Space.com article SUPPORTS Cydonia research

[Simulist]

So at least according to Max, the information requires a great deal of effort to understand. Too much effort for most, I'd say.

Waste is a terrible thing to mind.

[compared2what?]

But Max....As I'm sure you know, there are quite a few mathematicians who have done that work (in response to Hoagland) and been utterly unimpressed by it.

Actually... no they haven't 'done the work'... not a one.

Due to their recognition that if you just draw a certain number of intersecting lines between a certain number of topographical features on a photograph, you'll create a certain number of angles, from which it's very easy to infer tetrahedrons in spheres, and patterns involving constant numbers and ratios and so forth and so on.

Prove it...

Where does one even begin?

At Cydonia... it all begins with one rather basic assumption ...

... based on the most ancient science of all... not just geometry....

Tetrahedral, i.e., SACRED Geometry


So the notion that one can find the same complicated framework on (lol) 'any' photograph isn't just fallacious reasoning...

It's straight up denial and a slap in the face of everything science is supposed to stand for.

barracuda's link pretty much covers it.

[stefano]

I , meanwhile will assume that you are attempting to be serious.

If you assume that, why don't I get a reply? You posted a statement of fact in this thread, which was wrong and incomplete, and I pointed it out.

19.47 degrees is the point at which the double tetrahedron circumvents any sphere ( including planets). On earth this energy is released in non esoteric form at Mauna Kea in Hawai.

You're actually more wrong than I thought when I posted yesterday, because 19.47° isn't 19°47', it's 19°28'. It's not a big difference on the ground, about 45 km, but it makes it pretty obvious that the person who first tied Mauna Kea to 19.47° wanted something to be happening at that latitude, plonked a ruler down on a map of the world and took note of the only vaguely pyramid-shaped thing on the line. He never got a larger scale map of Hawaii to make sure, because he didn't want to be sure, he just wanted a "whoa man, did you know..." story.

You and Max are the ones trying to bring tetrahedrons into it, and I just pointed out that if there were any significance to it, the tangents of all four planes would throw up something related to 'energy release', which they don't. You also ignored the fact I brought up about the Earth not being a perfect sphere, now does that make a difference to your theory or not?

attempting to convince people that Mount Hebron doesnt actually sit at 33 degrees latitude and 33 degrees longitude.

Ha, fantastic, this is too good. You obviously read that somewhere and never checked it either, just like you never checked Mauna Kea's co-ordinates, because you so badly want it to be true that you don't care whether it is or not. 33°N and 33°E is in the sea. Mount Hebron is at 31°31'N and 35°02'E.

Also, on the subject of longitude, do you realise that it's a consequence of purely political factors that we draw the 0° meridian through Greenwich? I have an old map of Africa using Paris as the meridian, and if Napoleon had won at Waterloo all modern maps would do the same. So you might want to think twice before ascribing coincidences of longitude to ancient alien overlords.

Go get your shine box atlas. Or download Google Earth here.

[82_28]

It's a fucking planet that give or take tens of millions of miles or hundreds of millions of miles depending on orbital position just only recently got fucking cursory-ily explored insofar as the amount of time us humans have been able to send shit up into space and trajectorize them. Nothing was fucking found at Cydonia. Nothing was found, other than human imagination. What is is. Imagine away! That could be it -- the answer or truth and light. But no NASA probe is going to offer you your bona fide answer. Even in the the realm of pseudo science, we don't even know jack shit about this goddamn oil spill. And we live on the same goddamn planet as it. So take a planet that is on average about 30 million miles away from Earth's orbit, and suddenly we have all this shit on a planet 2/3ds the size of Earth all figured out and it has some mystical meaning? Come on now. We don't know jack shit about earth. Yet as Sagan said, to paraphrase, we can fool anybody all the time. And that's just on THIS PLANET, hovered by thousands of satellites that take pictures of it. Mars has what, 2, 3 and a couple cute little rovers? (Which Lord be a witness, if real, amazing qualities of total engineering genius!)

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Though I do believe that Jupiter losing it's stripe is evidence for a Stanley Kubrick prophesy, year we make contact thread. But that's neither here nor there.

I don't know jack shit and neither do you Mr. Knife. Get to know your motherfucking science and practice it.

[Simulist]

I , meanwhile will assume that you are attempting to be serious.

If you assume that, why don't I get a reply? You posted a statement of fact in this thread, which was wrong and incomplete, and I pointed it out.

19.47 degrees is the point at which the double tetrahedron circumvents any sphere ( including planets). On earth this energy is released in non esoteric form at Mauna Kea in Hawai.

You're actually more wrong than I thought when I posted yesterday, because 19.47° isn't 19°47', it's 19°28'. It's not a big difference on the ground, about 45 km, but it makes it pretty obvious that the person who first tied Mauna Kea to 19.47° wanted something to be happening at that latitude, plonked a ruler down on a map of the world and took note of the only vaguely pyramid-shaped thing on the line. He never got a larger scale map of Hawaii to make sure, because he didn't want to be sure, he just wanted a "whoa man, did you know..." story.

You and Max are the ones trying to bring tetrahedrons into it, and I just pointed out that if there were any significance to it, the tangents of all four planes would throw up something related to 'energy release', which they don't. You also ignored the fact I brought up about the Earth not being a perfect sphere, now does that make a difference to your theory or not?

attempting to convince people that Mount Hebron doesnt actually sit at 33 degrees latitude and 33 degrees longitude.

Ha, fantastic, this is too good. You obviously read that somewhere and never checked it either, just like you never checked Mauna Kea's co-ordinates, because you so badly want it to be true that you don't care whether it is or not. 33°N and 33°E is in the sea. Mount Hebron is at 31°31'N and 35°02'E.

Also, on the subject of longitude, do you realise that it's a consequence of purely political factors that we draw the 0° meridian through Greenwich? I have an old map of Africa using Paris as the meridian, and if Napoleon had won at Waterloo all modern maps would do the same. So you might want to think twice before ascribing coincidences of longitude to ancient alien overlords.

Go get your shine box atlas. Or download Google Earth here.

Facts are pesky, bothersome little details to a True Believer. Facts get in the way when someone "wants to believe" something bad enough.

I don't know if it's really true that "a con artist can't con anyone that doesn't want to be conned," but the "will to believe" really, really helps.

[slimmouse]

attempting to convince people that Mount Hebron doesnt actually sit at 33 degrees latitude and 33 degrees longitude.

Ha, fantastic, this is too good. You obviously read that somewhere and never checked it either, just like you never checked Mauna Kea's co-ordinates, because you so badly want it to be true that you don't care whether it is or not. 33°N and 33°E is in the sea. Mount Hebron is at 31°31'N and 35°02'E.

Also, on the subject of longitude, do you realise that it's a consequence of purely political factors that we draw the 0° meridian through Greenwich? I have an old map of Africa using Paris as the meridian, and if Napoleon had won at Waterloo all modern maps would do the same. So you might want to think twice before ascribing coincidences of longitude to ancient alien overlords.

[/quote]

Indeed it is my friend, so adjust your calculations accordingly. Once youve done that, do some minor tangential adjustments and see what you come up with. I must say I would tend to agree with Barracuda. The reason for my stalling patience is at least that clear. In fact, if Im not mistaken isnt the original line that which goes through the Giza pyramid ? One might assume so since this is the most central point of the entire landmass of this planet.

Arent you even curious as to how exactly a bunch of essentially uncivilised idiots ( by any modern definition) knew all of this stuff, and how they encoded it with a precision that belies our most modern technology ? OK, I will readily admit that Im going off at something of a tangent myself here, but of course all of this stuff is clearly interconnected IMHO

Anyways........go figure. Ive no doubt that for yourself and many others , just like the Avebury/ Cydonia "coincidences", its all just a load of hocus pocus anyways.

BTW - have a look at my sig. That should also help you decipher the wheat from the chaff. The quote is of course Einstein, and Einstein I aint - But I do get the jist - Just like the uncivilised, unlearned, technologically deficient ancients did.

Seems that some things do indeed never change.

[stefano]

You know, slimmouse, I actually looked into this because I am quite interested. I love geometry and like drawing zellidj patterns in my idle hours. I don't know a lot about astronomy but I have a lot of respect for the people who went before, who tracked the movements of the stars and planets and made it possible for me to know so much about the universe in which I live. So if I'd found something in all of this that actually made sense, I'd have grabbed onto it enthusiastically. Instead there's just obfuscation and outright untruth. You've made at least two untrue statements in this thread, or there have been two that I've picked up on, and instead of telling me what kind of meridian adjustments, or pole shifts or whatever, can result in an outcome that would show me anything interesting, you just bluff.

adjust your calculations accordingly. Once youve done that, do some minor tangential adjustments and see what you come up with.

I didn't do any calculations at all. I looked at a map, which I'd have thought would be the first thing anyone making claims about geography would do. Apparently not, though, hey? What adjustments do you recommend I make? How much, in what direction, for what reason? What is a "tangential adjustment"?

isnt the original line that which goes through the Giza pyramid ?

I don't know, slim, is it? According to whom? And what happens if you draw a meridian through the pyramids? I'm all ears.

this is the most central point of the entire landmass of this planet.

What does that mean? Can you provide any sensible, mathematical way of working out the "central point" of a huge, irregular landmass?

Arent you even curious as to how exactly a bunch of essentially uncivilised idiots ( by any modern definition) knew all of this stuff, and how they encoded it with a precision that belies our most modern technology ?

This is a different conversation, but let's just say I am very curious. And I like your sig, but there hasn't been much talk of real astronomy or physics in this thread.

[stefano]

I just had a little look and there is no way, from what I can tell, of determining the centre of non-contiguous shapes. But that hasn't stopped zealots from claiming that Jerusalem, Meccaand Gizaare literally the middle of the Earth. Choose your poison, hey?

[MaxtheKnife]

David Wilcock has released a terrific 90 minute interview w/ Graham Hancock.

Especially relevant in light of my recent paper, The Dog Star.

Enjoy...

[MaxtheKnife]

"There is NO escaping the hard science of applied precision geometry which reveals the exact interlocking connectivity between Cydonia's monuments."





For details see 06/03/10 update here: Splitting Hairs

[Avalon]

Yes, but you're not doing "precise geometry," Max. Take your image above from May 22, of the D & M Pyramid with the 60 degree diagram you've drawn on it.

It's not a real pyramid, as it has two vertices, not one, though still a fascinating feature. It's only with a close look, rather than a casual one, that a reader here would realize that you've decided to have a few arbitrary straight segments be where you put your straight lines, regardless if that means that that other parts of the lines you've drawn are based on imagination rather than topography. In truth, a higher contrast and resolution image shows that the line you used as the basis for drawing the NW/SE line has a gentle arc to it. And if it isn't straight, and you are arbitrarily choosing part of it for an alignment, you can't claim you are doing precise geometry.

There are other drawings you've shown us where in order to have it look like what you want it to look like, you've just continued lines to make your pictures despite there being absolutely no corresponding topographical feature underneath, nor any evidence that there had ever been a feature there once that has eroded away. I'm not singling you out on that -- there have been plenty of anomalists who have done it in the past, and continue to do it today. But it doesn't make it in the slightest bit valid, or help to advance the argument that there has been evidence of intelligently constructed features on Mars.

Mirroring the Face as RCH did originally helped to show that if you were to think of the western side as being intact, unlike the clear mass wasting on the eastern side, that the Face kept its Face-like qualities. Features could have fallen away on the east, and there is nothing that contraindicates there having been a set of face features that disappeared (a ledge too high, or the actual existence of the "horn" that was a data processing error would have worked against that). But this mania for mirroring has been a real dead end that gives no valid or useful information. I'm not sure what you are trying to say about the yellow circle you've just shown us; it only looks like someone's pissed their pants. And your attempts at philosophical justification have been nothing but muddled and incoherent throughout.

Barracuda, a while back you'd asked about mainstream science people over the years who did at least say it looked like a face, while denying that it could be artificial. While I found it interesting that some would at least admit that, it wasn't interesting enough or useful enough to keep track of, so I didn't.

[Iamwhomiam]

Mad Max strikes (out) again...

Fer chrissakes, Max, you should see a doctor, really, you should.

Again, another post with one line and links to your website. You couldn't even cut & paste your text here?

"This is something I have proved to myself time and again during the course of several 'start from scratch' efforts..."

Sad. Really sad.

"Bingo!

Now that looks interesting.

The next step was to 'plug & chug' and see if the results actually lead anywhere."

"Look what happens if I just copy this line twice and rotate those lines 60 and -60 degrees respectively."

[MaxtheKnife]

Again, another post with one line and links to your website. You couldn't even cut & paste your text here?

Why would I want to do that when I get such a kick out folks like you squirming in their seat & grabbing at anything they can find to post out of context and use as another useless strawman.

Interesting you didn't choose this:

This precision geometric test, based on a falsifiable assumption, is PASS or FAIL.

In order for the assumption to pass, it must relate in a precise and meaningful way.

If an intersection of three lines is off by even this much...

... it is a FAIL.

Like I said... "There is NO escaping the hard science of applied precision geometry which reveals the exact interlocking connectivity between Cydonia's monuments."

[beeline]

.

Max, I hope you get to Mars some day

[Iamwhomiam]

He spoke to me!

I am forever blessed and must now run and tell my grandchildren!!

You know Max, you really could have responded to my valid questions long ago, asked on page 3. It would not only have been polite, but appropriate for opening a dialog.

You see, there are those who know much more than you do about Cydonia and you could learn from their wisdom.

So this drivel is your meaningful response to my sarcasm?:

"Why would I want to do that when I get such a kick out folks like you squirming in their seat & grabbing at anything they can find to post out of context and use as another useless strawman."

If you think I'm squirming over any of your, ahem, 'papers' or need to pose some strawman argument, you must truly be mad.

I and I imagine others reading this blog have a slow dial-up connection. While I've read your printed information, I cannot afford to waste the many hours it takes for my computer to download your graphic intense pages and so I asked you to please explain a few of the things you felt were important about your theory and its findings.

You know, like this, for one: "The Face on Mars doesn't just mean something, it means everything. It is the Way, the Truth, & the Light."

But yet, after 12 pages you have been unable to do that, not just for me, but for the many others, including one of this site's moderators, who've asked you to.

You, my brother, are suffering from a messiah complex.

Your air of superiority in your rude replies to others has a repugnant stench to it.

Your centers are assumed and not true.

Rethink your theories from that assertion.