by qwerty 137 Replies latest jw friends
ianao,
So what do you say to someone like me who has looked at the sites you've mentioned (and many others) and I STILL see a face?
We say: Take your medication!
- Jan
--
Faith, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. [Ambrose Bierce, The Devil´s Dictionary, 1911]
We say: Take your medication!
Gosh!
That reminds me- I've got to take my medication
Thanks, Jan
To ianao:
: So what do you say to someone like me who has looked at the sites you've
: mentioned (and many others) and I STILL see a face?
"To each his own, said the old woman as she kissed the cow".
Actually I suggest that you haven't actually looked at those sites. Right
now it's evident that you couldn't possibly have done so between the time
I posted and the time you replied.
What I think you have done is exactly what dozens of JW-defenders
have claimed: you've looked only at the things that support your desired
beliefs, and the only negative criticism you've looked at is whatever
has been provided by those you want to believe. In other words, you've
only looked at "cooked" criticisms.
I have no doubt that Talleyman, with whom I'm having a friendly
disagreement, will spend a good deal of time looking at those sites and
will come up with some substantial comments in return. You should do
the same.
: Should I re-adjust my thinking here?
I certainly think so.
: Do I lack intellect because I disagree?
No. I simply think you're wrong, and I've given my reasons why. If you
want to be perceived as having intellect, then you'll have to prove it
by actually dealing with specifics of the topic, not slithering down
into meaningless generalities like you're doing in this post.
: Now, when I see Van Flandern's "face" with a crown that was recently in
: the newspapers, and I look at it in the context image, it's clearly a
: trick of light and shadow and "convienient" cropping of images. Same
: story with Dolphins and hangers, and egyptian goddesses, etc.
I'll take your word for it, since I have no idea what you're talking about.
: BUT
: I look at the cydonian "face", and lo! It be out in the open on flatland,
Nope. It be smack in da middle of a bunch of other odd landforms. When
you look carefully at the very latest (April 2000?) high resolution images,
you see very normal looking landscapes that only look strange if you look
with low resolution.
: staring me down from space!
You should take a look at the website link I provided where someone "drew"
a face on "the face" with "magic marker". I think that will help dispel
your feeling of being watched.
: Even in the context of the viking images! It standeth out like a spike
: in me arse.
So what? As far as some people were concerned, the old Proctor and Gamble
logo contained images of demons.
: Why did NASA tell us in the 70's that they shot the face later and the
: illusion went away, and lo! It be in another photo they didn't mention
: in the original press conference?
Care to provide solid references for that?
: And lo! Nasa cannot reproduce the image that shows it as a trick of
: light and shadow from the viking archives!
According to whom?
: NASA currently advocates possible running water on the surface of the planet.
No they don't. You've misread news reports. I won't try to set you straight;
do it yourself.
: What is so hard to grasp about a civilization existing on the planet long
: ago?
Nothing. I just don't see any more evidence of it than I do for claims
that the JW Governing Body speaks for God.
: I don't understand the brain-lock here.
No brain-lock. It's healthy skepticism. Extraordinary claims require
extraordinary evidence for confirmation. Not fuzzy photos that upon
obtaining clear ones prove to be funny looking mountains.
: AlanF, it's really a sad lot isn't it?
Depending on which "lot" you're talking about, I might agree.
: I mean, in reality, if all of these "conspiracies" are true, then we:
: will never know will we?
Sure we will. Eventually the illuminati will come to power, or the aliens
will return, or we'll be taken away in shining spaceships, or we'll be
resurrected by superpowerful aliens, and then we'll know.
Of course, if the conspiracies are only in the imaginations of people
who need to "believe", then they're entirely irrelevant to anything.
: AlanF, just out of curiosity, do YOU believe man ever set foot on the moon?
No. It was all done in NASA-controlled Hollywood studios. Just like
WWI and WWII were staged. The reality is that the Heavens Gate people
were right, and now they're looking down from their spaceship and
laughing at all us dummies who didn't believe them.
: Although it has no baring to this thread,
I think it bares your thinking very well.
: I would like to know your personal thoughts on this, as the "moon
: debunkers" are doing about as lousy a job debunking the moon as you:
: are the "face". Just curious.
Frankly, after this comment I know you're an idiot, and I'm sorry I've
bothered to waste my time answering you.
You've shown that you can lie about what you've looked into and make
stupid comments about things you don't know anything about. What a dork.
AlanF
geez Alan,
Frankly, after this comment I know you're an idiot, and I'm sorry I've
bothered to waste my time answering you.
You've shown that you can lie about what you've looked into and make
stupid comments about things you don't know anything about. What a dork.
if you are so smart why waste your time?
seems someone of your calibur and intelligence and highly evolved reasoning skills would have something better to do than dispute with the fuzzy thinkers?
that IS alot of ranting and time wasted,
doesnt seem very intelligent of you now does it?
-----------------------------
hey true believers check this out!!!!!!!
http://www.blackvault.com/
Ah, Cloud-Brain-In-Massive-Dick erects itself yet again.
Compared to you, this dork is Einstein.
You can barely read.
Go back and give MistressMayhem a piece of your mind.
AlanF
: So what do you say to someone like me who has looked at the sites you've
: mentioned (and many others) and I STILL see a face?
"To each his own, said the old woman as she kissed the cow".
Actually I suggest that you haven't actually looked at those sites. Right
now it's evident that you couldn't possibly have done so between the time
I posted and the time you replied.
What I think you have done is exactly what dozens of JW-defenders
have claimed: you've looked only at the things that support your desired
beliefs, and the only negative criticism you've looked at is whatever
has been provided by those you want to believe. In other words, you've
only looked at "cooked" criticisms.
That's because I've seen the sites you've posted **BEFORE**, and upon looking at them I said to myself: "Been there, done that." The "cooked" criticisms as you say, BLEW AWAY any prior scepticism I previously had.
I have no doubt that Talleyman, with whom I'm having a friendly
disagreement, will spend a good deal of time looking at those sites and
will come up with some substantial comments in return. You should do
the same.
I would, but there is a problem with this. See, I've been here before, Alan. I've been in these 'debates'. There is almost always name calling (whether direct or indirect), "mud slinging", (to use a political term loosley), and after everything, it all comes out to you think I am an ass, I think you are an ass. Both sides yelling: "Don't be ridiculous" to each other, utlitmately aluding to the other's perceived dogma on either side. Quite fruitless actually.
: Should I re-adjust my thinking here?
I certainly think so.
: Do I lack intellect because I disagree?
No. I simply think you're wrong, and I've given my reasons why. If you
want to be perceived as having intellect, then you'll have to prove it
by actually dealing with specifics of the topic, not slithering down
into meaningless generalities like you're doing in this post.
LOL. Since the topic is "Face/Pyramids on Mars! What do you think?" Generalities is all that can be brought forward at best, because ultimately, the evidence is in the hands of a NASA subcontractor.
: Now, when I see Van Flandern's "face" with a crown that was recently in
: the newspapers, and I look at it in the context image, it's clearly a
: trick of light and shadow and "convienient" cropping of images. Same
: story with Dolphins and hangers, and egyptian goddesses, etc.
I'll take your word for it, since I have no idea what you're talking about.
Thank you for admitting that. Perhaps looking MORE into a topic rather than dismiss it may "peak" your curiosity the way it did mine. Then again, I forgot, you are obviously in rationale mode.
: BUT
: I look at the cydonian "face", and lo! It be out in the open on flatland,
Nope. It be smack in da middle of a bunch of other odd landforms. When
you look carefully at the very latest (April 2000?) high resolution images,
you see very normal looking landscapes that only look strange if you look
with low resolution.
I disagree. I see a bunch of small impact craters, smooth land, small ridges, and then suddenly, large sarifs that look like pyramids, hexagons, and --->A FACE<---.
: staring me down from space!
You should take a look at the website link I provided where someone "drew"
a face on "the face" with "magic marker". I think that will help dispel
your feeling of being watched.
Interesting. Now, if you look at the January 31 image from msss at < http://barsoom.msss.com/mars_images/moc/01_31_01_releases/cydonia/index.html>; and look at image M16-00184 ("face" mesa), you will see that the image from the MOC camera CONTAINS an 'anomoly' that was PREDICTED to be there before high-res pictures were taken of the mesa. (It's an eye). It's right there in the high-res GIF (no JPG anomolies possible). (BTW, after you look, please give yourself a moment to regain your composure, I would hate for you to hurt yourself should you momentary lose conciousness.)
: Even in the context of the viking images! It standeth out like a spike
: in me arse.
So what? As far as some people were concerned, the old Proctor and Gamble
logo contained images of demons.
True, and was that demonic image a NATURAL formation as well?
: Why did NASA tell us in the 70's that they shot the face later and the
: illusion went away, and lo! It be in another photo they didn't mention
: in the original press conference?
Care to provide solid references for that?
http://www.enterprisemission.com has all the references (for the most part.) BTW, before you laugh, please remember that not everyone goes to the trouble of scanning gov't documents for everyone to view on the web. (Do YOU trust the scanned items you find on this site?)
: And lo! Nasa cannot reproduce the image that shows it as a trick of
: light and shadow from the viking archives!
According to whom?
See above. NOTE: Hoagland is a commentator on the work of others, for the most part. He has plenty of articles that point to other investigations not involving his egotistical agenda against NASA.
: NASA currently advocates possible running water on the surface of the planet.
No they don't. You've misread news reports. I won't try to set you straight;
do it yourself.
Fine. You are in denial. NASA acknowledges 'seepage' onto the surface from under the soil. http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast05jan_1.htm
: What is so hard to grasp about a civilization existing on the planet long
: ago?
Nothing. I just don't see any more evidence of it than I do for claims
that the JW Governing Body speaks for God.
: I don't understand the brain-lock here.
No brain-lock. It's healthy skepticism. Extraordinary claims require
extraordinary evidence for confirmation. Not fuzzy photos that upon
obtaining clear ones prove to be funny looking mountains.
: AlanF, it's really a sad lot isn't it?
Depending on which "lot" you're talking about, I might agree.
: I mean, in reality, if all of these "conspiracies" are true, then we:
: will never know will we?
Sure we will. Eventually the illuminati will come to power, or the aliens
will return, or we'll be taken away in shining spaceships, or we'll be
resurrected by superpowerful aliens, and then we'll know.
Of course, if the conspiracies are only in the imaginations of people
who need to "believe", then they're entirely irrelevant to anything.
: AlanF, just out of curiosity, do YOU believe man ever set foot on the moon?
No. It was all done in NASA-controlled Hollywood studios. Just like
WWI and WWII were staged. The reality is that the Heavens Gate people
were right, and now they're looking down from their spaceship and
laughing at all us dummies who didn't believe them.
: Although it has no baring to this thread,
I think it bares your thinking very well.
: I would like to know your personal thoughts on this, as the "moon
: debunkers" are doing about as lousy a job debunking the moon as you:
: are the "face". Just curious.
Frankly, after this comment I know you're an idiot, and I'm sorry I've
bothered to waste my time answering you.
You've shown that you can lie about what you've looked into and make
stupid comments about things you don't know anything about. What a dork.
JanH:
I can't take my medication until you give it back. Sorry.
(I knew I shouldn't let a stranger borrow anything. Mummy was right!)
So, we would appear to have two main possible explanations:
1) The shapes are naturally occuring landscape patterns.
2) An ancient intelligent race of Martians spent their time carving gigantic faces and crowns etc. into the landscape of Mars (for whatever reasons they had) before dying out. The governments don't want us to know this (for whatever reasons they have) and are suppressing scientists and evidence from the general public, so that we never find out this dangerous knowledge.
Hmmmmm....would you believe in the last years of the twentieth century that Mars is being watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than ........blah, blah.
Expatbrit
I hope the conspiracy theorists can understand why scientists get a little upset when you accuse us all of being part of a vast conspiracy to hide things from the public. It is rather insulting, and also dangerous.
Perhaps scientists are lying about all the evidence for evolution too. If they can cover up evidence of extra-terrestrial life then it would be child's play to cook-up this whole "evolution" story.
Why believe any evidence these "scientists" give to support evolution? Most people I know who believe in this sort of ET stuff also laugh at the foolishness of Creationists- trusting science when they want to and accusing it of lying when they want to.
I see it like this: according to the UFO conspiracy theorists intelligent life contacted the earth, but everyone missed it- except for the Government and some top-notch investigators/tabloid authors.
According to the WT, the end of the world came in 1914, but everyone missed it- except for the Governing Body and some top-notch writers at the Watchtower and Awake writing departments.
What's really sad is when people "ASSume" so much when your only contention is that the US government is intentionally covering up the discovery of past and present (yet primitive) LIFE on another planet besides this one, for the sake of NOT CAUSING A PANIC.
You "debunkers" constantly lump people in a specific category and discount everything that is said. (Not unlike our favorite "spiritual israelites" who ASSume that all appostates are mean and hateful).
I Say! What a wonderful tool disinformation is. It's just a shame to see it duping SO MANY PEOPLE who are otherwise intelligent thinking people. Maybe we are NOT so ready for all of this.
Tell me something, with NASA now stating that mars "may have been warm and wet". ----> MAY. <----
IF that is discovered to be a correct conclusion...
WHAT would be so illogical about intelligent beings having lived on mars LONG AGO and having remnants of their homes/cities/dwellings discovered by US?
Quickly! Let's rationalize it away before we start thinking about it and everyone makes fun of us for being "independent thinkers"...
ROTFLMAO
