Road Runner on Mars

Considering the fact that there are almost a dozen avian formations surrounding this little road runner geoglyph in this surrounding area of Cydonia (Including an eagle, dove, parrot, raptor, magpie, woodpecker, pelican, goose and more), this new HiRISE image appears to confirm all this birds features - that were observed in earlier lower-res images.

John Levasseur is correct - due to the age of these formations much of the fine detail has long been lost to the erosion of time and the idea of zooming in with the MRO HiRISE camera for evidence of brick and mortar is like zooming in on the head of the Serpent Mound winding along Brush Creek in Adams County, Ohio.

It may just appear as another pile of earth and rock.

Zip Monster

There is another explanation which I'd like to interject here. For the sake of argument, let us say these formations are artificial. In this speculation, we could assume that the makers have created these endeavors to be seen from considerable heights (assuming they have the capacity to view them from far above). Then in this case, it may not be necessary to fabricate, contrive or otherwise manipulate the surface with any real need of great detail at close range. Or in other words, they are produced to be "observed" from height only. This case, only specific proportions or "aspects" of the design need only be crafted.

Also, we must not overlook the possibility that the methods used in their creation may not require picks and shovels as we use here on earth. So the question then remains is; could these artifacts be created by some unknown technology that is activated not at ground level but from above? The evidence seems to suggest this.

Below, is an anaglyph of the so called "Three Monkeys" from the overhead view of Hebes along the south wall of the Mensa. Here one can see quite close up in 3D which shows the formation with very little detail being conducive to the formation when seen from high above.

[/URL]

It is important not to loose sight of the fact that many thousands of eyes here on Earth over the years when seeing the face at Cydonia for the first time, have immediately cried FACE! So the objective (if there was one) was in fact - attained.

Malcolm Scott

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Marsevidence01</i>
<br /> In this speculation, we could assume that the makers have created these endeavors to be seen from considerable heights (assuming they have the capacity to view them from far above). Then in this case, it may not be necessary to fabricate, contrive or otherwise manipulate the surface with any real need of great detail at close range. Or in other words, they are produced to be "observed" from height only. This case, only specific proportions or "aspects" of the design need only be crafted.

... So the question then remains is; could these artifacts be created by some unknown technology that is activated not at ground level but from above? The evidence seems to suggest this.
Malcolm Scott
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Back in the early 2000s, when I was working with Neil writing papers on some of these anomalies, I posited just such a theory. Only my idea was that these landscape images were designed to be seen from a particular distance above. <b>Not </b>just from <b>far away above, but from a particular distance above.</b>

I don't remember what Topic it was in, but there's one where TVF and I go back and forth on this subject for quite some time. My main reason was that all of the stuff that was being found tended to all be in the same order of magnitude size-wise. This seemed odd to me, and I conceived of the idea that it would make sense if the target audience was some constant distance away, either in a craft, or on another planet (star system, whatever) where their method and capabilities of observation corresponded to seeing things that distance that were exactly the size of the Martian objects.

However, as my thinking evolved, I realized there was a much simpler reason for them to be the size they were. Namely, the size just happened to be some fraction (1/3, 1/2, 2/3, etc) of the width of the MSSS MOC image strips.

If it's all pareidolia (modern), then it only stands to reason that we see images in the size of the image we're looking at.

Simple.

Did you ever wonder why there always appears to be faces (and other forms), almost anywhere we look? There are only two likely reasons for that: 1.) Trinket was right and there are artworks on every square inch of Mars, or 2.) (more likely) It's all pareidolia (modern).






rd

Back in the early 2000s, when I was working with Neil writing papers on some of these anomalies, I posited just such a theory. Only my idea was that these landscape images were designed to be seen from a particular distance above. <b>Not </b>just from <b>far away above, but from a particular distance above.</b>
rd
[/quote]


Yes, this is a most intriguing phenomenon and I am of the mind that there is most assuredly more here than meets the eye (excuse the pun).

We all derive our conclusions (or theories) from the basics of our disciplines. The scientist will see and evaluate differently than say; an artist. It's rather similar to being at an art gallery and standing in front of a piece of "abstract" art where interpretation is in the mind of the beholder. As a scientist, I sense that you will evaluate the measure of a thing, where I will be more inclined to see the "design" in the object.

I have seen great size (relatively) in many perceived designs. The Mensa in Hebes Chasma is a truly remarkable example of this. I see definite creations here and no, they are not pareidolia (all) as the shapes or landscape formations can be seen quite clearly from some distance above. But this is the designer in me.

Take a look at this huge example of a Labrador's head (of sorts) at the very north west quadrant of the Mensa. In 2D, the image can seen of a dog and in it's mouth there is the defined rock structure that has the appearance of a decapitated head of a contrived creature that looks to have been killed by an arrow. Underneath the dogs head can be seen it's legs stretched out in front with an interesting twist. I have noticed this inclusion in many "action" images where the legs can be construed as being blurred as if "in motion" Quite remarkable!

[/URL]

However, this is only really seen from circa170km above. But upon close range inspection, we see a somewhat contrived landscape where the dog head image diminishes somewhat as it corrals down the side of the Mensa wall. As a result, the image is more profound if one closes one eye (in the 3D image) to see the shape in 2D as opposed to 3D. The question to me is; has this angle been accounted for in it's creation. I have to say at this point yes as the principle of "perspective" has been correctly accounted for when viewed directly above. This is even more remarkable when one takes into account that the vertical drop from the top of the Mensa to the base is in the order of 4 to 5km!

[/URL]

And so from this distance above, the image is quite clear. If this IS real, this would suggest a technology and ability that we have no way as yet of understanding, not the least of which of "why a retrieving Labrador like dog"? I estimate the head to be approximately 25km across.







Malcolm Scott

I see the dog in the 2D image. The 3D image appears to falsify it. The dismembered head is certainly falsified.

rd

Back in the early 2000s, when I was working with Neil writing papers on some of these anomalies, I posited just such a theory. Only my idea was that these landscape images were designed to be seen from a particular distance above. <b>Not </b>just from <b>far away above, but from a particular distance above.</b>
rd
[/quote]

Is there anyway I could get a copy of your papers here?
I believe you have my email address.

Cheers,

Malcolm Scott