Intelligence on Mars

Note: I initially posted this in "pseudoscience". As such matters are usually not openly discussed in mainstream science forums. Although, I feel, this is very suitable for mainstream astronomy discussion.

Please do not mistake this for another thread, that has you gorging at rocks, to see anamolies. In fact, here, you will not have to gorge for hours on end, you will merely have to glance once.

I showed these images to some friends, including my mother, who have barely any knowledge of ETI and Mars. As soon as they glanced at the images, they instanty recognized them. I then told them, these images are from surface of Mars and they are only illusions of light and shadow and natural erosion and crater formation. The expressions on their face were almost as if I was telling them the sky is green; they simply could not accept, that what they just saw, was anything but artificial. In fact my mom went as far as saying, "whoever thinks this is, natural, needs their head checking" In fact, I do not disagree with them at all.

If these images are optical illusions, or just perceptions akin to ink-blot test, then why are they so well-defined, instantly recognizable, seemingly intelligently designed and very detailed. From a human perspective, they look as real as a cropcircles would look from a topological view. Yet, we know for a fact, that cropcircles are really there - not an illusion of light and shadow.

Yet it is also true, that we humans, try to seek order in everything we see. Even in complete chaos. Hence, why some of us can discern the face of Jesus in clouds etc. Yet, everytime this has happend, the supposed "face" is a very faint outline, and the rest of the details, we fill in ourselves. On the contarary, we've never seen a face formed by natural chaos, that is completely defined; every detail: eyes; chin, mouth, teeth, face structure, nose, nostrils, jaw; evenly proportioned, well defined and symmetrical - basically every primary and secondary facial feature.

If one studies terrestrial geology and satellite imagary of areas of natural geology, we could build up a geological and a visual vocabulary of natural occurring structures, with which, we can discern weather the structures on Mars, are natural, or artificial.

In fact as per the laws of probability based on the priori principle, the probability of a face forming completely out of chaos is 1 in 10^21 - basically, and it's an understatement; very unlikely. According to the same laws of probability - the probability of three such faces forming in the same place(Mars) would be 1 in 10^63 - which would not occurr according to Boel's law.

In other words, the probability of all 3 faces on Mars, forming completely by blind chance; is mathmatically impossible.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

(Note, this image is often discounted as an optical illusion, however there is proof now, that this is not an optical illusion at all, and the images released in 98 were deliberaly flattened and unevenly lit to make it look less like a face)

Therefore, mathematically, there has been, OR still is, some form of ET intelligence on Mars.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Someone move this back to pseudoscience. tha chances of a something that people find looks kindof likes a face, froming on mars is equal to the chances of faning a peotato chip that looks like elvis after searching though a thousand bangs of chips. and since people find peotato chips that look like Elvis all the time.
Here is a face on earth!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

http://desiconnection.com/fun/amazing-pic/face_on_earth.htm

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Crazymikey's friends and family think they're artificial? Well that clinches it for me!

Seriously, the top one may have looked like a face to Picasso, but not to me. The middle one is made out of a weathered cliff and a scree slope on the side of a gulley. As for the bottom one, do you have a non-paranoid fanatic reference regarding the proof that it was doctored so as to look natural?

Well Cooked Fetus,
Now you've gone and done it... it'll only be a matter of time before someone comes along claiming that THAT face is artificial.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

WCF, that is quite a provoking illusion, and as I've said, humans tend to make order out of anything. The illusion that, this is a face, is simply because we fill in the details. If I anaylse it closely, I actually do not see a face. It's lacking much of the geometry of a face, and much of the primary and secondary features. On the contrary, the faces on Mars, are completely defined, showing both primary and secondary facial features. As I said, the probability of this, is 10^21.

It's therefore very unlikely it is naturally produced. Unless, you can show me natural structures like this on Earth, or indeed a pringle

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

How do you calculate that probability? Interpretation of a human face seems like a pretty subjective phenomenon.

 

I would say nothing more than an uneducated opinion. Not only are you completely ignoring how improbable that is, you are ignorant of the fact, that such geology is not possible here on Earth. At least from what I know of, care to show me?

 

the face on mars has definition?, bull shit they show barely any features look at them!

Calculate the number of the rock formation occurring on a planet like mars and multiply it by the calculation of what each formation looks like at different angles view at and multiply it by diffrent angles of the sun and you might find that 10^21 or where ever you got that number you got came from is in fact totally likely to happen.

 

It is based on the priori principle. A proposition that can be had without experience. What it does, it calculates the probability of a face forming completely by chance. The actual figure I quote:

 

and where is his math for that? for all we know he just pulling that number out of his butt!

 

If you have a proposition WCF, please support it, with evidence, and a theory that makes sense. From what I know of, there is no natural process that could produce that. Do you?

 

Yes its a rock formation that kind of looks like a face, rock formation form. I would like to see the math on how likely it is that two "eye" a "nose" between and a "mouth" at the bottom would from, to me that just 5 lines, and in the pictures your presented they are not even line up as correctly as one would expect from a face sculpted by intelligence. I presented in natural rock fromation of a face here on earth that looks just as natural as the ones on mars.

 

Well, I have already shown you the approx probability of such a face forming. Yet, logically speaking, 2 eyes(including pupils), a bridge of a nose, the tip of the nose, two nostrils, a mouth, a jaw, a chin, contoured face structure, all appearing in intelligent configuration - is astronomically low. 10^21 sounds about right.

Think of it like this, the probability a rock falls to form an eye, would be 1 in the total area of the face. Continue multiplying for every other primary and secondary feature and you'll appreciate how improbable it really is. It's akin to say, Abraham Lincoln's face appearing on a mountain by complete chance.

The face you shown does not show most of the primary or secondary features, as I've already outlined. However, the images on Mars, are as real, as say a cropcircle on Earth.

Now if you think this is natural. Prove it to me.

 

If the three faces were not enough, how about a complete network of glass tubes, covering several miles, like an interstate highway!

Almost everything we see, that we cannot explain, we dismiss with some prosaic and unfounded explanation. The following extraordinary proof is also subject to the same.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

They have tried to explain this as sand-dunes, although it is completely unfounded. Somehow Martian geology, not only can form artificial and artistic structures - it can also form an entire network of glass tubes! As, we can see, even NASA scientists themselves know they are not sand dunes:

What are they then? If they are a natural process, then Mars geology, is to put it lightly, bizarre - following completely different laws of nature.

Now if they are indeed constructed by an intelligence. They could be:

1: Pipes to transport water to habitated areas
2: A Martian transport system - similar to mag-lev's

It is actually turning out, that Mars really does have ET life. What we don't know is; is it indigenous to Mars, or an ET colony.

 

crazymikey,

You have not shown us the math for that probabiliy, until you do what you have said is bullshit.

Hey everyone grap 5 pennies drop them randomly until you get pattern that looks like a face. lets see it should happen once every 10^21 trys right?

 

What are you saying Crazymikey - that cliffs and scree slopes do not occur on Earth, or that rocks do not erode into peculiar shapes? Either proposition is ridiculous.

Are you also claiming that Well Cooked Fetus' picture of a face has less detail and definition than those posted by yourself?! Honestly Crazymikey, I thought you prided yourself on your objectivity. Take another look!

Also, sand ripples are ubiquitous on Mars. That "glass tube" you've shown is quite obviously an example. Seeing anything artificial in such pictures reflects a desire to see something artificial.

 

WCF and Faulty, I think you are sadly mistaken, that I have to provide you evidence. I think the photographic evidence of these artifacts and structures speak volumes themselves. You are postulating, that they are just natural, with little analysis of the geological and mathmatical aspects, further more, not providing any evidence whatsoever to support your counter-claims. They are nothing but uneducated opinions, much like your opinions on UFO's.

Meanwhile, serious scientists, including those do not support the claim of intelligence, are baffled by these structures.

Now if you really think these sturctures are natural, formed by erotion, crater formation etc, then support it with evidence, which in this case, would be evidence of this phenomena occuring naturally on Earth.

 

Mikey the faces arnt even relatively straight, if humans can make relatively straight pictures in the hills of england thousands of years ago, how come ETI cant make something similarly accurate? And no you cant see pupils in any of them, the eyes are just black, more like just sockets than eyes, the 2nd 1 has no right chin, the 1st no top it just fades into the landscape and i cant even see a half decent mouth on the 3rd, there are plenty of weird rock formations on earth and we've had discussions about it before.
WCF's pic shows 2 lips, a chin, a large nose and the eye looks pretty accurate, it looks similar to me lying on my back, it has slightly more distinguishing features than any of yours and it is formed on earth.
As for the glass tube its not even straight, you'd think intelligent life would know the advantages of something being straight(like the romans built straight roads), i'd say its about as weird as the giants causeway.
Oh and what evidence exactly do you have that its glass???

 

Ok... my analysis of your mathematics:

Bullshit. This is because you cite the incredible unlikelihood of geological features occurring in precisely the right places to make a face, while ignoring the fact that the face that you contrive to see does not depend on such exact relationships. You would be just as likely to imagine the structure's artificiality if it took on any of a near infinite number of configurations. If you want to see a face, you'll see a face. The geometry that you are seeing in those pictures is not the only geometry suggestive of human anatomy.

My analysis of the geology:

For the 'faces'-
Erosion acting on...
1. some rocks (plus some sand)
2. some rocks
3. some more rocks.

For the 'glass tunnel'-
Wind acting on... some sand.
For a comparison see the Sahara desert.

It really is that simple.

 

Faulty: I will again repeat to you; show me evidence that this is natural. You seem to persist such faces, and structures forming is natural. Then show me.

Lemming3k: The third picture, is actually the one taken by Viking. In fact, if you consider one taken more recently, it clearly shows a full face. Click on the link I cited.

The glass tube network is in fact very straight(across miles) and at certain juncture points, then start to go down, and then up again. There are many of these tubes, and they are interconnected. They are referred to as glass tubes, because they are transparent, and have a circular interior. I would not be exaggerating, if I said, there is no terrestrial geological process, that would account for them.

 

No, you wouldn't be exaggerating. You'd be lying. They are accounted for by wind blowing over sand. I think it's a universal. In this case the wind appears to have been channelled down a gulley. That's why they appear regular. Maybe the sediment has only accumulated in the gulley. See MGS pictures of Sirenium Fossae for a comparison.

The picture of Macchu Picchu(?) posted by Well Cooked Fetus is a spectacular example of forces of nature conspiring to produce a formation which can be interpreted by us as a human face. It's better than any Martian example I've seen. To clarify: I AM SHOWING YOU THAT SUCH STRUCTURES CAN FORM NATURALLY. Unless you're about to claim that this too is artificial, can't you just accept that geological processes can account for these curiosities?