Here are two examples of remote sensing on two separate planets.
Example #1 is EARTH(Washington D.C.)

Example #2 is MARS(Cydonia Mensae.)

http://web.1asphost.com/anomalist/NOEL.jpg


This Thread will deal with the Science of Spherical co-ordinates,planetary geo-spatial locations.and Evidence of Artificiality.
All of my Evidence is repeatable/testable and measurable.

Members are justified as sceptical about Cydonia...but Washington D.C. is not in doubt?

What exactly is the evidence?

Which evidence do you consider quantifiable enough to be repeatable? Which qualitative enough to be testable?

Other than spurious examples of seeming geometricity in the above photo, there is nothing but pseudoscience to your methodology.

Indeed, this thread is mis-placed in the Earth Science sub-forum.

What exactly is the Evidence?

Example # 1
Washington D.C. exists.YES or NO.

And what is Washington D.C. supposed to be evidence of except vile scum and villainy?

What exactly is the Evidence?

Example # 1
Washington D.C. exists.YES or NO.
yes, washington d.c. exists

The Cropped Image of the Square complex reveals itself in Numerous infra-red ASU/Themis images
I have denoted it as "AN"(as opposed to D.C.)
Wether artificial or not it exists.YES or NO.

if you are talking about the photo on the right yes, there appears to be a square. as to what it actualy is, i don't know

Skinwalker
Other than spurious examples of seeming geometricity in the above photo, there is nothing but pseudoscience to your methodology.
...My,My.such words!

You brandish me a Pseudoscientist.
Suffer the fool...I'm an Anomalist.

Irregardless of that.A centimeter is a centimeter and a Yard is a yard and a Mile is a Mile to both of us.SW:You've got an attitude that I will snap you out of.
It's unhealthy and causes dischord amongst the Board.
Deny a meter from the metric System if you so will.
It exists.YES or NO.

Except it isn't "square." Its an illusion that the human eye pics up on. Any one with a bit of critical thinking and analytical skill will notice that there are only a few features that almost come into alignment.

With the bottom of the screen being south, the SW "side" is comprised of two ridges that run in similar but different directions (the uppermost ridge is tilted slightly more southward);

the NW and SE "sides" are probably leeward side features of the two ridges - the wind blowing to the left and right of the two ridges removing the top layer of sediment to reveal craters/rocks/etc -all giving the illusion of "sides" to a "square;"

the NE "side" is only a short edge created by the windward side of a slope that meets horizontal ground -only a very short edge is noticed and it isn't perpendicular to any of the other sides.

What you've shown us is evidence of the human potential for delusion, however slight. This isn't something to be ashamed of, really. It is a matter of natural selection in all probability. We've adapted to be good at finding patterns in our surroundings. It was only natural that there might evolve some "significance-junkies" that make spurious connections to patterns that barely exist and come to wild conclusions with speculations to match.

Electric_Ashlar demonstrates to us all a very good example of anthropomorphic tendency in humanity. The very same tendency that has led to the creation of religion and belief in man. In caves of early hominids, animal-shaped formations on the cave walls were painted to bring the animals to life. It's this same thinking that drives individuals like EA to see patterns and faces where they don't truly exist.

I propose that this thread be moved to the Human Sciences sub-forum, so we can discuss the anthropology and psychology of this human trait in more detail.

Thanx Leopold99.
Confirmation # 1 by your peer SW.

Thank you agin for your honesty leo99
Though he does not claim to "Know"(whatever that entails?)



Thanx Leopold99
Confirmation of #2 by your peer SW.

Pseudoscience can only find ground in popularity contests. It can never stand on its own merits.

Thank you agin for your honesty leo99
Though he does not claim to "Know"(whatever that entails?)

it means that i am not sure what i am looking at
it would help if you had 2 or 3 photos of the same area taken from different angles

Like I said, this is a thread about psychology and the anthropology of belief. Electric-A's juvenile responses are demonstrative of this.

Leo99


Realise this.You are not required,so participate at your own peril.
If I have to hold yer hand across the entire freakin' internet then I will also reserve the right to cyber-bash your numbskull up against where I take you.
Get off yer ass and go Find the Square yourself.
I found it.It's easy as Phi.

Less than an hour ago...in another thread you called me a pussy Skinner?
and (far be it from me as to why?) you call me Juvenile.
TWO thousand,THREE hundred and SEVENty THREE posts.

You are a blabbermouth and Over the next few weeks...I'm gonna destroy your credibility merely by letting yer big fuckin' yap -a-keep-a flappin!

It's gonna Happen.
Because Skinmeister...your so full-a-**** that Maybe we should film your breakdown.
EA is on the scene.
Scuttle yer ass over,and make room.



(Bitch-slaps SW for the helluvit.)

Leo99
Realise this.You are not required,so participate at your own peril.
If I have to hold yer hand across the entire freakin' internet then I will also reserve the right to cyber-bash your numbskull up against where I take you.
Get off yer ass and go Find the Square yourself.
I found it.It's easy as Phi.

i have given you no cause to respond to me in this manner.

A meter exists as the World's Basic measure(Not that american Imperial crap like yards anf foots and hairy palm widths)
A METER exists.YES or NO.

True.
Leo.
I'm an asshole when superior intellects tell me how superior they are and where my witheralls belong.

I have NO excuse.
Sorry.

You are a blabbermouth and Over the next few weeks...I'm gonna destroy your credibility merely by letting yer big fuckin' yap -a-keep-a flappin!

Goodness. I think I must unplug my computer! I fear your skillz!

<or>

yawn....

A meter exists as the World's Basic measure(Not that american Imperial crap like yards anf foots and hairy palm widths)
A METER exists.YES or NO.
a meter (39.37") exists, yes

As You may have noticed there is a high-testosterone battle going on between Skin-walker the Screen/pseudoman and basic science.
SW is practically foaming at the mouth ,but that has little to do with the Fact that A Meter Exists.
What a heretic am I ...espousing the Meter over the Yard.
The Yard sucks.
Go Metric System...that's how science truly measures reality.
Demand at your next PTA meeting that your children learn TRUE Scientific Measures.

Anywayyysss.
So the Meter exists.
Big deal.

How was the measure of a meter derived?

As You may have noticed there is a high-testosterone battle going on between Skin-walker the Screen/pseudoman and basic science.
SW is practically foaming at the mouth ,but that has little to do with the Fact that A Meter Exists.
What a heretic am I ...espousing the Meter over the Yard.
The Yard sucks.
Go Metric System...that's how science truly measures reality.
Demand at your next PTA meeting that your children learn TRUE Scientific Measures.
That's totally beside the point of what you apparently originally wanted to point out with those pictures. Do you actually have something you wanted to discuss or do you just want to ramble around with other unrelated (as far as I can tell) things?

More specifically,regarding the Meter...

Skinwlkers little member(tee-hee!)is not a constant.

Is the "Meter" derived From actually measuring the planet Earth?
independantly Having nothing to do with my Woo-Woo?

Relatively speaking Light.
What is Light?
and I want your answer in the Metric System.ya yankee flunkie...world-wide test-scores leave you lacking...care to be global instead of insular?
Whaddayou? Skinwalkers pet?

What System are you aware of that deals with circles outside of 360 degrees?
Transpositional to a sphere once you progress from here?

okay, we detemined that washington dc exists and that the meter(39.37") exists
so now what

The picture of mars illustrates a very common thing in these types of photographs. If you take a look at Enceledus pictures by the Cassini spacecraft, you will find hundreds of these "squares". Simply, high resolution photographs are not taken in one big picture. Instead many pictures are taken and stitched together to form a large high res photo.

The photo you've presented illustrates a prime example when the stitching isnt done correctly or some uncontrollable element steps in when taking a photograph.

So no, you have nothing.

Relatively speaking Light.
What is Light?
and I want your answer in the Metric System.ya yankee flunkie...world-wide test-scores leave you lacking...care to be global instead of insular?
Whaddayou? Skinwalkers pet?
Oh, well. So much for having an intelligent conversation with you. Shove off, mate!

Light?
Please refrain from tainting the forum membership with what you believe is the point or "besides" the point.
As far as Earth Science goes...There is NO earth "SCIENCE" unless there is a Metric System.

I laugh at this forum for even providing an "Earth-Science" sub-criteria.
You use Imperial measures!!!LMAO!!!!
America has no claim to an Earth science(unless they admit the Metric Superiority)

Tell Skinwalker's lady that his lil' pecker is humongous in metric measures.

Locate Washington D.C. for me.
Latitude / Longitude

Tristan?
You sure of that claim?
Ummm...
I won't strip you to the bone in front of the forum at least until you verify your own bilge.
Get yer ass researching and don't come back until you mean it.
THEN we'll have fun...run along now,big boy fun may hurt ya innocent by-standers.

sciforums.com : Subcultures : Pseudoscience - Remote-sense: Intelligent Earth Modification

Welcome home. The psuedoscience topic from the woo-woo finds its way back to the appropriate forum. If there was truly evidence, would it not have stood on its own merits in a real science sub-forum?

Instead of making a real point, the disgruntled woo-woo attempts to bait in juvenile manner with comments about his perceived enemy's loved ones and reproductive anatomy. Over the next few weeks...I'm gonna destroy your credibility merely by letting yer big fuckin' yap -a-keep-a flappin! Yes. I've been utterly destroyed. I shan't sleep the night.

Do the Two Square's in the image that originated in page 1 of this thread Share Co-ordinates?
YES or NO?

No. They're on two different planets. Moreover, one is actually square. The other is "square" only in illusion. In addition, their dimensions are significantly different.

Nothing about these images is similar.

Except it isn't "square." Its an illusion that the human eye pics up on. Any one with a bit of critical thinking and analytical skill will notice that there are only a few features that almost come into alignment.

With the bottom of the screen being south, the SW "side" is comprised of two ridges that run in similar but different directions (the uppermost ridge is tilted slightly more southward);

the NW and SE "sides" are probably leeward side features of the two ridges - the wind blowing to the left and right of the two ridges removing the top layer of sediment to reveal craters/rocks/etc -all giving the illusion of "sides" to a "square;"

the NE "side" is only a short edge created by the windward side of a slope that meets horizontal ground -only a very short edge is noticed and it isn't perpendicular to any of the other sides.

I have to say I thought this looked square at first. But your explanation makes sense. The more I look at the 2nd picture the more I see the features as you say.

I think there are some things are Mars that are difficult to explain as natural, but the wind blowing the dirt explanation fits.

Also EA, I find it hard to take you seriously with all the banter that you are allowing yourself to be a part of in this thread. Most of it seems created by you, though Skin is definitly trying to get under your "skin"

Damn! that yap of your digs you deeper.
DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !
they are on two different Planets-You win a prize for observancy

Why is one SQUARE and the other NOT?
(You are a godsend my friend...too easy)

Locate Washington D.C. for me.
Latitude / Longitude
38d 53m 23s north
77d 0m 33s west

this is the coordinates of the capitol

ylooshi.
Your problem(like SW's) is personality.
I'm not a member here to win a popularity contest.
I'm cramming EA down your throat(Evidence of Artificiality)
You take the data wherever you find comfort with.

I will ask again:
Do the Squares share co-ordinates irregardless of Earth or Mars?
If so...Wich Co-ordinates?

Nevermind Skinner-he only scares YOU(he is a font of humour to me).

Skinwalker,Your peer Leo99 has verified three facts...what have you verified?

What "coordinates" are supposed to be "shared?" There is only one image that contains anything that could be called a "square." The other does not. I've yet to see where you've demonstrated that.

ylooshi.
Your problem(like SW's) is personality.
I'm not a member here to win a popularity contest.
I'm cramming EA down your throat(Evidence of Artificiality)
You take the data wherever you find comfort with.

I will ask again:
Do the Squares share co-ordinates irregardless of Earth or Mars?
If so...Wich Co-ordinates?

Nevermind Skinner-he only scares YOU(he is a font of humour to me).
first of all the sguare on the washington dc picture does not exist in reality
second, yes you can measure distances on mars in meters

Electric
Why don't you Verify a NASA site location for an undoctored image so a comparison can be made of your alleged artifact?

ylooshi.
Your problem(like SW's) is personality.
I'm not a member here to win a popularity contest.
I'm cramming EA down your throat(Evidence of Artificiality)
You take the data wherever you find comfort with.

I will ask again:
Do the Squares share co-ordinates irregardless of Earth or Mars?
If so...Wich Co-ordinates?

Nevermind Skinner-he only scares YOU(he is a font of humour to me).
(This guy gets my vote for idiot of the month, folks. Another one for the ignore list. Sigh)

Electric,
Ty posting without attempting to start a flame war, then I might just stop deleting your posts.

Sure Stryder.
If I don"t? ya gonna ban me?
Do you honestly think I'd bullshit you.
I have EA.You don't.

Yep...ya got a live anomalist thrashin' around in here.

Yer gonna need a bigger boat.


Whaddaya need Stryder?
You think I just pull this outta thin air.
REOPEN my Thread,Please.Sir.

Skinner...how economical with the Truth.
You act as if this is new to you...or NEWS to you
The Members of the Forum here see otherwise.
You've never read the Thread but you presume to convince us (having admitted purposeful ignorance)
that you are knowledgeable...and can hold your end of a debate up to scientific standards?

Kiss my ass.
You re lazy and you never measured nuthin' so shut ya mouth.
Blowharder.

I appear to have struck a nerve with my simple questions and criticisms. I've read the thread. Indeed, I participated in it from day one before Stryder closed it. I even offered many images which effectively debunked your little claim that space aliens (or Martians or whomever) created monumental architecture on Mars.

As I recall, the little "square" on page one was your best "evidence." When looked at with any scrutiny, the "square" quickly disappears into the illusion of natural features. As I pointed out, the SW "side" doesn't even line up: the two ridges are not parallel. The other "sides" are likewise illusions and anyone with true critical thinking skills can see the problem with your spurious claims of "artificiality."

Your speculation is utter rubbish.

01:15 AM
Insulting other posters will not be tolerated on sciforums. If you continue in the same vein as we have seen in your posts so far, you will be banned from sciforums. http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=1013473#post1013473

01:58 AM
Kiss my ass.
You re lazy and you never measured nuthin' so shut ya mouth.
Blowharder.

I request my thread a ressurection.
Stryder You are personably responsible for this.
Sadly you won't own up to your inability to deal with power.

The Thread will stay closed because it was first started in 2003, and it died a death back then. The reason why I close the old threads when they get dragged up is purely because some people actually attempt to read threads post by post and reply at the end. When you drag up an old post they might reply to someone that posted here years ago that no longer posts here, or no longer has the same stance on what ever it was they posted.

As for banning you, I won't be doing that since thats not what I do, however I'm sure your abusive attitude will probably take you down that road eventually, if you should decide to keep it up.

Electric, As I keep attempting to say:

"Abuse doesn't win favour."

I request my thread a ressurection.

But you haven't respectfully requested it. I think you should issue apologies to Stryder for you very rude and insolent remarks made about him publically. Then ask him to re-open your thread.

Where were we?
Props to Stryder.
SW.Explain to me: latitude
as this is Earth Science.

Leopold99
[QUOTE=leopold99]first of all the square on the washington dc picture does not exist in reality
second, yes you can measure distances on mars in meters[QUOTE]

Actually the Square does exist in reality of washington D.C.

First of all as a blueprint.
then manifest as sattelite data.


But this doesn't matter,my thread here was closed.

So now I will re-new.

Without the Insults(You can call me a woo-woo though,I don;t mind that) I just don't care to be called a liar.

Skinwalker,I told you once I'll tell ya twice...
I like my boots spit-shined.
Get on it Boy!

Im going to have to say that these two pictures are related only by the minds ability to do so. The pictures ARE similar, but one can hardly draw the conclusions that this thread is trying to do.

What is unnatural about a square?
They seem quite natural to me.

I can think of several features at microscopic and macroscopic scales that are perfectly natural. Why are we apparently (woo-woos and debunkers alike) implicitly or explicitly agreeing that a true square suggests something artificial?

Very strange.

By the way EA, natural squares are still square when we measure them in rods, chains, or perches. (Furlongs, feet, or angstrom units.)