Remote-sense: Intelligent Earth Modification

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

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

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

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

(This guy gets my vote for idiot of the month, folks. Another one for the ignore list. Sigh)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

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.

 

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.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=1013473#post1013473

 

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."

 

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

 

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.)