You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Let me first say that it is not the policy of New Mars or its parent organization, the Mars Society International, to pursue investigations into intelligent alien life of the Cydonia variety. We do not believe that there is a conspiracy to cover it up, and we believe that discussion of such topics is not useful due to insufficient evidence and a complete lack of usage of the scientific method. The New Mars forums were not set up to promote this kind of discussion, and papers submitted to Mars Society Conventions relating to Cydonia are not welcome.
However, New Mars is not going to suppress or censor this kind of discussion, since people will always want to talk about it. All posts on New Mars referring to the possibility of intelligent alien life having formed artefacts on Earth, Mars, Venus or indeed anywhere in the solar system should go into this forum - if they are not made in this forum, then they will be moved here. Discussions of the Drake equation or detecting intelligent life may or may not be moved here.
The management of this forum and of New Mars is up to the administrator's and the Mars Society International's discretion. If you are not happy with this arrangement, then there's always Usenet and other forums.
Editor of [url=http://www.newmars.com]New Mars[/url]
Offline
Maybe you should rename this thread "The Lunatic Fringe"
To achieve the impossible you must attempt the absurd
Offline
Maybe you should rename this thread "The Lunatic Fringe"
hahaha
How ironic.
Offline
Overall new mars seems to have a relativly well rounded group. At least compared to other forums. I am sure that the number of crazed incoherent posts will expand with the popularity increase of the webboards.
Offline
Dear Adrian, Thank you for allowing discussion of the Cydonia structures. However, I have to disagree with your statements about the lack of evidence & lack of proper use of the scientific method when examining possible alien structures in our solar system. Here's some important facts you should consider. 1. Many reputable scientists & organizations consider the concept of alien artifacts in our solar system a possibility. These individuals & organizations include Sir Arthur C. Clarke, Dr. Carl Sagan, Mr. Walter Sullivan of The New York Times in his book "We Are Not Alone", Dr. Jill Tarter of the SETI Institute & Dr. Seth Shostak of the SETI Institute. It should be noted,however, that Dr. Shostak considers it possible but very unlikely. 2. NASA discussed the possibility of alien artifacts in our solar system in The Brooking Report that was presented to Congress in 1961. In addition,the 1999 Workshop on the Societal Implications Of Astrobiology(Ames Research Center-Pages 27-28-Dr. Albert Harrison Comments) discussed The Brookings Report & alien artifacts in our solar system. The Brookings Report also discussed the possibility of withholding the existence of alien artifacts from the public because of fear of a negative public response to their existence.NASA-Ames Workshop On The Societal Implication Of Astrobiology(1999) 3. The Society For Planetary SETI Research, which in Nov., 1997 had an important meeting with then NASA Acting Director for Solar System Exploration Dr. Carl Pilcher that led to the 1998 MGS re-photography of Cydonia, takes a very balanced approach to the concept of alien artifacts in our solar system. It supports a thoughtful & very detailed examination of possible artificial structures in our solar system & includes members such as former shuttle astronaut & NSS President Dr. Charles Walker. Dr. Carl Pilcher was very impressed with the extensive research that the SPSR had carried out. After the meeting SPSR scientists were informed that although many NASA scientists viewed alien artifacts with great skepticism, others within NASA find the evidence intriguing.Society For Planetary SETI Research(Homepage) 4. The Mars Society(Spanish Chapter) recently(Nov.,2002) published an article in which they supported investigating the possibility of alien structures at Cydonia with a manned expedition to Mars. The article also discussed using nuclear propulsion for a manned Mars expedition. Again, thanks for allowing discussions of this very important topic. Respectfully Yours, Rick L. Sterling-Member-The Mars Society & The Planetary Society;Contributor To The Stafford Commission Report(Nuclear Rockets Section) On President Bush's(Senior) SEI Lunar-Mars ProgramMex-Areohab: A Hispanic-Mexican Habitat For Settlement Of Mars
Offline
Ok. I am new to this forum. It seems so far very informative in many aspects. I look forward to getting to see & know this more. I already know some of you. But like meeting new peoples. :-)
It is encouraging at least, though held with bias it seems,...
;-) ... that the issue is at least allowed to be heard. To me I am more in your face about the issue as it IS an issue to be dealt with. So great for no censorship... bad for the spitting on it! :-/ But that is just how it is. I guess. For now. ;-)
Through what I am trying to do with my radio Show, I am trying to focus on the Face of It All. ;-) The past show I had done was dealt on this issue. It is not archived yet, but maybe you would like to see the pics I used of the Face at Cydonia. Natural Intelligence??... Orrrr...
That's the main radio show page. I hope you check it out & see the Faces of the Face At Cy. ;-) Also feel free to listen to past show archives. I do hope to have some of you on in the near future discussing many wonderful subjects, including the Face at Cy, as well as what many not want to accept of Mars research! But also open to discuss with those that not adhere to artificiality, as long as no bias. ;-)
Well..I'll be back later & check this forum out more.
Offline
What is cydonia variety?
Offline
In regards to the stated purpose of this forum Adriane posted:
"Let me first say that it is not the policy of New Mars or its parent organization, the Mars Society International, to pursue investigations into intelligent alien life of the Cydonia variety. We do not believe that there is a conspiracy to cover it up, and we believe that discussion of such topics is not useful due to insufficient evidence and a complete lack of usage of the scientific method. The New Mars forums were not set up to promote this kind of discussion, and papers submitted to Mars Society Conventions relating to Cydonia are not welcome."
It seems to me that a good deal of serious scientific study from respected researchers in many fields has been applied to study of "The Face".
Dr. Mark Carlotto, using photoclinometry, concluded that the face seen in the photographs reflects an actual face on the ground and not an illusion, stating "The features are present in the underlying topography and do seem to reflect recognizably facial charateristics over a wide range of illumination, conditions and perspectives."
Geologist James Erhavec, who has assisted in the establishment of a geologic baseline for continued studies of Cydonia does not believe any of the anomalous features of Cydonia are the result of natural erosion processes.
Geologist G. E. Mcgill, using crater dimensional equations concluded that only slight to modest erosion had occured in the area, simply not enough to allow the formation of the
Cydonia anomalies through erosion.
Anthropologist James Channon examined the "Face on Mars" and found its proportions were in accord with classical cannons concluding that the structure was"...a consciously created monument typical of archaelogy left by our predecessors."
Dr. Mark Carlotto and his colleague Michael C. Stern applied fractal analysis to the face on Mars and the results indicated very high probablility that the structure was artificial.
Robert Fiertek did an extensive four year study of the Mars structures that included careful measurements of their relative alignments. He was so impressed by their architectural symmetries that he concluded:
"It can be argued that individual objects at Cydonia may or may not be artificial, but it is very doubtful that the complex as a whole is anything but artificial." Vincent Dipietro and Gregory Molenaar published a very detailedand respectable scientific analysis of the face.
(The above info is from the book Martian Genesis by Herbie Brennan)
I am not here to argue with you about what material is of a serious enough scientific nature to be submitted to the Planetary Society. Searching for traces or clues of the presence of intelligent civilization, past or present, through remote viewing and analysis of the Mars images is the focus of my work and having spent in excess of 5000 hours over the last four years or so in this pursuit I do take it seriously.
I am not sure if I should be miffed or honored that my work was removed from the Life on Mars thread and put in the Intelligent Alien Life thread where it will presumably not contaminate work of a more serious scientific nature.
When discovering and exploring a new world that might contain the marks of an alien culture or civilization, past or present, I think that what can be observed visually and analyzed, drawing on what is known about anthropology, human society, ancient artifacts, archaeology and the history of civilization here on Earth is every bit as important and worthwhile as as the more "scientific" approaches. Remote viewing is just another tool that can be used to help define what Mars is or what it has been in the past.
My very narrow interest lies with discovering if Mars bears the marks of having been inhabited by civilization and what the nature of that civilization and culture might have been, and what the relationship of Martian culture might have with the history of civilization on Earth. There are fascinating clues to be found in regards to these issues.
I am pleased that there is a place in your forum for the exploration of other than mainstream thought on Mars.
Offline
In regards to the stated purpose of this forum Adriane posted:
"Let me first say that it is not the policy of New Mars or its parent organization, the Mars Society International, to pursue investigations into intelligent alien life of the Cydonia variety. We do not believe that there is a conspiracy to cover it up, and we believe that discussion of such topics is not useful due to insufficient evidence and a complete lack of usage of the scientific method. The New Mars forums were not set up to promote this kind of discussion, and papers submitted to Mars Society Conventions relating to Cydonia are not welcome."
It seems to me that a good deal of serious scientific study from respected researchers in many fields has been applied to study of "The Face".
Dr. Mark Carlotto, using photoclinometry, concluded that the face seen in the photographs reflects an actual face on the ground and not an illusion, stating "The features are present in the underlying topography and do seem to reflect recognizably facial charateristics over a wide range of illumination, conditions and perspectives."
Geologist James Erhavec, who has assisted in the establishment of a geologic baseline for continued studies of Cydonia does not believe any of the anomalous features of Cydonia are the result of natural erosion processes.
Geologist G. E. Mcgill, using crater dimensional equations concluded that only slight to modest erosion had occured in the area, simply not enough to allow the formation of the
Cydonia anomalies through erosion.
Anthropologist James Channon examined the "Face on Mars" and found its proportions were in accord with classical cannons concluding that the structure was"...a consciously created monument typical of archaelogy left by our predecessors."
Dr. Mark Carlotto and his colleague Michael C. Stern applied fractal analysis to the face on Mars and the results indicated very high probablility that the structure was artificial.
Robert Fiertek did an extensive four year study of the Mars structures that included careful measurements of their relative alignments. He was so impressed by their architectural symmetries that he concluded:
"It can be argued that individual objects at Cydonia may or may not be artificial, but it is very doubtful that the complex as a whole is anything but artificial." Vincent Dipietro and Gregory Molenaar published a very detailedand respectable scientific analysis of the face.(The above info is from the book Martian Genesis by Herbie Brennan)
I am not here to argue with you about what material is of a serious enough scientific nature to be submitted to the Planetary Society. Searching for traces or clues of the presence of intelligent civilization, past or present, through remote viewing and analysis of the Mars images is the focus of my work and having spent in excess of 5000 hours over the last four years or so in this pursuit I do take it seriously.
I am not sure if I should be miffed or honored that my work was removed from the Life on Mars thread and put in the Intelligent Alien Life thread where it will presumably not contaminate work of a more serious scientific nature.
When discovering and exploring a new world that might contain the marks of an alien culture or civilization, past or present, I think that what can be observed visually and analyzed, drawing on what is known about anthropology, human society, ancient artifacts, archaeology and the history of civilization here on Earth is every bit as important and worthwhile as as the more "scientific" approaches. Remote viewing is just another tool that can be used to help define what Mars is or what it has been in the past.
My very narrow interest lies with discovering if Mars bears the marks of having been inhabited by civilization and what the nature of that civilization and culture might have been, and what the relationship of Martian culture might have with the history of civilization on Earth. There are fascinating clues to be found in regards to these issues.
I am pleased that there is a place in your forum for the exploration of other than mainstream thought on Mars.
A very ratonal policy.
Offline
Yor forgot the logic of string theory. every string is a possibility branch. As we are made up of possibility, there are other possibilities where we are on this planet, but our histories are different.
The greatest advance will come from meeting ourselves. So will the greatest chaos.
Offline
Is it your contention that there is no extraterrestrial intelligent life ?
If there is why have you excluded the possibility of their activities here or on other planets ?
SRAM
[b]JESUS IS GOD[/b]
Offline
Seems like I picked the wrong place to present my evidence. I'll see if I can find a more open group. BTW the evidence does not point to them being "Aliens". They looked just like you and me.
Offline
Pages: 1