life, well, on Mars.

I don't think for one moment that the moon "turned red".

There's been a total lunar eclipse 3 times in the last 12 months.

The next one will be in 2010.

I missed last nights, too cloudy.

12 years?