Mars White "Winged" Anomaly and "Crater" Anomalies

[Amaterasu]

Amaterasu, sorry it has taken me so long to comment on your reply. You certainly did give us a different perspective on these craters. I too think these craters are indicative of intelligent design. If "almost anyone" just looks at these craters, it is not too hard to see artificiality in their interiors. They are just very different from typical craters, and have peculiar features that almost scream out "look at me"! That is why i posted them. They do in fact cause one to think maybe they possibly are actually underground entrances and exits.

I am a little surprised that no one has commented on the single multi-level crater that I also included in the OP's. It too has a very artificial appearance.

I might add that the two "craters" top and right have edges that also line up with a side of the box.  I'll relook at the OP pic.  [smile]

[ArMaP]

I am a little surprised that no one has commented on the single multi-level crater that I also included in the OP's. It too has a very artificial appearance.

I didn't make any comments because I don't find those craters that strange (and much less artificial looking), to me they just look like craters that were affected by erosion (probably cause by water).

[rdunk]

AmArP said: "I didn't make any comments because I don't find those craters that strange (and much less artificial looking), to me they just look like craters that were affected by erosion (probably cause by water)."

ArMaP, you may be right, but since these craters look so common to you, I will give you a little challenge - locate and show to us, any other crater(s) on Mars, that have similar interior features to these. The interior of these OP craters look so artificial to me, I just need to see those you referring to.  One of these craters even has a very obvious raised and shaped structure of some sort right in the middle of the bottom of the crater.

We will look forware to seeing your very similar crater examples!!! 

[ArMaP]

ArMaP, you may be right, but since these craters look so common to you, I will give you a little challenge - locate and show to us, any other crater(s) on Mars, that have similar interior features to these.

I didn't say that they look common, I said that they do not look that strange, that's not the same thing. But I will look for more craters like those.

The interior of these OP craters look so artificial to me, I just need to see those you referring to.  One of these craters even has a very obvious raised and shaped structure of some sort right in the middle of the bottom of the crater.

I see it as an "sunken", not a "raised" feature, like three (for example) levels corresponding to three occasions in which a lake lost a large part of it's water.

We will look forware to seeing your very similar crater examples!!! 

I will see what I can do.

[Amaterasu]

ArMaP, what do You think of what I demonstrated with My boxes...

I mean...  That little feature was particularly rectangular - and that cut out canyon with the "angel" feature does follow the same lines...

What are the odds?

[rdunk]

Amaterasu, I know we can each call the "angel" feature as we see it. Just to be sure, what I am calling a "white winged object", and is your "angel", is in my opinion a "flight object" of some sort. As I said prior, because the second white object seems to be laying limp, then these are probably not metal structure "flight objects".

The primary winged object really does seem to be primed for flight, don't you think. The wings are obviously positioned, and I just assume this is a working object, rather than being a statue. And most likely, the beings that would support any flight operations, would be underground, having gone down through crater opening/closing. 

[Amaterasu]

You say winged object, I say angel - Let's call the whole thing off!  LOL!

Yeah, it does not look "natural" in that it looks far too symmetrical.  But it is the identical line orientation of that rift with the small rectangular feature that sells ME on the idea there is more going on there than past or present weather.

[ArMaP]

I mean...  That little feature was particularly rectangular - and that cut out canyon with the "angel" feature does follow the same lines...

That crater is somewhat rectangular, but nothing special, and the sides do not really make 90º angles with each other.

As for the alignment with the "canyon" it doesn't look like a real alignment, as it looks like the line you draw does not follow the main shape of the "canyon".

Maybe this is all because I am used to technical drawing, so I look at this photo and I see how those shapes could be constructed with drawing tools (I learned "old style" technical drawing, with drawings made with a ruler, a set square (or whatever they are called) and a compass, almost any shape can be drawn with those tools).

What are the odds?

If, as it looks to me, that area was mostly shaped by water or other liquid flowing into it, the odds would be relatively high.

[Amaterasu]

Thank You for Your assessment.  I disagree, of course.  I do find the the whole area suspicious.  While You are right that the "canyon" is not a nice straight line, the "coincidence" that it is nearly so and has the same average direction, along the the other strange aspects, looks more to Me like someone attempting to make a facility look "natural."

My take.  Thanks again.

[rdunk]

Thank You for Your assessment.  I disagree, of course.  I do find the the whole area suspicious.  While You are right that the "canyon" is not a nice straight line, the "coincidence" that it is nearly so and has the same average direction, along the the other strange aspects, looks more to Me like someone attempting to make a facility look "natural."

My take.  Thanks again.

Of course, I agree with you, that this area has fairly specific evidence of intelligent intervention. There is one thing about these craters, as possible underground entrances - If one needs to get under the ground, for whatever reason, then using an impact crater to do that could be just about perfect in many situations. If we assume the "impact" made a crater of some depth, then, if we "start digging" at the bottom of the crater to get "underground", we are already the depth of the impact, below the general surface area. That means a lot less digging to get to a starting depth. Speculation, of course, but it sounds good to me because I always try to find the best easiest way to get something done! 

Amaterasu, I don't know whether my coming comment will affect how you (and others) view these anomalies or not, and it may just be another terminology difference ---but, I "think"  that what may look like a "canyon" to you, is (may be) actually a place forged into the side of a "cliff", or "down-slope". At least, that is the way I see it.

Perspective can make a difference to us regarding what we see in some of these Mars anomalies. And that can impact our viewing results. Seeing this as being on the side of a hill, makes it more plausible to believe that these craters are entrances to the underground of this hill, for support of this "flight operation" on the side of the hill,, as well as for whatever else might be going on "underground" here.

I am posting another screenshot of the anomaly area, for viewing in this regard.

[ArMaP]

I do find the the whole area suspicious.

Why?

While You are right that the "canyon" is not a nice straight line, the "coincidence" that it is nearly so and has the same average direction, along the the other strange aspects, looks more to Me like someone attempting to make a facility look "natural."

If both features were shaped by the same event, don't you think they would have some similarity between them?

[rdunk]

Amaterasu said: "I do find the the whole area suspicious"
.
And ArMaP said "Why".
______________________________________________________________

ArMaP, can you not see that the crater on our right has something in the bottom of it. There is an opening in the bottom of the crater, and there is "something" that looks metallic rising vertically from whatever that is below the opening of the bottom. And that piece that is rising vertically is a shape that has 5 sides, with 2 90 degree angles separating two of the sides. It is my estimate that this feature measures about 250 feet between the two horizontal sides.

The other two craters have open bottoms, but no vertical feature.

Then we have the white winged object(s) just below these craters.

There is just a lot here that makes one "suspicious" relative to civilized action and intent. There is no known acceptable explanation for these two white winged objects, and the general area, not being artificial.

I do understand doubt and skepticism, but this high quality MOC CTX camera photo almost speaks for its self. "Intelligent activity of some sort"!!!

[ArMaP]

ArMaP, can you not see that the crater on our right has something in the bottom of it.

Yes, I can see that, but it doesn't look strange, as I said before, I think it looks like it was full of water that evaporated in two or three stages.

There is an opening in the bottom of the crater, and there is "something" that looks metallic rising vertically from whatever that is below the opening of the bottom.

That I don't see, and I don't know how you can see an opening or how something can look metallic on a photo like this. I also do not see anything rising vertically.

And that piece that is rising vertically is a shape that has 5 sides, with 2 90 degree angles separating two of the sides. It is my estimate that this feature measures about 250 feet between the two horizontal sides.

I don't see any of it, maybe I'm looking at the wrong place.

The other two craters have open bottoms, but no vertical feature.

What do you mean by "open bottoms"?

Then we have the white winged object(s) just below these craters.

That I think is just a geological feature.

There is just a lot here that makes one "suspicious" relative to civilized action and intent. There is no known acceptable explanation for these two white winged objects, and the general area, not being artificial.

Only if you ignore common geological explanations.

I do understand doubt and skepticism, but this high quality MOC CTX camera photo almost speaks for its self. "Intelligent activity of some sort"!!!

Either you are seeing things or I am going blind, you talk about things I do not see on that photo (although I used my version of the photo instead of your version, too dark to be useful).

[rdunk]

ArMaP, thanks for your very detailed reply. I am not going to try to re-reply to each of your thoughts, for we obviously see things very differently on this anomalous area.

I see obvious evidence of intelligent design in and around the "white winged anomaly", and you see "geology".

I see obvious intelligent design associated with aspects of those three 2000 ft. diameter craters, and you see geology.

I still can't imagine how anyone could give an acceptable  "geological explanation" of the two "white winged objects", with one being obviously lying "limp, and the other positioned upright, as if ready for flight.

ArMaP, one thing you said, I want to address, and maybe help with this a little. You said, "Either you are seeing things or I am going blind, you talk about things I do not see on that photo (although I used my version of the photo instead of your version, too dark to be useful)". Well, maybe it could be because of "your version of the photo", I don't know.

What I have done for you is to modify the photo of the primary crater we are discussing, to maybe help you actually see that somewhat special vertical feature at the bottom of the crater. I have enhanced the photo, and I have even over magnified it to maybe bring it more into view for you. and I have included adjacent locater lines to hopefully bring your eyes right to it. As I said, whatever this vertical feature is, it is about a "football field" wide.  I have no estimate for its height.

I am posting a new screenshot of this crater, with the mods. Let me know what you see!! 

[ArMaP]

ArMaP, thanks for your very detailed reply. I am not going to try to re-reply to each of your thoughts, for we obviously see things very differently on this anomalous area.

Sorry for that, my way of answering is a little strange, but it makes it easier for me to rearrange the ideas in my head while I write.

I still can't imagine how anyone could give an acceptable  "geological explanation" of the two "white winged objects", with one being obviously lying "limp, and the other positioned upright, as if ready for flight.

Could you please point to the "limp" and the "upright" as you did with the crater? That would make things easier. Thanks in advance.

Well, maybe it could be because of "your version of the photo", I don't know.

It probably is.

Let me know what you see!! 

The only difference between what I see in my version of the photo and what I see in your version is that in your version that central feature really looks more like a pentagon, while on my version (taken directly from the closest to the original I could get) it looks more round.

Also, looking at the direction from where the light comes, I think that is a sunken and not a raised feature, and not much deep, because the shadow is not that big.