RocK? Or Anomaly With Applied Shadow

[rdunk]

To you they may look like anomalous features, to me they look like common Mars rocks.

Then you have no "eye" for anomalous entities! Why do you waste your time?

[ArMaP]

Then you have no "eye" for anomalous entities!

The question is not if I have "eye" for anomalous entities, the question is "do you see anomalous entities where there's none?"

Why do you waste your time?

Probably by the same reason you keep on posting your finds, because I think it's more likely that I am right. 

PS: considering that I have found at least one anomaly and you pride yourself on never having changed your mind about one of your "anomalies", I also think that it's more likely that you see anomalous entities where there's none than I not having the "eye" for finding them. Also, I see things people point as anomalies, but my interpretation is different.

[rdunk]

The question is not if I have "eye" for anomalous entities, the question is "do you see anomalous entities where there's none?"
Probably by the same reason you keep on posting your finds, because I think it's more likely that I am right. 

PS: considering that I have found at least one anomaly and you pride yourself on never having changed your mind about one of your "anomalies", I also think that it's more likely that you see anomalous entities where there's none than I not having the "eye" for finding them. Also, I see things people point as anomalies, but my interpretation is different.

Well obviously, OF COURSE ArMaP!! I see nothing! I know nothing! And you are always right about everything!! And I would not recognize a real reptile if I were to see one, as they are just too hard for me to actually see!! And everyone knows already that there is no such thing as a real reptilian anyway!!..........Just move along!!

............................................................................

But I was actually astounded when I did see this reptilian lying there on Mars surface, possibly seeable as a result of a disturbed grave - disturbed by a small meteorite or incoming missile - such a small crater ( I said "possibly disturbed")! Oh well!!

[ArMaP]

Well obviously, OF COURSE ArMaP!! I see nothing! I know nothing! And you are always right about everything!!

Why are you acting like a child? I never said that you see nothing or know nothing, and much less that I am right about everything. In fact, I am the first to admit that I may be wrong about almost everything.

And I would not recognize a real reptile if I were to see one, as they are just too hard for me to actually see!!

Just because a rock looks like an animal doesn't mean it's an animal, the problem with your interpretation is that you jump from the "it looks like" to the "it must be" without more evidence than that of your own eyes. Are you one of those people that think they can never be wrong?

And everyone knows already that there is no such thing as a real reptilian anyway!!..........Just move along!!

Nobody is saying either of those things.

[Pimander]

But I was actually astounded when I did see this reptilian lying there on Mars surface, possibly seeable as a result of a disturbed grave - disturbed by a small meteorite or incoming missile - such a small crater ( I said "possibly disturbed")! Oh well!!

To be fair, I've never seen a sandstone reptile.

[rdunk]

To be fair, I've never seen a sandstone reptile.

And neither have I!  

FWIW, most "sandstone" is not a black color, as is the Mars reptilian that I posted. The Mars "Egyptian Statue" that we all have seen at the Victoria Crater on Cape St. Vincent is carved out of some sort of rock on the face of the cape, but not this reptilian. Admittedly, we cannot see very much of the reptilian, but there is enough to see to know that it is a reptilian form. And for it to have a piece tied to its wrist really "nails" this amazing discovery.

I am sorry that some just cannot see it there on the surface! I do think that the fact that it is mostly covered by some sort of plaster-looking stuff probably is a distraction factor to actually seeing the reptilian.       

[Pimander]

It isn't plaster, it is a rock with layers (like sandstone).  The "reptilians head" also has layers so must also be rock. LOL

[rdunk]

It isn't plaster, it is a rock with layers (like sandstone).  The "reptilians head" also has layers so must also be rock. LOL

Obviously, with the alien being......being in Mars photo, no way to positively know what it is! Could be a droid/robot of some sort, but then why would it have been left or buried here. I call it "reptilian" because all of its "few" seeable features are more reptilian-like - its very very heavily rough outer "skin", its large but flattened arm, and its seeable 2 fingers sticking out from under the shaped & marked/engraved metal-looking piece on its wrist. There are numerous markings on this wrist piece, but most are not clear enough to actually really make-out - one of them looks like a large number "1" right in the bottom middle of the wrist piece.

IMO, the fact that this wrist piece is attached to this possible "reptilian" makes it quite obvious that this "whatever it is"..... is simply not a natural rock object!!  But yes, it is hard to get these natural human minds to accept - in thus case - what we are seeing here!    

(again - the reptilian OP: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=709.0  )

One of the original photos that gives us a pretty good view of this anomaly:

[ArMaP]

I call it "reptilian" because all of its "few" seeable features are more reptilian-like - its very very heavily rough outer "skin", its large but flattened arm, and its seeable 2 fingers sticking out from under the shaped & marked/engraved metal-looking piece on its wrist.

The "arm" doesn't appear to be part of the larger object, as you can see in the animation below, created with the photos you like.



The same animation made with the photos I like.



And, just because I can, a colour version, made with the photos I like. Because the image used for the red channel is from the infrared channel the colours are not really what they should be, but it's the only colours we have.



PS: just curious, what makes you think that that other object is "metal-looking", what properties do you see in it that make you think of metal?

[rdunk]

"The "arm" doesn't appear to be part of the larger object, as you can see in the animation below, created with the photos you like".

ArMaP, you are so funny!! It is more than obviously that the "arm" is a direct part of that black object. And even in your shaking photos, the "arm" is precisely moving with the shaking, right along with the head and shoulder. Making it shake so that it makes it to you seem disconnected is a total waste for seeing the truth of this matter. For what it is, everything is just there in very plain sight. Nothing you say is going to change what is there in the NASA pic.......as far as what I easily see. No making shapes out of clouds, and the such like! What is there is there.

Now I would be even more interested in knowing what actually disturbed this place! There are several very small craters of this type, with each having significant evidence of aliens/intelligent design. It is almost as if they have at some point in the past been targeted, as if to maybe destroy the evidence however (How many years did NASA orbiters and landers photograph Mars before the Rovers came to life there?). I have also wondered why NASA's rovers, with relatively such short distance to travel capability, would just "coincidentally" be on route to stop by so many of these small anomaly prone craters, and take photos??

PS: just curious, what makes you think that that other object is "metal-looking", what properties do you see in it that make you think of metal?

Metal-looking = geometrically shaped, smooth face, a bit more reflective than the area rocks. If not metal, then some sort of other material that would withstand the harsh environment of a "surface grave on Mars" (a matter of evidentiary opinion). 

[Pimander]

the "arm" is a direct part of that black object.

There is no black object it is a shadow.

For what it is, everything is just there in very plain sight. Nothing you say is going to change what is there in the NASA pic.......as far as what I easily see. No making shapes out of clouds, and the such like! What is there is there.

rdunk, do you really think that is a dead reptilian?  SERIOUSLY?

There are several very small craters of this type, with each having significant evidence of aliens/intelligent design.

You do realise that even if a rock looks like something it doesn't mean it is that?  Probably not on the evidence in this thread.

Metal-looking = geometrically shaped, smooth face, a bit more reflective than the area rocks. If not metal,

Again, where is this metal object in the high resolution pictures with enough detail to see the nature of the material?  It doesn't exist.

Convincing anomalies are interesting.  This discussion is also interesting but only from the point of view of studying psychology.

[ArMaP]

ArMaP, you are so funny!!

I'm here all week.

It is more than obviously that the "arm" is a direct part of that black object. And even in your shaking photos, the "arm" is precisely moving with the shaking, right along with the head and shoulder.

Don't you see a space between the "arm" and the "shoulder"? And that the shadows are not connected?
Interesting.

Nothing you say is going to change what is there in the NASA pic.......as far as what I easily see. No making shapes out of clouds, and the such like! What is there is there.

That's true, regardless of what you or I think, the truth is the truth. Have you ever thought that you could be wrong?

(How many years did NASA orbiters and landers photograph Mars before the Rovers came to life there?).

The first photos of Mars taken by orbiters were taken in 1965, by Mariner 4, but they didn't had enough resolution to show any thing so small as the area in the photo being discussed, I suppose only with Mars Global Surveyor (in 1997) did they have photos with enough resolution.

Metal-looking = geometrically shaped, smooth face, a bit more reflective than the area rocks. If not metal, then some sort of other material that would withstand the harsh environment of a "surface grave on Mars" (a matter of evidentiary opinion). 

So, your opinion that this is a metal object is partially based on your interpretation of the scene and not vice-versa? Interesting.

[rdunk]

Pimander said, "There is no black object it is a shadow. "

Pimander, you are partially right! There obviously are shadows in this pic! But, at some of the shadows are shadows cast by the "black object", which makes the black object something other than a shadow.  That would be the shadow on the ground under what I term the reptilian's head. That shadow is easily seeable and obvious. There also is a "bit" of shadow on the ground alongside the reptilian's arm. Also, there is a small shadow under the "object" on the reptilian's wrist. So, as you see, the shadows do play a confirming part in the defining of the fact that there is a very different object here, which I refer to as looking like a reptilian. 

Pimander said, "rdunk, do you really think that is a dead reptilian?  SERIOUSLY?"

Yes........ but not without some consternation to begin with!! And I really have no viable thought of reality about why this thing exists!! To begin with, I could not believe what "I" was seeing...........!!!! So, I certainly understand you and anyone questioning what I have proffered. But, as I said earlier, this thing is not a "cloud", nor is it a wind/erosion designed piece of rock or sand. It has very specific features that are seeable, even though this thing is mostly covered - head, shoulder, arm, and covered hand with 2 "fingers" showing, plus the geometric piece which covers the hand. Whether reptilian or not, whatever this thing is, it has a very strange appearance here on the surface of Mars.

Pimander said, "Again, where is this metal object in the high resolution pictures with enough detail to see the nature of the material?  It doesn't exist.

First-off Pi, the "nature of the material of this wrist piece makes no difference to the conclusions of what we can see. The piece on the reptilian's wrist seems to be geometrically shaped, flat, or relatively flat, with various visible inscriptions on it. That piece is simply "not a rocK". It somehow has been attached to this thing's wrist.........for some unknown (to us) purpose, and we can see two black "fingers", with lighter color finger-nails sticking out from under it. The "fingers" are somewhat reptilian-like too!

Pimander said, "Convincing anomalies are interesting.  This discussion is also interesting but only from the point of view of studying psychology.

Yes Pimander, I agree - and the psychology of it can go both ways!!  In the past, for me, any conversation/presentation relative to the possibility of reptilian beings were very farcically regarded. Even when I saw this one, I had a hard time believing what I was seeing. But, I take photo fact seriously - photo fact is what I see in a photo - so, I had to accept what I was seeing in this photo. For sure, we can let what we believe over-rule at times what our eyes are telling us!

Oh, and there are no real differences between the photo ArMaP presents, and the original NASA posted jpeg photo, other than his photo has  slightly less contrast - all of the interesting details are present in both!!

[rdunk]

ArMaP said, "Don't you see a space between the "arm" and the "shoulder"? And that the shadows are not connected?
Interesting."

ArMaP, if you would take a magnifying glass and closely look at the black object in either of our "still photos", you should easily see that the arm is solidly connected at the shoulder of this body. Maybe the shaking pic gives you a distraction, caused by the noticeable bumps on the top of the arm, and by the outward stretching of the curving arm at the elbow?? The attachment looks solid to me!

ArMaP said, "So, your opinion that this is a metal object is partially based on your interpretation of the scene and not vice-versa? Interesting."

Well ArMaP, as I said earlier, the physical make-up of the wrist piece object makes no difference. I called it "metal-looking".... that does not mean it is actually metal does it?? It could just as well be painted carbon fiber - or whatever!! The main thing is, it is a very visible engraved geometric emblem type piece that seems to be attached to this being's wrist. Nope, we absolutely do not know why this piece is attached to the reptilian's wrist, but by all that we see, we can know that SOMBODY had a reason for putting it there - Now, who was/is that SOMEBODY"??

[Pimander]

But, at some of the shadows are shadows cast by the "black object", which makes the black object something other than a shadow

But if you look at the pictures, there is no black object there.  There are parts of the image of the rock in shadow and there is a darker shadow on the ground but there is no black object in the image....

But, as I said earlier, this thing is not a "cloud",

At least we can agree on that.

nor is it a wind/erosion designed piece of rock or sand. It has very specific features that are seeable, even though this thing is mostly covered - head, shoulder, arm, and covered hand with 2 "fingers" showing, plus the geometric piece which covers the hand.

What you are calling the "geometric piece" has the same texture as the rock a little to its right.  It just looks like a different shaped rock to me.

That piece is simply "not a rocK". It somehow has been attached to this thing's wrist.........for some unknown (to us) purpose, and we can see two black "fingers"

Why does it have the same texture as a rock then?  You were saying it was metallic before.

Lets say that what you think is a wrist is just a long rock.  Then you have a rock textured "piece" near a longish rock... I'm less convinced the more I look at the image.  Surely it should be the other way around?

Pimander said, "Convincing anomalies are interesting.  This discussion is also interesting but only from the point of view of studying psychology.

Yes Pimander, I agree - and the psychology of it can go both ways!!  In the past, for me, any conversation/presentation relative to the possibility of reptilian beings were very farcically regarded.

Yes the psychology can work both ways.  The thing is, I don't have a pre-conceived position.  I think there is a good chance there has been life on Mars and may still be.  I am completely open to the possibility of seeing fossils or perhaps even living things on Mars.  I just don't think this is what you think it is.

What I find interesting about the psychology is that you can't entertain the possibility that you might be wrong.

Don't forget you are discussing this with two people who have "wasted" hundreds of hours looking at Mars and Moon images, one of us is adept at image analysis and the other is a biological scientist with an A level in geology.  I know that does not mean we will always be right (I've been wrong plenty of times analysing images before) but.... 

I have often looked at anomalies and decided I don't know either way.  It might be something it might not.  Rarely I have leaned towards it looks like something but often I leaned towards it is nothing.  In these cases I'll wait for more data before I decide.  In this case I think it is definitely a rock.  If I had to bet my life on it, it is a rock.