I agree that you have to pick and choose what objects you think have not been obfuscated to such a high degree that attempts at clarification are useless. I used to pick the worst because it means something to "them". Mostly in vain. I just try to make sense out of what I can see that looks out of place.
Here is some more work on the PIA16768. The first pic is from the upper right quadrant of the huge TIFF and appears to be structures or machines.
The second set of pics is at the end of the pipeline. The pipeline is dual as you can see the dark spots indicating the end openings of it. Many apparently ruined facilities at this location.
There are many more sights to see here, including the "boat" and surrounding dock area which has been heavily obfuscated now.
To: Ken A/All. Yes indeed, they have an extensive bag of tricks to keep us diverted from learning about our true history, and particularly here, our recent return to a great federation of inhabited worlds. They have purposely studied and deployed the most intricate and deceptive counter-measures to keep anyone not of their status and persuasions, out of the loop permanently. They certainly don't want to make it easy for us, that's a given for shure.
But,as remonstrated often before, don't look at these pics, or study the ' data ' as you have been conditioned to, or how they want you to see these convoluted representations of once clear pics. Instead, get right into a pic with the awareness that this is a prepared fabrication to begin with .. it may be 10 - 40% ' real ' .. and that is being quite generous. See where these obfuscation and layering techniques have been applied .. as contrasted with the(usually) darker and original picture. It takes but a little practice to catch on to this, and I have posted many practical exercises and examples for everyone here. Although this is a relatively new field of research, I feel we have been amassing a solid and useful data bank of awareness, de-conditioning, and counter-moves to these gambits and bluffs being laid on the table, and so, we are now showing some rather consistent and quite keen playing and gamemanship ourselves. Just train regularly and be confident, despite any counter-indications or discouragement encountered ... you are on the right track and supported by all the AA members too. Shure, you'll make mistakes, mabee a lot at first, who hasn't, but in a short time you'll be hitting 90 out of a 100 .. and that's good odds by any reconing, besides, there is a lot of personal satisfaction just in the sharing here. Remember, your mind is not playing tricks on you .. NASA is. Your mind is telling you the truth .. so go with it, and advance into the knowledgeable and experienced Hunter that you have worked so hard to be.
Another point I would like you to consider here, is the ability to see the colour/sheen component as an actual and reliable indicator in defining the particular reality of these anomalies. I recall a post by Iceman which presents the distinct and peculiar metallic sheen to be observant of and looked for particularly. Here we may engage words like albedo and refractive-index, etc.. But do we really need ' scientific ' 16 letter Latin sounding words and equations to recognize in pics what we regularly observe all day long in our daily life anyways? Like older car bumbers, tin cans or watches .. we know quite well and directly, what we're looking at. Yes, Iceman is quite correct to bring this viewing hint out to us. Another example to note here, is that, the only place in pics that a peculiarly human, healthy-pink, flesh-colour is found .. is in these very same ( -people )..wether it be a partial or full face, hands or body/parts. This is a great concept to take with you and under consideration when trying to decide exactly what is being hidden but in degree is still present in our pics. This particular colour ( white/pinkish to olive-darker browns) is only and consistently displayed in living human beings .. on Mars. There will not be anywhere else, a single instance of ' rocks ' etc., being found displaying this very distinctive colouring .. anywhere .. only in human beings. Anyone may confirm this by simply taking a picture with many areas with this pinkish/brown ' life ' colour, then cut them out and paste them side by side on perhaps a light blue background, for ample confirmation here and they will all reveal parts of the human physiology/physique.
One last hint then, that has to do with pic ' choices .' Practice and get used to spotting a good one, or one that may have some features that are less obfuscated. Trying to see or determine something in a medium to heavy obfuscation effort .. is well nigh impossible really. These are, in my opinion and for the most part, poor choices. As they are totally, or much, tampered with, and , as such, the entire picture has no context or interpretational value. At present, I do not feel we are at the limits of what our vision and awareness are actually capable of. What details I or anyone else can pick out and make accurate observations on, what to recognize when encountering them, and to see certain items with the extra clarity of a trained eye .. is an individuals own growing talent to observe, refine, and to share all our best techniques, intel, and encouragement too. We often walk and work in this twilight zone of research. Many features or ' anomalies ' however, are always found on this borderline , and it is difficult to appraise, even with zoom, contrast, etc., if they are indeed what they appear, may be something else .. or even if they exist at all. As mentioned, we often venture into this surrealistic twilight zone of research, and yet most members are in degree aware of these problematic areas, and return to share their best .. while discarding .. the rest. Cheers all, / -M
Quite right Morbius, Are you asking about the Originals. I have sometimes drawn lines to highlight these circumstances show that the texture and shape has been changed. We are creating new vision.
An entirely plausible insight Ken A, but trust what we see .. I think we have the edge here .. in an exercised perception that penetrates the veiled, and comprehends the real picture equally well.
Iceman .. the outcome ( results ?) of a ruined ( tampered with ) pic could still be ruins that make sense .. not ' something else ' .. or am I not interpreting this correctly? Would you mind giving an example to clarify this somewhat .. then we can go from there .. fair enough ?
An entirely plausible insight Ken A, but trust what we see .. I think we have the edge here .. in an exercised perception that penetrates the veiled, and comprehends the real picture equally well.
We as anomaly investigators have to think with that mindset that you have nicely described in your statement above.
If we get terrified and so unsure of our selves because of the "you never know trick" that they are purposely playing on us, then it is game over and everything is on their terms.
Being on their terms makes us no different than the general public that likes to be spoon fed non threatening news and images that reinforce what they been told all their lives as far as intelligent life on other planets is concerned.
To them that is the stuff of science fiction or of the tin foil hat crowd.
They sleep better that way, knowing that NASA is still looking for basic life on different planets and never actually finding it.
-- Edited by Ken A on Friday 31st of May 2013 12:00:36 AM
Ken A . You wonder why the pipeline/tunnel of this vista was not covered-up by the NASA censors? Mabee because they put it there in the first place? Their management, control, and manipulation of pics has gone to an entirely new level of craftiness lately. I sometimes wonder what we are actually looking at in these pictures ( and mabee their counting on that too?). Funny, a peculiar thought here ... what if NASA et al, has, or had to ' make a deal ' to even allow the Rovers, etc., to proceed? To take ' pics of Mars ' .. yes .. as long as those pics are ' edited ' to their liking? What pressure then, might NASA's command really be working under? Mabee, not knowing the fuller picture, we shouldn't be getting so mad at NASA after all? Why should we be so adamante in trying to prove what cannot be disproved anyways ? I have had to look more intensely at these pics for awhile now, to untangle all these false leads and what not, but I don't think we are at the limits of our resourcefulness ,, yet .. such is the conundrum and plight of the involved anomaly hunter . Seems I'm in a poor mood tonight..Well .. tomorrows another and brighter day. Cheers / -M
Ken A . You wonder why the pipeline/tunnel of this vista was not covered-up by the NASA censors? Mabee because they put it there in the first place? Their management, control, and manipulation of pics has gone to an entirely new level of craftiness lately. I sometimes wonder what we are actually looking at in these pictures ( and mabee their counting on that too?). Funny, a peculiar thought here ... what if NASA et al, has, or had to ' make a deal ' to even allow the Rovers, etc., to proceed? To take ' pics of Mars ' .. yes .. as long as those pics are ' edited ' to their liking? What pressure then, might NASA's command really be working under? Mabee, not knowing the fuller picture, we shouldn't be getting so mad at NASA after all? Why should we be so adamante in trying to prove what cannot be disproved anyways ? I have had to look more intensely at these pics for awhile now, to untangle all these false leads and what not, but I don't think we are at the limits of our resourcefulness ,, yet .. such is the conundrum and plight of the involved anomaly hunter . Seems I'm in a poor mood tonight..Well .. tomorrows another and brighter day. Cheers / -M
**************************************
The same thought has crossed my mind.
I noticed that about 80% of the views we are presented by NASA have a very illustrated look to them, as if drawn by an average illustrator or artist. I reckon this is done so to tell us not to trust in what we are seeing.
-- Edited by Ken A on Thursday 30th of May 2013 12:56:13 PM
Subjectively, by context or interpretation then Iceman? How are the ruins related to a picture and not a subject? What is the criteria being offered in your view? Is it by semantic or etymological significance or validity? Would be glad to be presented with qualifiable and quantifiable delineation of the content here ... oh, forget it friend ... what do you mean?
Ken A ... what do you make of the jumbled mass of ruins scattered about just below the pipeline ? May it not be however, an underground tunnel-system exposed by some catastrophe, as parts of its construction and framework have rolled or been thrown violently downhill and now rest on the small plain below? Just a thought. Yours? / -M
I noticed the rectangular structures right away and to me they looked like ruins of buildings with just the foundation remaining or remnants of holding tanks or enclosures for some liquid as some are right beside the pipeline/tunnel/bridge/roadway and abutting it.
You could be right that it was a tunnel system exposed by some catastrophe but it is still too orderly looking for some reason.
There is what looks to be branching piping coming out of the main pipeline or tunnel body at the quarter length run from the right and this piping is going down into one of those rectangular enclosures that I mentioned above.
I suspect there is a lot of typical NASA obfuscation in this scene, especially the dark orange wedge at the lower bottom right of the picture and tapering to most of the bottom going left.
Makes one wonder how come the main meat of this photo that sticks out like a sore thumb, which is this strange anomaly of the pipeline/tunnel/bridge/roadway across this vista was not covered up by the NASA censors.
Ken A ... what do you make of the jumbled mass of ruins scattered about just below the pipeline ? May it not be however, an underground tunnel-system exposed by some catastrophe, as parts of its construction and framework have rolled or been thrown violently downhill and now rest on the small plain below? Just a thought. Yours? / -M
/ -M
