Alien Anomalies

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: The Spherule or Blueberry Thread


Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1901
Date:
The Spherule or Blueberry Thread
Permalink  
 


969.jpg

mall deepenings in limestone are hammered by cave pearls. This rare species of pearls grows in itself in puddles of lime water. Its structure differs from those pearls that molluscs make a little, but it has no beautiful nacreous shine. Nevertheless is a rare natural phenomenon, therefore a scattering of cave pearls always represents a great interest for cave explorers.



-- Edited by goggog on Sunday 27th of November 2011 01:50:57 PM

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Date:
Permalink  
 

If we can find a golf ball on the Moon, we can as well find it on Mars.

__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 399
Date:
Permalink  
 

we called them puffballs. fungus.

and they are mangos? iceman?

the blueberries are not the other thing, they are not anything presented here.


we don't know what they are yet.



__________________


Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

Not quite sure what you are getting at Iceman, but the posts on this thread are relevant, aren't they?
Probably the one that is not so relevant is your own with the golfball in it - but even that is somewhat relevant (it is round?).

The point is that there probably will never be a complete solution until we have the real truth from Mars, and anything we say will be only almost as good as the scientists view, since they know how to interpret the (perhaps false?) data from the other instruments and we dont.


__________________


 



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Date:
Permalink  
 

How about stick to the original topic instead of stuck in a unrealistic example that has no reference to the project.

brobohnerz.jpg

golf ball.jpg

I mean working  on a solution instead of considering the coverage of the dust paralyzed thinking.



__________________


Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

It is rather strange how there are not piles of spherules in certain places where they have been eroded out of the rock, or the wind has blown them (no flowing water on Mars). It is strange too how there are some localised areas like between plates of rock, where there are no spherules in a spherule-rich area. One day Science has to come up with hypotheses about this kind of visible anomaly.

We do see meteor-like or volcanic-type rocks strewn about the place, I wonder if the spherules are eroded out of these rocks? (I dont think so really,but you never know the ideas the space geologists will come up with to explain their concretions theory)

__________________


 



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 551
Date:
Permalink  
 



Bohnerz image is from earth.

This kind of " Bohnerz" occurs in sandstone and in limestone. Both are sedimentary rockformations.  Bohnerz needs the force  of streaming  water to be created. The shape of these spherules goes from kidney-shaped to perfect round. Cause Bohnerz  consists of a bunch of layers of Fe hydroxydes encircling a center, like the famous Mn-concretions from the deep sea, this would be (maybe) a  distinctive feature, regarding the question if the martian spherules are of organic or of unorganic origin.

After the solid rock is moved away by erosion the spheres get embedded into the earth or they are washed away or washed together in certain places by water and wind. 


__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Date:
Permalink  
 

In further studies of certain subjects is sometimes necessary to examine more specific details, in order to gain a clearer picture of the subject. We can find thousands of similar circular subject all around the universe therefore we need further approach.

trjásveppasamanburður.JPG



__________________


Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

...but where are the cup recesses left where the spherules fall out after being eroded from the rocks? I assume this photo is from Earth and it clearly shows the recesses where the spherules were... (I hope it IS from Earth, if not it is the best and clearest photo I have ever seen from Mars!)

I think I am right in saying that the rock they come out of needs to be a sandstone type too which this one is in your photo osd.

__________________


 



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 551
Date:
Permalink  
 

Maybe there are optical similar phenomenons that are significant different in its  origin. Organic  and unorganic ones. Check for example "Bohnerz", a special type of spherulitic iron ore. 

brobohnerz.jpg

__________________


Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

Right, further investigation leads me to the radical idea that this is not rock but a whole area of this fungus-type plant and these spherules ARE the fruituing bodies of them. Look at this and tell me that this is not a whole scene of plant matter with the spherules as the mature reproductive method.

You know when NASA was supposed to have destroyed that fossil? Well, it was not a fossil at all but one of these pieces of plant life. If you look carefully, you can easily see 'scales' or overlapping segments which could have been what NASA destroyed and everyone else thought was a fossil. THAT is why they did not bother too much - because it is all over the place. If it HAD been a fossil, they probably would have preserved it on a "if in doubt, then preserve it" kind of mindset, but because they knew what it was (and we the public did not know) they went on and destroyed it with the RAT.

Sorry, but as you can see, I am really excited about this possibility.

The other thing that just occurred to me is that the 'soil' they are growing in is not soil but they are tthe spores of this plant and they come from the burst-open fruiting bodies.



-- Edited by qmantoo on Friday 18th of March 2011 01:54:25 AM

__________________


 



Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

In the middle of this image, you will see what I think is a blueberry/spherule emerging from the ground.

I think this sequence is of an area where they are popping up from all over and emerging from the spaces between the rock. I think there are possible fungus fillaments and threads and new small blueberries growing. There are many images of this area so it must have been interesting to NASA scientists for some reason, and I think this growing blueberries is the reason.

Sorry, I just had to add this one.

This too is an excellent example of a growing blueberry.

 



-- Edited by qmantoo on Friday 18th of March 2011 01:29:06 AM

__________________


 



Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

It could be similar to a tree fungus - except we are shown Oppo taking the picture . Now, this may be all part of the illusion, I dont know, but if challenged, othodox people will say that it was found near rock not near wood. (That image I have given the link to, is a little strange anyway - with a straight 'track' at the top of the picture and no sky) So, anything is possible in this case.

__________________


 



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Date:
Permalink  
 

1M155259760EFF38EVP2977M2M1-BR sol305-pp.jpg

This could be a "tree" fungus. Please compare the background and the attached samples.

2686358910048367916DeCoqi_fs.jpg

B250865-Tree_fungus-SPL.jpg

Fungus_on_Tree.jpg

preview.jpg

 



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 134
Date:
Permalink  
 

SOL 305

Not sure if this is accumulated sand/dirt or some sort of vegetative growth on left side of spherule. 

1M155259760EFF38EVP2977M2M1-BR sol305.jpg

__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 134
Date:
Permalink  
 

Opportunity:  SOL 259

1M151175856EFF36CLP2977M2M1-BR 259.jpg

1M151175130EFF36CLP2977M2M1-BR.jpg

1M151177645EFF36CLP2956M2M1-BR.jpg



__________________


Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

The problem is sometimes that all images which show an area of fuzz/blurriness (for example) are modified in the same way. Now, we know from specs that the pancam is in focus from about 1 metre to infinity which means that unless there is a spot of rain or some other liquid on the lens of the camera, then this has to be manipulation. Unless of course there is some other reason for it.

I am not an expert photographer like some are here, however, my common sense says that if the specs of a camera say that it will be in focus from 1 metre, then I expect it to be sharp focus from that distance. Is this a reasonable assumption?

Even the pds images are affected and they are the ones which are supposed to be used by our scientific community.

It seems that no-one of any standing has the guts to stand up and ask why the specs of the cameras are not realised in the images we see in the pds. I can understand why some images may have to be reduced quality for website display purposes, but for scientists to use images for their research and for forming their hypotheses, they need the best quality available.

Sorry, I forgot to say that it is not difficult to prove that we are getting far, far lower quality images in the pds than the specs of the camera say we should be getting. The environment on Mars does not account for the differences.



-- Edited by qmantoo on Wednesday 16th of March 2011 01:21:17 AM

__________________


 



Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 305
Date:
Permalink  
 

1)Here we see an area where the paint job has failed.
What is wrong with it?  It may just be the angle due to uneven terrain.  Anyway, speculation is nice, but it's hard to believe if we can't come to some testable hypotheses.  The arc machining hypothesis is testable, has been tested, and came up with extremely similar results, perhaps beyond a shadow of doubt.  However, if you wish to form an alternate hypothesis, it must be testable otherwise there is great uncertainty.  This is the type of problem that the Big Bang theory faced, and failed at (it was based on false presumptions about the Dopplar effect and light), and is scientifically proven to be false now.  Don't make the mistakes modern astrophysicists have made - use as much logic as possible.  And where possible, use the empirical scientific method.  Not pseudoscience.

The problem with claiming "this image is tampered with" is that claim is extremely difficult to prove, and easy to disprove if multiple images exist.  So before you point fingers, be sure to observe other photographs of the same area, just to be safe.

If this site is a search for truth, then it must be scientifically dealt with.  Don't do thought experiments - observe and make plausible speculations.  Then do some actual research or experimentation/testing and figure out which one is correct.  And don't be afraid to admit when you are wrong, either.

The random, baseless speculation I have seen lately around here is nothing to be proud of - it is no more logical than speculating the Earth is flat or that the Sun is nuclear-powered, or that time dilation occurs.  These are baseless, and when they are not, they are still pseudoscientific, as they fail to account for evidence that flies right in the face of them, and are started from a lack of competency and knowledge on the real world and how it works.

Please think for yourselves.  It is interesting to note that science never advances drastically without the help of independent researchers.  If you do what I said here, you are indeed helping humanity.  Saying what you see in a rock is nice, but it isn't testable.  Saying that you see a hexagonal crater then assuming it is artificial is nonsense, as well (caused by electrical arcing).  Do some science.  I hear many people claim that what they do here isn't science, but that doesn't mean it has to be that way.


__________________
What if Pinnochio says that his nose will grow longer?


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Date:
Permalink  
 

 Here we see an area where the paint job has failed.

PaintFake.jpg

__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 134
Date:
Permalink  
 

After looking at dozens and dozens of these blueberries in opportunity images without realizing a real reason of how they formed or what they are I just thought I show photo with literally thousands of them basically carpeting the landscape from sol 2454. 

1P346035937EFFB0J3P2299L5M1_L2L5L5L7L7.jpg

__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 134
Date:
Permalink  
 

I've been looking into the possibility that these 'blueberries' are similar to the ancient plant 'Pachytheca' which are similar in shapes and sizes to the objects we see in the Mars images. 
Pachytheca - (Late Silurian to Early Devonian) Algae consisting of single spherical body 1.5-7 mm diameter composed of an inner and outer zone. The inner zone consists of a nucleus with multicellular filaments oriented randomly, but in the outer zone are radially oriented.  For a long time Pachytheca was thought to be part of a bigger plant, but nowadays it is rather firmly believed to have been a complete organism. 

There doesn't seem to be much about them online yet here is an interesting site that shows a few good examples of them. 

http://www.xs4all.nl/~steurh/engpach/epachy.html



__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 305
Date:
Permalink  
 

Speak of the devil:

__________________
What if Pinnochio says that his nose will grow longer?


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 305
Date:
Permalink  
 

1)then what the heck did that on mars?
Well, given the extremely convincing support for the electrical cosmos theory, much more than the mainstream one, it is safe to say that we simply do not know.  I haven't read the actual stuff on their speculation about Mars yet, but they say that whatever caused that planetwide devastation, it occurred very recently (thousands of years) and wasn't anything short of spectacular.
However, I am afraid that idea is still...speculation.

The plasma universe theory (plasma cosmology, now officially recognized as an actual field of study) is more accurate only because it uses the scientific method.  It isn't pseudoscience.  The modern theories are always surprised at what they find and post increasingly rediculous theories and ideas that defy observation and logic, such as black holes, relativity, dark matter, etcetera.  These ideas are just as silly, if not sillier, than the idea that the Earth is flat.  Physics has been thrown completely out the window, unfortunately.  The whole idea of an "aether" was completely thrown away, when this now strongly suggests the existence of an "aether".  The theory also explains more easily what modern mainstream science fails miserably at, with ease.  And it requires no strange, outlandish hypotheses.  It has been proven.  Mainstream ideas have not, and in many cases have been debunked, such as the Big Bang.  The universe is not expanding.  The "scientists" only think it has because they know nothing about physics.  Haha, they think that it means the observed quasar exhibiting redshift is moving away from us, when in reality, it is really exhibiting redshift because of its young age.  The Dopplar effect does not apply to light in the way that modern physics baselessly assumes it does.
So qmantoo, I do have a problem with mainstream science.  It's dogmatic.

2)no one says what the actual catharsis was!
If that word were used correctly, I could help you here.  If you are attempting to refer to what caused the destruction of Mars, as one may call it, that's still open to speculation.  Plasma cosmology simply goes with intellectual honesty: We don't know.

Also, from now on, I will be using the plasma cosmology interpretation of physics, as it is more efficient, complete, and demonstrably accurate.

3)ya! but i cannot go with that.

the spiurils or blueberries in the lab are just, what you call it, 

results of high temp elec arc. (in the lab!)

Yes, but it's the best explanation we've got at the moment.  It certainly makes sense.  No one is debating their existence.  And there is a striking resemblence between the spherules on Mars and the ones created in labs on Earth.  A possible explanation for why we don't see them in this abundance on Earth could be that our planet wasn't wiped out from an electrical arc.  Haha.

Still, we now know that the craters (majority, at least) are not impact craters at all but in fact the result of electrical phenomena.  The same goes with the canyons (however, the Grand Canyon on Earth appears to be the result of a similar electrical discharge).

Perhaps a reaction with the atmosphere would cause the Martian blueberries to lose their shiny metallic color and become their familiar tarnished blue-grey.

At the moment, I do not know enough about real physics to tell you why there are some...square blueberries, and neither does mainstream science.  I will try to find this out.

The implications of plasma cosmology are staggering.  The technologies now possible, the scientific explanations for stuff of fantasy and science fiction like telepathy and superluminal communication/travel, antigravity, etc. are not out of reach.  It's amazing what doors this opens for us.  And it also makes the ufo phenomenon much more plausible, now that it doesn't break any scientific laws.  So I will not be leaving this site in light of this new science.  In fact, I will stay here.  It puts that much more credibility into this.  So now that you aren't using an outdated theory, re-evaluate your hypotheses, making certain that nothing contradicts them.  Be better than mainstream.  Be intellectually honest.

(This would also say that we should expect to find some hexagonal shaped craters, as well as craters within craters and craters that overlap.  Those are not impact craters.)


__________________
What if Pinnochio says that his nose will grow longer?


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 134
Date:
Permalink  
 

This image of Sol 1747 shows some odd-shaped blueberries (2 almost square in lower left) and multiple examples of round ones with holes or dents in them.  It seems as though these things are everywhere that Opportunity rover is.  Does anyone know of any other examples of 'square' blueberries?

http://marsrover.nasa.gov/gallery/all/opportunity_m1747.html

Opportunity :: Microscopic Imager :: Sol 1747

1M283281560EFF94B2P2956M2M1.JPG


__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 399
Date:
Permalink  
 

then what the heck did that on mars?


niburu? what?

no one says what the actual catharsis was!

__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 399
Date:
Permalink  
 

ya! but i cannot go with that.

the spiurils or blueberries in the lab are just, what you call it,

results of high temp elec arc. (in the lab!)


they look nothing like on mars.


i don't buy it.

coagulation, melt, whatever, it's not the same.



__________________


Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

I think (if I have understood what little I read correctly) the point of it is that someone has made 'blueberries' in the lab with electric discharges and there is evidence that possibly many of the structures both large and small on Mars and in the universe are made using this phenomenon.

__________________


 



Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 399
Date:
Permalink  
 

interesting read and i never beat anybody up!

i was joking!

this is about blueberries and i don't see any connection, still.


no offence. i don't believe in the flying spaghetti monster either.

back ot,

deer droppings are like that too.

i still go with veg life form.

but there are parasites that create shells around themselves.

is this a colony and what are they waiting for to come by?

i try to think about these things as what we know as a food chain.

nothing lives in a vacume, sp!

ie; nothing survives without something else.





__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 399
Date:
Permalink  
 

read it, lol. thanks!

i look for traces of life elsewhere. i leave this stuff to the kids i used to beat up in school.


Summary



A complete summary of all the aspects of the Electric Cosmos is too extensive to fit into a single web page. In fact, this entire web site, with all its pages, is only a cursory introduction to the vast implications of these ideas. Therefore, this summary page can only list a few (not all) of the points that should be remembered by anyone who is trying to learn about the modern view of the Universe that is emerging. It is my hope that if you have read through these webpages, you may be interested in seeing a more complete description of these and other properties of the Electric Sky provided in my book by that name available through Mikamar Publishing and at Amazon.com.

The entire cosmos is permeated with plasma. In some regions (within a galaxy, within a solar system) the plasma is denser than it is in others. In some cases the plasma is visible, in some, not. But everywhere our spacecraft have gone - they have found it.
The electrical properties of plasma vastly outweigh its mechanical (gravitational) properties.
There is nothing mysterious about magnetic fields. They do not "get tangled up", "break", "merge", or "reconnect". They require moving charges (electric currents) in order to exist.
The relative distances between even the most densely packed stars are vast in comparison to those stars' diameters.
The homopolar motor - generator shape seems to be ubiquitous. Stars, pulsars, and galaxies are organized in this morphology.
The z-pinch effect that occurs in Birkeland currents (electrical currents that flow through plasmas) is responsible for the accretion of stars, planets, and galaxies.
It is quite possible that the solar system started out as a collinear array of "Herbig - Haro" type objects formed by a z-pinch.
The presumption that, if an object exhibits redshift, it must be far away - is false.
The Big Bang Theory is false. It has been defended in a most unscientific way.
There is a lot more electrical activity out there in the cosmos than astrophysicists seem to want to admit.
Astrophysicists and cosmologists need to take some courses in electrodynamic field theory and experimental plasma physics.
Astrophysicists need to stop acting in a "knee-jerk" confrontational way to any new ideas, especially those involving electricity. True professionals do not engage in ad hominum attacks.
Astrophysicists should stop dreaming up impossible imaginary entities such as black holes, neutron stars, strange matter, WIMPs, MACHOs, and MOND, when a perfectly real and well understood body of knowledge stands ready to explain all the things that "mystify" them so. For anyone who is interested in learning more about these ideas, some important web pages to take a look at are shown on the Links page that follows this one.
Some Last Thoughts I have been asked several times recently why I think it is so important that the Electric/Plasma Universe Theory gains general acceptance. What difference can it possibly make to the future of humanity? How will knowing how the cosmos operates benefit mankind? Who cares? Of what possible practical use is this information anyway? Why get so excited about it? How will it help us in the future?


A blunt short answer would have been: "Posing that question is equivalent to asking, Why study astronomy in the first place?" It would have to have been asked by someone who can look at the night sky and not wonder about that marvelous sight.

So, let me answer it this way instead:

One of the attributes that separates the human from the animals is our yearning to know about our world and our sky - to wonder about the cosmos and have a desire to find out how it works and what is up there. Another attribute is that we do not like to be told things that are untrue and have these ideas forced on us by people who claim to have superior knowledge and intellect. We have been told that we average humans are not capable of really understanding the cosmos - that it is inhabited by mysterious and invisible forces and entities that only impenetrably abstract mathematics can explain. We are told to just passively accept whatever the 'experts' tell us. We have become so intimidated by how complicated modern science has become that we throw up our hands and say, "You're the experts - we'll believe what ever you tell us." And they say, "That's good, because our continued funding depends on your feeling that way." What will the reaction of the taxpaying public be if and when they realize the full extent to which they are being bilked by the scientific power-structure?

Educated lay-people have abdicated their responsibility to think proactively and ask the questions that will keep science honest. It seems we would rather just lie back and believe whatever we read in "Discover" magazine. If 'they' tell us black-holes and dark matter exist - so be it. The public has become enthralled by the magic show that astronomy, particle physics, and some other sciences have become. Why does every TV 'science' program have background music that is more appropriate for a sci-fi horror movie? And a narrator's voice that sounds like God? The public apparently enjoys the magic, mystery-tour aura of most of present day science 'shows'. The ship of science, captained by astronomy and astrophysics, is not just steering a wobbling course - it is miles off track and it is intentionally laying down a smoke screen - implying that modern science has to be counter-intuitive and mysterious. The astronomical world badly needs a reality check. The challenges embodied in these pages constitute just that.

The present day peer review system determines which proposed research projects get funded and which do not. It also determines what results get published and which do not. At first it seems very sensible that any scientific field should be able to keep 'quacks and crack pots' from being funded and published. However, when any given area becomes controlled by 'experts' who have accepted a deductively arrived at theory, they tend to see any alternative data or proposed hypotheses as 'crack pot'. When those who steer the ship of science refuse to allow alternative hypotheses from even being discussed or investigated, let alone published, it is little wonder we are wildly off course. The general public thinks of science as always looking for new ideas. The sad truth is: it does not, certainly not in astronomy / cosmology. What it does do is constantly seek funding from friendly peer reviewers.

When we think about the travesty the Roman Catholic Church perpetrated against Galileo (waiting until late in the 20th century to admit it) we feel superior. WE modern folk would never ignore and suppress a scientist in that way! No? Then how about astronomer Halton Arp who was denied access to Mt. Palomar and refused publication of his work because the present day high priests of the Big Bang Power Structure found the publication of his photographs embarrassingly contradictory to their well-funded dogma? Would it not be educational to realize that we have just screwed up again - big time!

If the Electric Star hypothesis is even partially correct, there is no guarantee that the Sun will continue to shine for millions of years as we have been assured by the experts. What anxieties will this realization engender in a scientifically semi-literate public? But, it may be reassuring for them to know that Earth has much less to fear from a near collision with an asteroid or comet than they now think. Why have billions of tax payer dollars been used to support "accepted" solar fusion models and the Big Bang but none invested in any alternative ideas, however worthwhile they may be?

The fundamental challenges that are described in these pages contain the most potentially explosive ideas ever to have been issued in science. They constitute a cosmic reality check for the entire intellectual community. There is almost no field of academic endeavor that will not be affected in some way (or even overturned) by these ideas. Areas of science that refuse to honestly address these questions will become irrelevant.

Will it take another several hundred years (as it took Galileo) to gain official recognition of the validity of these challenges from those who presently occupy Fortress Science? Will it ever happen? I don't know. But does it have practical importance? You bet your pocketbook it does. The eventual outcome depends on the public's attitude - do you want the expensive magic show to continue - or do you want honest answers from science?

Links to Other Web Sites


peace!

__________________


Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

Reading a thread over at badastronomy, here is an image with spherules embedded in rocks
spherules embedded in rocks and it does look as it at least some, if not all come out of the rocks themselves. I still have to say that I do not think all of them can come this way, but you never know - maybe they do.

some blurb about spherules here
RAT attack and spherules on (blue) Berry Bowl


__________________


 



Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 305
Date:
Permalink  
 

Here's a more comprehensive explanation.  It spans a lot of reading, so beware:

__________________
What if Pinnochio says that his nose will grow longer?


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 305
Date:
Permalink  
 

1)i can't roll with the electric universe.
It's an acquired respect if you are somewhat versed in the errors of modern physics.  If you are just some average dude, don't expect to understand it for now.


__________________
What if Pinnochio says that his nose will grow longer?


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 399
Date:
Permalink  
 

well that seems like over kill to me.

we should have seen it on earth. on going at that.


not for anything but stuff like that on a planetary scale and we don't see it on earth, i find hard to believe.


especially as it is supposed to be system wide.



i can't roll with the electric universe.

__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 305
Date:
Permalink  
 

1)i don't know about the electric thing, eaol.
Well, it does explain certain aspects of physics that are foggy under the mainstream view.  It hasn't really had time to rise to prominence, given the amount of accepted theories it overturns (like relativity, spooky-action-at-a-distance, the Big Bang), and the things it adds some credibility to, such as "antigravity", biological telepathy, realtime communication over light years of distance and faster-than-light-travel.  All in all, it is more complete than the current accepted theories on how stars work, and is a lot more fail-proof.  More verifiable, and simpler.


__________________
What if Pinnochio says that his nose will grow longer?


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Date:
Permalink  
 

A small tip on a rock; if organic or man-made objects are a form treated by computer technology to look like stone, the character of things can occurred as remnants of the original form and can therefore give a wrong picture of reality including the sizes of organisms and the environment dimension.

It is perhaps time to confirm the existence of some rocks on the surface of the planet.

__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 134
Date:
Permalink  
 

Here are a variety of desert "spherules" or plants / fungi / molds that can be possible with limited requirements of known lifeforms:


hard'skin puff-ball
astreus.jpg

plantae
external image 2320751552_8bdc245e77.jpg?v=0

However - I'm wondering about the work entitled "Forbidden History..." by Cremo and Thompson that brings up the ancient spheres such as:


sphere.jpg


groovy.jpg









__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 134
Date:
Permalink  
 

I totally agree.  Life is totally possible in very dry desert regions.




fungus on the green peas


__________________


Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

More talk of concretions. Say it enough times and sheeple will believe it.

This is what we are all programmed to accept, but nothing has been proved and no-one has offered any different hypotheses against the authorititive opinions.

If these come from scientists, they should be able to point to reasons why they come to this opinion and show evidence in actual images from Mars.

There is no doubt that they are as 'real' as anything else is that we see in the pictures from Mars. I do not think we can point to concretions on Earth and use this as a basis for round objects which look like the same thing on Mars. Do you?

Let us know if you get any joy from NASA scientists and maybe post the reply! smile.gif

__________________


 



Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 134
Date:
Permalink  
 

Excellent points,

There are many examples of the "hematite concretions" that are terrestrial.  However, if we are to believe that these photographs containing the so-called "blueberry spherules (mostly from Meridiani Planum) are real then we need to know much more about the nature of the Martian planet's conditions.  For instance, why so much iron on Mars?  Are the concretions formed above or below the surface?  Why do some differ in shape and size or blossom from an apparent stem or seemingly have holes in them?  Let's compile more accepted data into our analysis and figure out what exactly is the case here and why this phenomenon is not or is in fact more widespread throughout Mars and Earth.  Why does Mars have such an abundance of these anomalies?

For comparison: here is a useful photo link from a researcher of Earth "hematite concretions"... :

http://meteorites.wustl.edu/id/concretions.

Has anyone recovered or shared any intel regarding this matter with the various space agencies beyong the scope of the public release data?

I personally would enjoy the validation of the notion that these objects are indeed some sort of fungi/mold life-forms yet am wondering if it is indeed simply a geological/chemical process.

Cheers,

Mark

__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 399
Date:
Permalink  
 

sorry forgot the quotation marks!

__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 399
Date:
Permalink  
 

i don't know about the electric thing, eaol.

seems like it would be system wide and we would have it documented here on earth.


in myth or seeing it all the time.

qmantoo,

what is left?


So after all that,
I do not think they are growing from
a plant due to there are not enough evidence
plants/fungus for them to grow from. Yes, there
are a few examples, but not enough.

I do not think they are natural rock formations
such as concretions, some are, but not the
millions we see.

I do not think they are hail or atmospherically
created.

Please argue against these points if you disagree.






__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 305
Date:
Permalink  
 

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050328blueberries.htm

Forgot that one.  Interesting.
And here's one you may all like:


__________________
What if Pinnochio says that his nose will grow longer?


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 305
Date:
Permalink  
 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hematite

It will help to check these links.


__________________
What if Pinnochio says that his nose will grow longer?


Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

The two on the right appear to have double heads and that would be strange that out of 3 growing on this rock, there are at least 2 with double heads on one stalk. Also, there are not enough examples to produce all the blueberries that we see.

I am not convinced these are the same spherules or produce the same spherules that we see as blueberries all over the ground.
If they were, the rocks would be covered with them or stalks, but we rarely see them "growing" from rocks. There should be millions of these things everywhere to produce such quantities of spherules.

I cannot help feeling that whatever it is which/who makes them, we have not got an image of. The Rovers have been there years so if there is a 'fruiting season' there should be a season where these things appear and the Rovers would have normally caught sight of whatever it is which produces them. Or.. at least piles of them under whatever produced them.

If they were produced by the atmosphere like hail, I do not think they would hang around for that long. Nature has a habit of returning back to Nature.
If they were produced by a plant of some kind, we would see these plants everywhere - there are so many blueberries.
If they were droppings we would see many animals/beings. WE DO see quite a few shelters with beings inside, and we do see quite a few pieces of evidence where small beings have been working on rocks.

This is my preferred speculation.
Maybe they were produced by beings as waste of some kind,
not necessarily droppings, but maybe as a result of them
working on the stones to form these shapes that we see.
There are enough varied rock shapes and there is enough
evidence of smaller beings for them to be some kind of
waste product.

Similar round items in nature apart from rabbit droppings
Birds like owls and hawks produce pellets which are
undigested fur and bones.
Beetles wrap their eggs up in balls.
Beach crabs produce balls from the sand they
have 'processed' (ie, they have extracted all
the food between the grains of sand)
Natural rock formations accretions as pointed out below.

Another point. They do not appear to be blown
about much because, due to their small size, they
would get blown about a lot and be lodged everywhere.
There are areas where they are not, such as dips between
rocks. Now, this may be because someone has cleared them
away neatly, but I would expect to see wind-blown piles
of them along with sand/soil, but we don't see this. This
could mean that they are sticky or that there is no wind.

So after all that,
I do not think they are growing from
a plant due to there are not enough evidence
plants/fungus for them to grow from. Yes, there
are a few examples, but not enough.

I do not think they are natural rock formations
such as concretions, some are, but not the
millions we see.

I do not think they are hail or atmospherically
created.

Please argue against these points if you disagree.



__________________


 



Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1901
Date:
Permalink  
 

2P170030726EFFAAEEP2534L234567M1.JPG
Spirit, Sol 492

2P170030726EFFAAEEP2534L234567M11.jpg2P170030726EFFAAEEP2534L234567M111.jpg

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Date:
Permalink  
 

268132345_5d9ec9c592_o.png

On the theory that the plant could be the case, I changed the light and color levels of the image in a way that the original depth turns out, this shows a completely different world than the original specimen. This picture shows in my view, tree leaves and fruits

268132345_5d9ec9c592_o-extra-1.png

268132345_5d9ec9c592_o-extra-2.png

Please check these results with an open mind it is truly our strongest tools in our research.



__________________


Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1921
Date:
Permalink  
 

we have only one image of some spherules attached to stalks. We have images where the spherules appear to be embedded inside rocks. We have one image where the spherule is possibly growing out of the ground, but we have millions of spherules lying on the ground not attached to anything. I think we need to try to find out how they get there. ie: the process BEFORE they appear on the ground. Like on the tree, on the fungus, etc Maybe we need to find where they come from perhaps.

__________________


 



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Date:
Permalink  
 

Fruitorwhat1.JPG

Here is an item that supports their theory that think this is the case of plant products.



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Date:
Permalink  
 

It's a good idea to study this phenomenon and express as many ideas as we can, in this case a picture of plums.

PlumsLg.jpg



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 679
Date:
Permalink  
 

Thank you Chandre,
I think the most useful weapon against NASA mis-interpretation of the various phenomena is to use physical laws because they are difficult to refute except by contrasting their application.

underpressureregion.JPG

__________________
1 2  >  Last»  | Page of 2  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard