http://marslife.us/mycommon/leech2.jpg

To see the image in stereo, you need red-cyan 3D glasses


This was taken on Mars resently by Spirit rover.
In the oval area that may be an imprint of an egg,
one can see what appears to be imprint of the spine and of other bones :)


ES

And if you really squint you can see Elvis.

Not much response. I've thought the picture is interesting. And is more rare than seeing Elvis too :)

Hum,
how about,
Do you think it`s funny to waste my time?

http://marslife.us/mycommon/leech2.jpg

To see the image in stereo, you need red-cyan 3D glasses
.....

you can see in stereo??

Image taken by the Spirit rover on Sol 1431 (Jan 12, 2008).

IMAGE (http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/1763/spisol1431ja2.jpg) (163kb, 1024 x 768)
Credit NASA

This is an image of a RAT brushed rocky outcrop on the Homeplate feature in Gusev crater.

Well, seeing as the rock abrasion tool has been used on this surface, it seems illogical to be speculating on what natural object it resembles. Extrapolating this to an extreme, it’s like asking whether or not you can discern the shape of a human in this rock…..

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/ATA/5074W~David-Posters.jpg

Was it a RAT surface?
And where was it?
I don't even think it was taken recently.

All in all, a useless post.


BTW, the hands on the statue are too big. But it's looking good.

you can see in stereo??

I stand corrected: To see 3D image, presented by this anaglyph, you need to use red-cyan 3D glasses.

eS
:)

Image taken by the Spirit rover on Sol 1431 (Jan 12, 2008).

You are correct.
It would be good to hear an opinion of professional, experienced in fossils and pseudofossils.


eS

you can see in stereo??

'Seeing in stereo' is quite aceptable. The precise term is 'stereoscopic vision'. The old name for a "Veiw Master" type device is a stereoscope.

@extrasense
First of all, lets note that images of skulls, eggs and Martian dinosaurs are great for a laugh with the kids; but i believe, if it's portrayed as a plausible idea on a public forum then it gets into a sticky area where some people are daft enough to take it seriously.
We have a duty to protect the innocent and vulnerable.
Until we have `proper` evidence for Martian life, my opinion is that we should treat this as fantasy and delusion.

My personal view is that if there are any ancient fossils in your image then they probably are microscopic algal mats. The area that the sample was taken may once have been similar to the Yellowstone Plateau volcanic field or early Devonian Rhynie chert formations. It could be reasoned that areas that contain fumaroles or geysers could provide the ingredients or habitat for early Martians.
Having said that, it is unlikely that the rover cameras could detect such life forms.
Given what we know about the evolution of the planet, it is unlikely that Higher forms of life ever arose.

I doubt that you have used 3D glasses.
I am not claiming that I know for sure, what the object is.

It can be a pseudofossil, an artifact of brushing, or just a random occurence.

It looks LIKE a fossil.
It is dissimilar to any known to me pseudofossils that can be found on Earth.
This makes it interesting and worth looking at it further.

eS

I'm not seeing the dino. Looks kinda like a butterfly.

This just in:

East Korean Sceantists Discover Fossil of Delicate Nonirradiated Butterfly on Mars; Launch Nuclear Probe to Further Investigate

Yes, it looks like those insects in amber,

but insects do niot have spine, do they?


eS

They do not.

Nor do dinos live on Mars, also.

Forgive my skepticism.

hey,

I am sceptical either.

I would like to hear what a fossil pro has to say.

Is it possible to invite any to the disussion?


es

I'm an evolutionary scientist, and an assistant prof. That count?

Great.

Do you have 3D glasses, to look at the thing in stereo?

:)