The implications of finding absolute proof.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Larry Burford</i>
<br /><b>[Malcolm] "5. Could it be the remains of a once living organism?"</b>

<b>[Rich] "5. Maybe, but that's one huge leap."</b>

***LB
Is it?

To claim it 'WAS once a living organism', yes. To ask 'Could it have been', not so much.
***LB

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">When you put it that way, I tend to agree with you. Put in the context of all the "stuff" we've seen over the years, and supposing anyone of them <b>could be </b> the remains of a once living organism, I'd say is a huge leap. It "could be" a crashed helicopter too. Where do we stop?

I think we stop at the first time someone takes one of these "could bes", follows up on it with evidence, and drives his point home. So far, no luck.

rd

By the way, Larry, did you cutoff email notifications? Not that it matters to me, just wondering if I lost it for some reason that could be corrected. If you did it on purpose because of too many notifications then...never mind.

<b>[rderosa] "Where do we stop?"</b>

Touche. I personally have a pretty thick skin. I wish everyone would grow a pair (of thick skins . But it seems that I'm in the minority.

Are there any rule adjustments we ought to consider? We want this forum to be as open as possible.

Without being too open.

Make any sense to you? It does to me. But then, I've always been at least two standard deviations off the norm (by my count but most people who know me probably have their own estimates).

So ...

***

By email notifications, I guess you mean for when you have subscribed to a forum/topic and someone makes a post? (I have not. Have they stopped?)

LB

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Larry Burford</i>
<br />Touche. I personally have a pretty thick skin. I wish everyone would grow a pair (of thick skins . But it seems that I'm in the minority.

Are there any rule adjustments we ought to consider? We want this forum to be as open as possible.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I couldn't agree more that everyone needs to have a thick skin about this, and keep plodding on. I try to keep it "real" as the saying goes, but who knows how well I do at it. It isn't always easy.

Sometimes we don't agree and it seems like it's more serious than it might be. I made a comment about the use of the term "inflammatory" because...well...

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">inflammatory (#301;n-fl#259;m#8242;#601;-tr#8242;#275;, -t#333;r#8242;#275;)
adj.
1. Arousing passion or strong emotion, especially anger, belligerence, or desire.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Really?! Arousing passion, strong emotion, anger, belligerence?!

Look at it from this point of view. Suppose I was a student at a university, and I was studying the images from Mars, and I went into a Professor of Geology's office and showed him that thing, and said, "I think this could be the remains of a living being." and the Prof replied, "That's a pretty big leap, what do you base that on?"

Sounds reasonable to me. As a matter of fact, in some circles it would be showing a great deal of restraint.

I'm not really sure what kind of changes you're getting at?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
By email notifications, I guess you mean for when you have subscribed to a forum/topic and someone makes a post? (I have not. Have they stopped?)

LB
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Yes, a few weeks ago, I stopped getting email notifications even though I'm still subscribed to the forum. It's not a big deal, it's just that you don't know what's going on in the other Topics. And it's pretty easy to ignore them if they start to seem like there's too many. I use a backup email address for this anyway.

rd

To claim it 'WAS once a living organism', yes. To ask 'Could it have been', not so much.
***LB

Gentlemen,

I am not chastising here. I too make "off the cuff statements" on occation which are sometimes construed as "actual" So I cast not the first stone here.

However, please let me clarify. Firstly, I never claimed that this is a possible or even a probable remnant of a once living organism. What I did say was; we could HYPOTHASIZE if this is a remnant?

And the response was; "that would be a far reach" or words to that effect. I objected on a basis of real science stating that NO it would not and gave my "objective" reasons why.

And I will state again. It is not unreasonable to consider if, in the event that an object or artifact which has similarities to skeletal remains and/or properties that have similarities to a religious artifact, could indeed be found on the Martian surface.

Currently, there is NO scientific, physical, atmospheric or otherwise <u>any</u> reason why this could not be the case.

When I return on Tuesday next week, I will post the surrounding image of which this artifact was clipped from. In this larger environmental image I feel quite sure will only add to the mystery. I will predict that we will be seeing for the first time on Meta Research imagery showing additional <i>possible</i> life as well as a <i>possible</i> power source yet to be defined. Until then.


Malcolm Scott

<b>[Malcolm] "... I never claimed that this is a possible or even a probable remnant of a once living organism. What I did say was; we could HYPOTHASIZE if this is a remnant?"</b>

This is a true statement. You said it 'could be'.

However, in the context of your total presentation here, from day one, there is <u>no way to <b>interpret</b> what you said</u> except "this IS a picture of a living Martian. QED."

There is NO APPEAL from my conclusion. I am the Moderator God, after all. But since I am a benevolent God (at the moment) I'll allow you to petition for a review. (See how I can violate my own rules, but you can't? That is one of the differences between Gods and mortals. Pay attention.)

***

By the way, have any of you noticed the similarities between Gods and Politicians? I hate to sully myself with such a comparison, but it is what it is.