Guest MikeG Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) Right and if you were really interested in a credible attack on the data you would go to the website and at least look at the data. I'd be glad to discuss it with you after you did that. But your speaking out of ignorance (not an insult--a description. Mods can relax) of the data isn't a position of strength for you. Frankly, that's the wrong answer! I am commenting directly on the image you have posted, on which there is no scale. Even if I go to this chap's website, why should I believe that he has been as honest with the scale as he has been dishonest with the colour? Link me to the NASA original and I'll take this all a lot more seriously. Mike Edited March 8, 2012 by MikeG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CT Seeker Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 If you went to the website you'd see the links DIRECTLY to the NASA website showing you exactly what he used. This conversation is just silly and I will move on as you can continue to ignore available data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kronprinz Adam Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 I was wondering how many of you in this forum believe that there is a Bigfoot/UFO connection? Merry Christmas to all! There was several "stories of the 3rd Kind" in the 70s and 80s magazines describing "hairy humanoids" descending from flying saucers!!!! The stories were quite entertaining, but it is possible that the magazines invented everything to amuse the readers!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spunout Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 I love topics like this as they spot light the creative thinkers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Just remember, creativity is not obliged to conform to reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 @CT Seeker: Respectfully, you are the one who introduced the photo of possible vegetation and liquid water on Mars so you bear the responsibility to share with the thread any information that might be available regarding the scale of the image. ^Egads, have you even provided a link for MikeG?! I don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Right here, Saskeptic. Jodie, I don't think it is clear that what is depicted in the Mars photo is a rock formation which is why it is being discussed/argued about. For people interested in high strangeness on Mars I suggest checking out the following website. JP Skipper does an excellent job of taking the actual Mars photographs, defeating the obfuscation tactics and showing what is actually on Mars. It includes living vegetation, liquid water, what appears to be ancient buildings, etc: http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CT Seeker Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Thanks Bonehead...*SIGH* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 "LAS VEGAS, Nev. Two years ago, Terry and Gwen Sherman were trying to unload a 480-acre Uintah County cattle ranch they said was rife with UFO activity and other bizarre occurrences....Millionaire philanthropist Robert T. Bigelow came to the rescue, buying the ranch and moving in a team of researchers and surveillance equipment." Here is another story of UFOs and BF on a Utah Ranch. BFs are seen in area and not directly connected with UFOs. Don't know what to think about this. Does anyone know the history on this ranch? http://www.rense.com...l32/strange.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) Georgerm, I recommend you read the book 'The Hunt For the Skinwalker', http://www.amazon.co...d/dp/1416505210, and also check out http://www.ovni.ch/guest/bourdais6.htm if you are interested in the Skinwalker Ranch. I have the book and have read it a couple of times. It's intriguing, but as the old cliche goes, it raises more questions than it answers. With NIDS apparently keeping the really interesting stuff under wraps, the book turns out to be a collection of curiosities more than an in-depth expose of high strangeness. The mention of BF-type creatures are limited to just a few paragraphs. Edited March 9, 2012 by Bonehead74 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) I read the Mars site so I am not speaking from a position of ignorance. It's garbage. Edited March 9, 2012 by arizonabigfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) Bonehead thanks for the reply. The report that I posted had enough of the curosities that you mention. I can imagine the book has many more and not sure I want to go in that direction when more questions than answers come about. But glad to know a book exist. Are the authors credible? When I read reports, I like to know the reputation of the author and their credentials. BF is where my interest lies and the report that I posted had more to do with extraterristeral which is another long term study to take on. BF keeps my hands full and don't really accept a BF/UFO connection but will read reports if people post them. We open one door only to find 10 more closed doors. I read the Mars site so I am not speaking from a position of ignorance. It's garbage. I looked at it and it's another can of worms. Below is some of what is being said: "TNow I've included the above fifth image of the same site but taken from the decades old Viking imaging to demonstrate that all visuals of these colossal monuments have been removed and completely sanitized from the older Viking evidence. Believe me, we would normally and easily be able to see anything like the 12 mile across head monument in this imaging. Obviously intentional tampering is by far the most likely explanation for the complete absence of these colossal size objects. We know conclusively from the numerous MOC imaging as listed above that these colossal objects are there. Yet, we don't see them here in the Viking data. That's obviously because they have been completely covered up by the same image tampering that has here again also blotted out the river system in the background, just as in the MOC data." Edited March 9, 2012 by See-Te-Cah NC To remove double quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) Authors of 'The Hunt For the Skinwalker': http://en.wikipedia....i/Colm_Kelleher http://www.8newsnow....03/george-knapp They don't appear to be fly-by-night hacks. Edited March 9, 2012 by Bonehead74 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) Thanks again Bonehead and rather impressive credentials for two of the researchers. This tell me there is something going on and would like to know more about it. Colm Kelleher is a research scientist and author. He received his PhD in biochemistry at Trinity College, Dublin and has 21 years of experience in the field of cell and molecular biology. In addition he was an adminisrator for a Nevada aerospace company, Space Sciences Inc., and was also Deputy Administrator of the NIDS, where he led the investigation at Skinwalker Ranch. He currently works in the biotechnology sector. Deputy Administrator Colm Kelleher, Ph.D. is quoted as saying the organization is not designed to study UFO's only. "We don't study aliens, we study anomalies. They're the same thing in a lot of people's minds, but not in our minds."[2] NIDSci has at various times employed scientists such as Eric W. Davis, who has worked for NASA on topics related to the claims of Eugene Podkletnov and who has also worked for the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin. Edited March 9, 2012 by georgerm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Frankly, that's the wrong answer! I am commenting directly on the image you have posted, on which there is no scale. Even if I go to this chap's website, why should I believe that he has been as honest with the scale as he has been dishonest with the colour? Link me to the NASA original and I'll take this all a lot more seriously. Mike Well out of curosity I did go to the website and very easily found this. It indicates to me NASA released this picture out of scale to begin with, so unless someone here can convince NASA to produce the original, debating the scale of the picture is pointless. There is no proof available to the public either way. JMO of course. ''The original MGS MOC E0801033 image strip used to extract the Mars evidence here is long and unusually thin. That signals a researcher like me to look closer at it. Why? Because it often means that someone has shrunk the strip so that any detail in it will be as from considerable distance and trying to zoom in on any of the evidence for a closer look in the strip will quickly run into trouble. In fact, that appears to be the case here. Additionally, someone put a haze over the strip to further degrade resolution as well as making it very dark. Most researchers would pass over such an image and the secrecy types know this. None-the-less, as you can see below, the evidence can still be brought out sufficiently to at least determine what is really going on.'' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts