My pareidolia knows no bounds.

More
10 years 6 months ago #22513 by rderosa
Replied by rderosa on topic Reply from Richard DeRosa
<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 />Suppose it had started out as an exact duplicate of one of those Easter Island heads?

After 3.5 million years of erosion (wind blown dust, micro- and milli- meteorites, thermal expansion cycles, etc.) what would it look like?

***

The problem with conjectures like this is that until you can go there and touch it all you have is an interesting data point.


<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">You are absolutely correct. I would even go so far as to say, <b>even if </b> you go there, you're quite possibly never going to be sure. Remember, these things are immense. This is roughly the size of 3 football fields in both directions. Sure if you were there you could hike on it and around it, and even hover over it in a craft of some sort, but unless it shows signs of being made of some material that would lend itself to sculpture, it may just look like a couple of hills.

One thing you have to admit though, is that it's not an object like the real Easter Island Heads.

rd

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 6 months ago #22230 by rderosa
Replied by rderosa on topic Reply from Richard DeRosa
<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 />After 3.5 million years of erosion (wind blown dust, micro- and milli- meteorites, thermal expansion cycles, etc.) what would it look like?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Another problem I have is why does it have to be 3.5 million years. If we go by Sitchen's theory of the Annunaki coming here originally, we're talking about no more than 600,000 years. That's a huge difference. An order of magnitude.

All though I suppose...

rd

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 6 months ago #22231 by Marsevidence01


The problem with conjectures like this is that until you can go there and touch it all you have is an interesting data point.

Remember, these things are immense. This is roughly the size of 3 football fields in both directions. Sure if you were there you could hike on it and around it, and even hover over it in a craft of some sort, but unless it shows signs of being made of some material that would lend itself to sculpture, it may just look like a couple of hills.
rd
[/quote]

Interesting point; <i>"material that would lend itself to sculpture"</i>

Unless of course, an intelligence which is thousands if not 10's of thousands of years in advance has not gotten over the difficulties of needing a material suitable to "hack away at" with a pick-axe. Seems to me, if a civilization this advaned required the need to manipulate a form or a shape "in any size" in the Martian surface, it should be quite easy I would have thought.

Do we have any possible evidence of that? Well yes we do....

Malcolm Scott

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 6 months ago #22572 by rderosa
Replied by rderosa on topic Reply from Richard DeRosa
<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 />suitable to "hack away at" with a pick-axe.
Malcolm Scott
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I was thinking more along the lines of lasers shot from a craft. Unless these aliens can fly around with a hand laser. But "pick-axe"? Probably not. That would be like when Frat boys have to wash all of Jack London square with a tooth brush.

rd

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 6 months ago #22232 by Marsevidence01
I was thinking more along the lines of lasers shot from a craft. Unless these aliens can fly around with a hand laser. But "pick-axe"? Probably not. That would be like when Frat boys have to wash all of Jack London square with a tooth brush.
[/quote]
rd

Yes, a close comparison and, the dimensions are huge at least when compared to those on Earth.
All images below are courtesy of the ESA Mars Express starting here:

www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science...Grand_Canyon_of_Mars

In this image, an interesting plateau can be found on the south facing slopes of the Hebes Chasma's Mensa slope wall as shown here in location Image A.

[/URL]

This close up perspective is a little off (flattened)and rotated approx 40% but in closer magnification we see familiar shape and form in Image B

[/URL]

Colorized image has the image back to TDC rotation

[/URL]

The plateau I've estimated to be around 1.5km from one end to the other. The image has been rotated so three monkey heads can be seen in a defined perspective mode. Each can be seen with conceptual properties of individual caricatures. These can be deduced from right to left. We see the furthest in perspective Monkey SEE NO EVIL . And then the Monkey in the center HEAR NO EVIL is crushed between while the largest and closest Monkey that SPEAK'S NO EVIL.

<i>Note, pay attention to the visible angle of the plateau perspective the larger head seems closest while the smaller is further afield</i>

From his mouth, the tongue can be observed whipping across the other two, depicted as a forked tipped tongue! Follow the lines, the image is quite clear.

When I first researched this area of the Plateau, the magic of the design was not immediately apparent. Then I came across this image of the Valles Marinaris basin, and the depth and vertical drop became evermore apparent.

[/URL]

The slope of the Mensa (below image) is actually more vertical than horizontal than seen here due to my rotation.

But the image below was taken by a different flyby and from a different lower angle. One can just make out the same Three Monkeys and that they have a defined 3 dimensionality. And even at this oblique angle, the same features which are seen in the overhead image are observed .
www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2008/03...ma_perspective_view2

[/URL]

The same image below but now rotated back to TDC. The angle of inclination is around 40%

[/URL]

Of course this is a big if at this point, as the whole idea goes to mute if the viewer does not see the very design and construct of The Three Monkey's. However, if you are like me and see this parable quite clearly, then you will have probably caught on to the Perspective Value proportionate to the size of each Monkey head, that appears to be built into design and angle of the cliff wall.

And it's here where it get's beautiful.

The Plateau lies on the side of the Mensa wall where its length, falls down the wall at a 40% declination.

The largest in the perspective of the three heads is in fact the furthest down the side of this immense island (some 5/6km high from its base) so when viewed directly from above, the plateau has built into the design "a perspective" that compensates for the visual distortion rate of declination.

Quite adroit, hmmm?

[/URL]

Or then again, it could just be another strange rock formation.


It's difficult to really grasp the size of this monstrous island, standing on the Chasma Rim would be beyond anything that exists on Earth so much so, that to stand on the rim and look across (in perfect clarity no clouds) just 20 miles away, you would be looking down on this Monster Island! In this image of Mount Kilimanjaro the 4th highest mountain on Earth at 5.8km high from base the Hebes Mensa will equate to about the same height except whereas Kilimanjaro is only 9km wide, the Mensa is 122km long from toe to toe. And this expanse would all be visible looking DOWN on its peek! A gargantuous experience.

[/URL]

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 6 months ago #22280 by rderosa
Replied by rderosa on topic Reply from Richard DeRosa
I'm not seeing the monkeys. That's the problem with a lot of this stuff, in many instances it's a personal experience. But we've usually found that if you make a key others will see it, and then after that they can see it without the key.

How about simplifying it to just the monkeys and a key?

rd

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.511 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum