>[Rob]: I was just wondering if anyone can point out more convincing images that perhaps are new to me, or have any reasonable interpretations other than structures.... or for that matter, better images/ reasons to believe there are buildings, etc. on Mars.
Biases are strong and run both ways. That is why we cannot trust "what an image looks like" to mean much. The team of scientists responsible for the "Artificial structures on Mars" presentation on this web site (see "Featured Articles" in left box on home page) has looked carefully for other clues, such as before-the-fact predictions, context, and interrelationships between images.
The bottom line is that it does not matter how artificial an image looks -- it can still be natural. And it doesn't matter how easily a feature can be explained by geology or other natural processes -- If it fulfills a priori predictions that distinguish it from chance, then it is not of natural origin. To cling to a prior opinion in the face of objective contrary evidence is just bias -- either way. -|Tom|-
Also, there are more than a few images that show what surely appear to be water, triple point be danged;
The "lakes" are probably aqueous but not pure water. For instance, a nitrite - nitrate - water solution could have a freezing point as much as 70 Fahrenheit degrees below pure water. The apparent observational fact is that of a liquid. There are hundreds of candidates, when non-pure solutions are considered.
Hi Tom,
I have several I think are pretty excellent.
Here's one of my latest.
<img src="
server2044.virtualave.net/bullitt/e02-00373C1structure-art.jpg
" border=0>
Whole bunch more where that came from.
Notice the angularity of the blocks on that rise.
BTW, nice BBS!
