Face/Pyramids on Mars! What do you think? (page 8)

ianao

BTW rem:

Not EVERYTHING is a theology. Please chill with the rationale, your paradigm is still intact. for now.

Tallyman

ianao,

Have you noticed the hits on this thread?
Well over a Thousand. - Somebody's interested.

Yeah, I gave rem the well-thought out rebuttal I thought s/he deserved.

Hated to see this thread get 'personal'...

But "reasonable people agree" (Judge Rutherford quote. heeee!), or at least reasonable people should agree that you don't have to agree with EVERYTHING a person/researcher/scholar says/prints/publishes...

Hell, I don't agree with EVERYTHING Richard Hoagland writes. He and I didn't see eye-to-eye years ago, on the original Enterprise board and had a little argument... but so the hell what! We're still friends. I did a transcript for him a few months after that.

There's plenty about which I still agree with him. He's made some fantastic observations. There's stuff you say I don't agree with, there's stuff AlanF says I don't agree with, and just about everyone else on this board... but I'm always willing to find some common ground.

- - -

That recent letter- what a chuckle I got out of the reply to attorney Gersten's letter to NASA, by Edward J. Weiler Associate Administrator for Space Science:

NASA does not know of any statements by Sir Arthur C. Clarke that suggest "... pretty convincing proof of the existence of large forms of like on Mars,"

Yeah, right!
NASA named the daggumed NEW MISSION to Mars, "Odyssey". ___ in tribute to Sir Arthur C. Clarke's, "2001 - A Space Odyssey".

I saw that rocket blast off a couple of Saturdays ago.

.

ianao

Tallyman:

LOL

That recent letter- what a chuckle I got out of the reply to attorney Gersten's letter to NASA, by Edward J. Weiler Associate Administrator for Space Science:
NASA does not know of any statements by Sir Arthur C. Clarke that suggest "... pretty convincing proof of the existence of large forms of like on Mars,"
Yeah, right!
NASA named the daggumed NEW MISSION to Mars, "Odyssey". ___ in tribute to Sir Arthur C. Clarke's, "2001 - A Space Odyssey".
I saw that rocket blast off a couple of Saturdays ago.

Yeah, I forgot about that. ROTFLMAO.

"Oh yeah, it's a hill. That's why we did a histogram of the entire mesa and now we won't give you that URL to find the data that we posted on the internet as promised."

ianao

BTW Tallyman:

Of course the thread is going to get personal. Remember how pissed witnesses get when the find out their religion is a bunch of BS.

SixofNine

That recent letter- what a chuckle I got out of the reply to attorney Gersten's letter to NASA, by Edward J. Weiler Associate Administrator for Space Science:
NASA does not know of any statements by Sir Arthur C. Clarke that suggest "... pretty convincing proof of the existence of large forms of like on Mars,"
Yeah, right!
NASA named the daggumed NEW MISSION to Mars, "Odyssey". ___ in tribute to Sir Arthur C. Clarke's, "2001 - A Space Odyssey".
I saw that rocket blast off a couple of Saturdays ago.

If I were a nasa representative, and wanted to rebut the above, I would write this letter:

Dear Mr. Tally Dega,

We repeat, NASA does not know of any statements by Sir Arthur C. Clarke that suggest "... pretty convincing proof of the existence of large forms of like on Mars,".

Yours,

Nah Saw

Don't make me pull out the indisputable physical facts!

ianao

Six:

Just like a rank and file witness can look you dead in the face and call you an appostate liar, DESPITE what you know.

terraly

NASA does not know of any statements by Sir Arthur C. Clarke that suggest "... pretty convincing proof of the existence of large forms of like on Mars,"

Yeah, right!
NASA named the daggumed NEW MISSION to Mars, "Odyssey". ___ in tribute to Sir Arthur C. Clarke's, "2001 - A Space Odyssey".

So basically what you're saying is that because NASA named one of it's probes after Clarke they know everything he has said? This comment was made to Space.com, a great site, but not exactly a major headline news organization. I have been unable to find the remark reprinted anywhere else except on UFO-type sites.

Here's the link for those of you curious:

http://www.space.com/peopleinterviews/clarke_believe_010227.html

Consider NASA's motivation, what would it have to gain by deliberately lying to FACETS on this point? That's right, absolutely nothing- in fact, it makes them look stupid, so why would they do it purposely?

For those of you who still believe this is all a big conspiracy, please consider Clarke's closing words at the end of this article:

[quote]
And then Clarke took an opportunity to rebut those who refuse to believe even well documented events, specifically, the Apollo moon missions. Responding to a recent television program claiming the Apollo landings were faked, Clarke said, "I can't imagine anybody being stupid enough to think that a program involving hundreds of thousands of people, carried out over a period of [more than a decade], in a blaze of publicity, could possibly be faked. Ben Franklin said, 'A conspiracy of three people can be kept secret, if two of them are dead!'"
[\quote]

It is quite clear that Clarke does not believe a conspiracy to hide something like intelligent life on Mars is feasible.

I am quite open to the possibility of life on Mars (although I think there is a lack of evidence for intelligent life), but I am firmly with Clarke on this one- a conspiracy to keep real evidence of this from the public would be virtually impossible.

Tallyman

Don't make me pull out the indisputable physical facts!

K'mon, Six... s u r p r i s e me!

ianao

terraly:

On a related, yet unrelated note regarding "silly conspiracies":

Please go to the following website:

http://www.msss.com (Malin Space Science Systems)

Now, click on the link titled:
"NEW! M13-M18: 10,230 New Images April 2001"

Now, scan and click and point to your heart's desire. Please tell me where these 10,230 new images are. I only see "the pictures of Mars acquired by NASA's Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) orbiter through August 2000". (as quoted from the site)

Now, please return to http://www.msss.com and click on the link titled: "See the Latest Pictures from Mars: Mars Global Surveyor MOC"

Note on this page that the first link is labelled "LATEST: 4 APR 01". Please go ahead and click this link.

Now, Note on the next page that the first link is marked: "10,230 New Images!" and note the date of April, 2001.

Now, after getting to this page, please NOTE that you are now being redirected back to the page that only has releases through August of 2000. ( http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/).

Tell me, where are the 10,230 new images as announced on Malin's intro page for April of 2001? Are they "bundled" with the images that only are marked through August of 2000? If so, why is this not STATED anywhere?

What a dumbass of a webmaster they must have!

Tallyman: If I am totally brain-farting here, please let me know and correct me promptly, but I cannot find any of those new April images as referred to in the letter to FACETS (nor can many people, including FACETS itsself)

terraly: You wonder why people even consider conspiracies, this is a damn good reason. I've seen MSSS blunder sometimes, but this is the first "mistake" I have ever seen that they are so reluctant to correct. Either a hacker is having fun with us "conspiracy theorists", or MSSS has a reason for SAYING that they've released 10,230 new images on the "internet", but not actually doing so.

rem

ianao,

Maybe this is what you are looking for?

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/01_31_01_releases/cydonia/

It took a little browsing around to find, but then again, I'm not one to jump to conclusions about conspiracies.

rem

Face/Pyramids on Mars! What do you think?

Share this