Mars

[tom502]

I do not know if the Adamski footage is fake. I do find it interesting that the craft is a Haunebu design, And just because someone could "fake" similar footage, does not mean the original is. It may be, I really don't know, and am not an expert on the Adamski case. I do admit to having some personal bias, because even if it is highly suspect, I "want" it to be real. Of course some photos and films are more "fakey" looking than others.

[jamesstew]

I do not know if the Adamski footage is fake. I do find it interesting that the craft is a Haunebu design, And just because someone could "fake" similar footage, does not mean the original is. It may be, I really don't know, and am not an expert on the Adamski case. I do admit to having some personal bias, because even if it is highly suspect, I "want" it to be real. Of course some photos and films are more "fakey" looking than others.

Well spoken sir and I will let it go. I guess it's no stranger than wanting Jesus, Allah, or Noah's ark to be real and at least you have pics. Before someone starts in on me about this having nothing to do with religion I was only pointing out what it's like to want to believe in something more extraordinary than what we can prove is out there.

[jamesstew]

Back on topic though, here's an older show but still cool:

[sgreger1]

If you look at the Mars site, and really examine the footage, you can see lakes, and flora. Looking at the Earth from Mars, I don't think all we have here would be very clear, especially if the Martians only used black and white photos with a blue filter. The Nasa Mars photos also use an artificial color filter, and the pics are not in true color. They do that to not have a mass of greenery visible.

Tom, I have read every single article on that site, and seen every picture. The lakes are not of liquid water, it is either frozen water or other frozen chemicals. Frozen Lakes=yes, liquid water= no.

There is some water that remains liquid for a very small amount of time, but 99% of the time all water is frozen there.


Additionally, the pictures of what you think are forests are no such thing. The pattern in the sand jus tlooks similar to what an arial photo of vegetation would look like. We see the same thing on deserts here on earth. On the ground images from the various mars rovers show a much better picture (and in all color!) than the false--color pictures shown on your website.


There is lots of cool stuff going on on mars,but none of them include vegetation or oceans of water. There is a lot of methane being replenished on one part of the planet, and ONE of the explanations is that it is being created by organic life. But even then we are talking about very small and simple life, no trees or forests.

[tom502]

Untill we actually "go" there, and not just to the middle of a desert, we really don't know. If Mars was full of plush forests and waterfalls, I have a strong doubt the "powers that be" would allow that info to be released. All we have is a rover, stuck in the mud, in the middle of a desert. And some distance pics which are not the most clear.

[devilock76]

I do not know if the Adamski footage is fake. I do find it interesting that the craft is a Haunebu design, And just because someone could "fake" similar footage, does not mean the original is. It may be, I really don't know, and am not an expert on the Adamski case. I do admit to having some personal bias, because even if it is highly suspect, I "want" it to be real. Of course some photos and films are more "fakey" looking than others.

But wait, you used fake footage of the moon landing to justify your theory that it was faked by NASA. I mean if that is not hypocrisy I don't know what is.

Ken

[sgreger1]

Untill we actually "go" there, and not just to the middle of a desert, we really don't know. If Mars was full of plush forests and waterfalls, I have a strong doubt the "powers that be" would allow that info to be released. All we have is a rover, stuck in the mud, in the middle of a desert. And some distance pics which are not the most clear.

Tom, that entire statement couldn't be further from the truth. We have mapped the entire planet, and have HI RESOLUTION pictures of the surface (taken by both sattelite and the rover) which answer this question already. We have sent several rovers there and they have been operating for years. The most recent one outlived it's lifespan but finally got stuck in the mud and is now being decomissioned.

Tom, we have ultra clear, high resolution pictures of the planet. It shows, without a doubt, that there isn't anything all that spectacular. A few things actually are very spectacular, but still no forests or oceans. There is no way to argue with such clear and high-def photos. Your evidence is cropped and color corrected low res photos that have been manipulated towards explaining a certain theory. It's like showing me a grainy black and white photo that you enhanced and colored yourself, as opposed to a high res image taken of something from different angles.

The fact and evidence are completely against you here from every angle. Mars surely has lots of really cool things on it, but one of those things is not forests. I assume we will find way cooler stuff once we look around some more, but really it is impossible to claim there are forests there.

[tom502]

If you know of crystal clear up close high res mars pics, of the landscape, please give me a link. I want to see the areas where the pyramids are, and the land area surrounding them. Thanks.

[devilock76]

If you know of crystal clear up close high res mars pics, of the landscape, please give me a link. I want to see the areas where the pyramids are, and the land area surrounding them. Thanks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cydonia...ion_of_Mars%29, that region right. Yeah the rover hasn't gone there. But the orbiter did.

Let me ask you this, you are saying our government wants to cover up life on mars right?

If that is the case why not bury all pictures. NASA pretty much controls all the tech to even see this stuff right now, so why release it at all and have to explain it, why not just bury it completely and leave nothing for speculation?

Again Occam's Razor.

Ken

[jamesstew]

If you know of crystal clear up close high res mars pics, of the landscape, please give me a link. I want to see the areas where the pyramids are, and the land area surrounding them. Thanks.

^^^^^Take that sgreger1!!!!!!!!

[jamesstew]

=

[jamesstew]

=

[tom502]

The Mars pics are so far away, you can't see any detail, like the Moon pics. So you see odd things, looks like forests and lakes to me, but how can you tell for sure, you can't. And Nasa has to show us some stuff, we know some stuff is being photographed, but the pics are far from clear and up close, so you can't really tell what it is.

[devilock76]

The Mars pics are so far away, you can't see any detail, like the Moon pics. So you see odd things, looks like forests and lakes to me, but how can you tell for sure, you can't. And Nasa has to show us some stuff, we know some stuff is being photographed, but the pics are far from clear and up close, so you can't really tell what it is.

They have tons of pics from all over, they could easily omit those pics. You are just reaching for anything to keep this lunacy going.

Ken

[tom502]

That doesn't make sense. The pics are not good. You can't tell for sure what anything is. Some do look like forests and lakes to me. But to know for sure, I'd need a clear close and in color pic, and there are none.