Jedi Religion: accepts atheists as well as theists

[Titanpoint]

I wrote to the Jedi Knight at www.jediism.org thus:

> Dear Jedi Knight,
>
> I have one question.
>
> Does Jediism acknowledge or worship the existence of
> a supreme being, a conscious, self-created deity
> which created the Universe?
>
> Thank you in advance for your response.
>
> TP


and the response is thus:

Dear Titan,

Thank you for your inquiry. I do apologize for the
length of time it has taken to respond - it is quite a
busy time for us.

Jediism acknowledges that there are many paths that
lead to illumination, enlightenment, salvation, inner
peace, etc. Our members are diverse. Many are
Christians (Catholic, Protestant), some are Buddhists,
Taoists, Hindu, Sufi, and some members do not adhere
to a belief in a Supreme Being.

As an organization, we do not dictate to our members
what they should believe as so far as religion and God
is concerned. We do acknowledge however that Light is
mentioned and referred to quite often in many of the
texts of the world's major religions. How each
interprets Light (as God, as Jesus, or Buddha, or as a
point of illumination) we leave up to each one.

We have a Code of Conduct (the 21 Maxims) that can be
applied regardless of religious and/or spiritual
affiliation. We have found that depending upon one's
religious paradigm, each interprets the Code in their
own way, according to the belief system they
personally adhere to.

I hope this helps amswer your inquiry.

Best Regards,

Christopher Chanada


So there we have it. The Jedi religion does not have a position on the existence of a Supreme Being.

I hope that clarifies something.

TP :cool:

[Tricky]

I guess that would explain why Jedi Knight turned to the dark side and became a Sith lord.

[De_Bunk]

Tricky..

Or a complete wanker...

De_Bunk

[Crossbow]

A good follow-up question to the Jediism folks would be:

Can a wanker who believes in one supreme god be a Jedi?

[Titanpoint]

Find out in next week's thrilling episode: "Return of the Flame-baiting troll"

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Reginald]

A boy... his cells have the highest concentration of mis-information I have seen in a life form.



Tested he will be.



:)

[The Fool]

C'mon guys, lay off him. He only became a Jedi to get the 15% discount on the action figures. The guy is an ultra right Catholic Fundamentalist.

[Giz]

Careless typo Mr Fool, you clearly meant to write:
The guy is an ultra right Catholic Fundament.

[panduh]

I wonder what Han Solo's religion is? I always though of him as a Humanist. Its no coincidentce that he's also my favorite character in the entire Star Wars universe. :D

Originally posted by panduh
I wonder what Han Solo's religion is? I always though of him as a Humanist. Its no coincidentce that he's also my favorite character in the entire Star Wars universe. :D


come on kid, we ain't outta this yet...

[De_Bunk]

"Chewwie...Is that you..??????"

[c4ts]

Jedi-ism is just the result of people watching Star Wars too many times, and Star Wars was the result of Lucas watching too many Kurosawa films.

[Doctor X]

Its no coincidentce that he's also my favorite character in the entire Star Wars universe.

Yet when you see Mifune as the original character in [Three Bad Men in] A Hidden Fortress you realize Han Solo is girlie-man.

Acknowledgement to c4ts for posting this wisdom first.

--J.D.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Titanpoint
So there we have it. The Jedi religion does not have a position on the existence of a Supreme Being.

I hope that clarifies something.

LOL

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by The Fool
C'mon guys, lay off him. He only became a Jedi to get the 15% discount on the action figures. The guy is an ultra right Catholic Fundamentalist.

Actually my position is clearer than that. I ponder why we are wasting so much time with stupid issues on this planet when we could be going to Mars and doing archeology about our ancestors and then propelling ourselves beyond this universe into an endless frontier ready to be claimed by humans.

JK

[Doctor X]

I am going to remember that.

--J.D.

I'm all for The Force.

[CWL]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Actually my position is clearer than that. I ponder why we are wasting so much time with stupid issues on this planet when we could be going to Mars and doing archeology about our ancestors and then propelling ourselves beyond this universe into an endless frontier ready to be claimed by humans.

JK

All too easy.

http://jeeptalk.org/crack/smilies/contrib/owen/vader1.gif

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Actually my position is clearer than that. I ponder why we are wasting so much time with stupid issues on this planet when we could be going to Mars and doing archeology about our ancestors and then propelling ourselves beyond this universe into an endless frontier ready to be claimed by humans.

JK
JK, if you made it to Mars, I'm sure that within hours you would be arguing with the liberal matriarchal totalitarian women Martians who want to add a woman's face to the landscape.

And don't call them "Marties". They hate that, even though I'm sure you didn't mean it as a racial slur.

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Actually my position is clearer than that. I ponder why we are wasting so much time with stupid issues on this planet when we could be going to Mars and doing archeology about our ancestors and then propelling ourselves beyond this universe into an endless frontier ready to be claimed by humans.

JK Do you really believe we came from Mars Jedi?

Admits she said she was a Jedi on the censor form religion question. it has to be on there next time alot of peope also did.

[CWL]

Originally posted by radiating-sunflower
Do you really believe we came from Mars Jedi?

Enjoy (http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=7891&perpage=40&highlight=west%20nile&pagenumber=7).

[Upchurch]

Is the site genuine, do you think, or is it a spoof?

Upchurch

[c4ts]

LMAO I thought I was quoting the Simpsons when I said he had been living in a cave on Mars his entire life. I didn't know he was serious!

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Actually my position is clearer than that. I ponder why we are wasting so much time with stupid issues on this planet when we could be going to Mars and doing archeology about our ancestors and then propelling ourselves beyond this universe into an endless frontier ready to be claimed by humans.

JK
How hard could that be with the right tools?
(Thanks to Scott Adams):

"You are wrong because:

For your convenience, I have checked the brain malfunctions that most closely resemble the ones that you recently exhibited on the topic of: __________________________________________
...................................

Anything you don't understand is easy to do ____
Example: If you have the right tools, how hard could it be to generate nuclear fission at home? "
:rolleyes:

[Reginald]

Radiating Sunflower

Oh you did that too?

:o

I think lots of us did!

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by radiating-sunflower
Do you really believe we came from Mars Jedi?

Absolutely.

JK

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Absolutely.

JK

Apart from the pictures you showed me last time I asked Jedi on the faces and observortory, do you mind if I ask 2 questions of you?(may lead to more)

1- If we came fromMars and by taking the picture as evidence that means we were highly civilised and advanced(general basement)how did we get to be here on earth?

2- Why dont we remember living on Mars? If we had surely we would have some memory of it even a tale from forefathers past down etc or documentory evidence?

[wraith]

nice avatar radiating-sunflower

that you by any chance?

;)

Originally posted by wraith
nice avatar radiating-sunflower

that you by any chance?

;)
Yes if normal women look orange and are in flames lmao.

if not lose the orange but I do spontanously combust. ;)

[wraith]

Originally posted by radiating-sunflower

...but I do spontanousl combust. ;)

that hot huh?

:cool:

[wraith]

no reason
;)

[subgenius]

'My product is 51 times stronger than cocaine, 51 times more hallucinogenic than acid and 51 times more explosive than ecstasy. It’s like getting a personal visit from God…'
I take it that this is based on personal experience.
:eek:

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by radiating-sunflower
1- If we came fromMars and by taking the picture as evidence that means we were highly civilised and advanced(general basement)how did we get to be here on earth?

Hyperdimensional physics. Our ancestors left us that information on Mars in Cydonia region. It is the key to the energy development necessary for interplanetary space travel. I am confident that humans will be able to develop it this century.

2- Why dont we remember living on Mars? If we had surely we would have some memory of it even a tale from forefathers past down etc or documentory evidence?

There is all sorts of information that prove it. The proof that man didn't evolve on Earth for example, strongly weighs into the argument that we didn't originate here. It doesn't take much to fragment a civilization. The Mayan's left us in recent terms and there is no one left alive to tell us about them, and they left few clues to how they did business but some of their structures survived. Perhaps they were ancestors of the first arrivals.



JK

[wraith]

Originally posted by subgenius
'My product is 51 times stronger than cocaine, 51 times more hallucinogenic than acid and 51 times more explosive than ecstasy. It’s like getting a personal visit from God…'
I take it that this is based on personal experience.
:eek:

haha from a song


;)

the most "hardcore" drug that Ive taken was probably panadol
lol

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Titanpoint
I wrote to the Jedi Knight at www.jediism.org thus:



and the response is thus:



So there we have it. The Jedi religion does not have a position on the existence of a Supreme Being.

I hope that clarifies something.

TP :cool:
Can we get back to the topic?
Any religion that isn't tolerant an't sh*t in my book.
"No god says to hate your neighbor,
Even if your neighbor doesn't believe in god."
-----the Roches

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


JK thank you jedi

wormholes do you mean by hyperdimensional travel
or parellel universal travel?

The latter I mean by way of definiton is, matter is solid to the timeframe is exists in, it can however pass through all other solid matter in all other parellel time frames, the TLOP is only relevent to it's orginating place of exsistence.

2, Mayans on that score I can agree with you in part on that as a valid explananation, as with other missing civilistions.
however, could it also not be that fear of recriminations of say past autrocities could have forced people to 'forget' their orgins.

Or to give there culture a high status of remeberence in history by vanishing and creating a mystery that is unexplanable?

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by radiating-sunflower
thank you jedi

wormholes do you mean by hyperdimensional travel
or parellel universal travel?

The latter I mean by way of definiton is, matter is solid to the timeframe is exists in, it can however pass through all other solid matter in all other parellel time frames, the TLOP is only relevent to it's orginating place of exsistence.

2, Mayans on that score I can agree with you in part on that as a valid explananation, as with other missing civilistions.
however, could it also not be that fear of recriminations of say past autrocities could have forced people to 'forget' their orgins.

Or to give there culture a high status of remeberence in history by vanishing and creating a mystery that is unexplanable?

In Cydonia Region of Mars there is a structure called the D&M Pyramid. That pyramid structure unlocked the theory of Hyperdimensional Physics.

Check out this webpage (http://www.enterprisemission.com/physics.html) for information about hyperdimensional physics.

JK

[Doctor X]

Oh well . . . why not?

The proof that man didn't evolve on Earth for example, . . .

I am afraid I am unaware of this proof so clear than one need not present it. I am aware of, however, the evidence that man did evolve on the Earth.

It doesn't take much to fragment a civilization.

This does not follow from the above or support the above.

The Mayan's left us in recent terms and there is no one left alive to tell us about them, . . .

"They" are still here. Quite alot is known about them and "who" made them "leave."

. . . and they left few clues to how they did business. . . .

Not true.

Perhaps they were ancestors of the first arrivals.

Since man had civilizations far before the Mayas and, indeed, evidence of human evolution far far before that time, this does not at all seem likely.

Incidentally--and perhaps this is the point regarding the fragment of civilization--even fallen and destroyed civilizations leave evidence of their existence. One of the reasons for the rethinking of the Exodus as historical is the complete lack of extra-textual evidence for such an event--not to mention internal inconsistencies [Then do not mention it.--Ed.] Fine, I will not.

Thus, I am afraid I would require more to believe a civilization on Mars with the technology to colonize another planet. Funny that the colonists lost all of their technology. . . .

--J.D.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Doctor X
Oh well . . . why not?

You know that you want to ask lol.

I am afraid I am unaware of this proof so clear than one need not present it. I am aware of, however, the evidence that man did evolve on the Earth.

There is no skeletal evidence that he did. There is skeletal evidence of other species, but not man.

This does not follow from the above or support the above.

Read above.

"They" are still here. Quite alot is known about them and "who" made them "leave."

In fragmented tribes they remain. Only structures and some artifacts remain of their massive civilization. How did that happen? Why did they not "remember" it?

Not true.

Really? Why?

Since man had civilizations far before the Mayas and, indeed, evidence of human evolution far far before that time, this does not at all seem likely.

There are underwater pyramids recently found off the coast of Cuba and also underwater pyramids off the coast of Japan. No one on this planet alive today knows when or who built them.

Incidentally--and perhaps this is the point regarding the fragment of civilization--even fallen and destroyed civilizations leave evidence of their existence. One of the reasons for the rethinking of the Exodus as historical is the complete lack of extra-textual evidence for such an event--not to mention internal inconsistencies [Then do not mention it.--Ed.] Fine, I will not.

Like I said, there is evidence. There is just no one with the knowledge to tell us who built them and why. No one alive. No one left us any information to explain it.

Thus, I am afraid I would require more to believe a civilization on Mars with the technology to colonize another planet. Funny that the colonists lost all of their technology. . . .

If they had a crisis, they couldn't move their entire civilization. After a few generations, they could also perish completely.



JK

[Doctor X]

JK:

There is no skeletal evidence that he did. There is skeletal evidence of other species, but not man.

Not really true. If you define "species" as the inability of two to "do the nasty" in a way to produce an off-spring . . . well . . . except for Arkansas, we do not have specimen of early men to try it out with, say, Lester and Cleatus.

However, the skeletal remains present quite a continuous development. I am afraid you would have to explain why the sphenoid wing developed independent in these species and ours.

Furthermore, we share genetic homology with current descendents of far more distant ancestors--apes and country western fans. You would then have to argue that "they" came and started it all--including the bacteria.

In fragmented tribes they remain. Only structures and some artifacts remain of their massive civilization. How did that happen? Why did they not "remember" it?

I would recommend a history of the wonderful jolly men of the Conquistadores with various priests destroying texts and trying to supress a civilization. "They"--if you refer to current tribes--do not remember things before they were born, of course, any more than I can recall why some of my ancestors gave up potato farming.


Really? Why?

Because. [Stop that.--Ed.]

Right, to give the context:

JK:. . . and they left few clues to how they did business. . . .

Moi: Not true.

Unless I have misread the recent archeology, translation of Mayan has provided good indications on the religion and government of the Maya.


There are underwater pyramids recently found off the coast of Cuba and also underwater pyramids off the coast of Japan. No one on this planet alive today knows when or who built them.

Well a Japanese archeologist has some ideas. . . . That did not address my point that older civilizations exist, which we know about, understand, and do not have to evoke aliens to explain. We certainly do not need the aliens to "evolve" us for them. So . . . the aliens "evolve us"--even though we have homology with other species . . . leave us alone for millenia, then, sort of start the Maya?

Now, I am unaware that anyone has demonstrated that these are man or creature made structures. In fact, the structures near Japan--as presented by Discovery or similar program recently--did not exactly resemble pyramids. Be that as it may, I would require some establishment that these are not natural phenomena like other example touted then disproved.

If they had a crisis, [Martians--Ed.] they couldn't move their entire civilization. After a few generations, they could also perish completely.

Far too facile. You propose a very sophisticated civilization--space travel. Douglas Adams' admonishment that we still think digital watches are a neat idea applies in that such a civilization will require technology and equipment that does not just "go away."

Moving an entire civilization? Okay . . . and then they . . . what? Got rid of the conveniences of wireless communication, flight, and toilets that flush? They then let the Conquistadores squish them with swords and muskets?

We have layers of civilizations going back millenia--they could not hide their trash, frankly. Such an advanced civilization would have far greater difficulty "hiding."

--J.D.

[Edited to repair a quote.--Ed.]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


In Cydonia Region of Mars there is a structure called the D&M Pyramid. That pyramid structure unlocked the theory of Hyperdimensional Physics.

Check out this webpage (http://www.enterprisemission.com/physics.html) for information about hyperdimensional physics.

JK
but why mars after all the atmosphere and planetary conditions are noting like earths, surely they could not survive?

regards link Not to desimilar to my speil above.

Ok with so if they had that why earth why not anywhere else, if they were advanced as they must have been with the sun dyeing shy move to earth ot another universe?

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
There are underwater pyramids recently found off the coast of Cuba and also underwater pyramids off the coast of Japan. No one on this planet alive today knows when or who built them.


JK

JK
Here is one guy alive today that knows how those underwater structures were formed. Idiot atlantis freaks who know nothing about geology like to imagine these natural formations are manmade. They see straight lines and jump to conclusions with NO knowledge of how straight lines, block and pyramid formations are completely natural...Just like how you see faces in fuzzy mars pictures. Its wishfull thinking and confirms your stupidity.



http://www.ramtops.demon.co.uk/yonaguni.html

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by radiating-sunflower

but why mars after all the atmosphere and planetary conditions are noting like earths, surely they could not survive?

regards link Not to desimilar to my speil above.

Ok with so if they had that why earth why not anywhere else, if they were advanced as they must have been with the sun dyeing shy move to earth ot another universe?

Mars still has vegetation on the planet's surface. Nasa hides what Mars really looks like with their photographs, but to see Mars as it is check out this (http://www.lunaranomalies.com/colors2.htm) article.

A few decades of terra-forming and we can live there no problem.

JK

[Lord Kenneth]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Mars still has vegetation on the planet's surface. Nasa hides what Mars really looks like with their photographs, but to see Mars as it is check out this (http://www.lunaranomalies.com/colors2.htm) article.

A few decades of terra-forming and we can live there no problem.

JK

When you're nuts, things just make more sense, don't they?

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by The Fool


JK
Here is one guy alive today that knows how those underwater structures were formed. Idiot atlantis freaks who know nothing about geology like to imagine these natural formations are manmade. They see straight lines and jump to conclusions with NO knowledge of how straight lines, block and pyramid formations are completely natural...Just like how you see faces in fuzzy mars pictures. Its wishfull thinking and confirms your stupidity.



http://www.ramtops.demon.co.uk/yonaguni.html

You just have a neolithic intellect, Fool. That is your problem. You can't handle the truth and that is why your logic is grounded in the 14th century.

Here are some pictures of the (http://www.lauralee.com/japan/japan1.htm) underwater structures off Japan.

Here are some new pictures (http://www.lauralee.com/japan/japan2.htm).

There are many more that have been taken of the site. There is a new site similar to this one off the coast of Cuba but at a much greater depth that is currently being explored.

Some day you will understand that the world isn't flat, Fool, and when that day comes it will be hard for you to swallow lol. You know, like a horse (Fool) pill.

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Dark Cobra
When you're nuts, things just make more sense, don't they?

Are you a product of the public school system? You act like you are.

JK

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


You just have a neolithic intellect, Fool. That is your problem. You can't handle the truth and that is why your logic is grounded in the 14th century.

Here are some pictures of the (http://www.lauralee.com/japan/japan1.htm) underwater structures off Japan.

Here are some new pictures (http://www.lauralee.com/japan/japan2.htm).

There are many more that have been taken of the site. There is a new site similar to this one off the coast of Cuba but at a much greater depth that is currently being explored.

Some day you will understand that the world isn't flat, Fool, and when that day comes it will be hard for you to swallow lol. You know, like a horse (Fool) pill.

JK
all naturally occuring geological structures...every last one of them....But of course taking the time to check is not one of your strong points..... Ever been to a slate quarry you idiot? Ever taken the time to read a book on geology that explains and shows examples of similar structures? No....atlantis is a better explanation.....LOL

[Bjorn]

Another example, this time the ruins of one:

http://www.lusterskifer.com/klipp32.jpg

[CFLarsen]

Hmmm...is it OK for a Jedi to lie?

Luke: How did my father die?
Obi-Wan: A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi knights. He betrayed and murdered your father.

Well, as we know by now, DaddyVadie was really Luke's real dad. So, Obi-Wannabe flat-out lied to Luke.

Is this how a Jedi should conduct himself? The ends justifies the means?

[Bjorn]

Here's another one, this is just above sea level (might have been submerged for thousands of years ... )

http://www.reefnews.com/reefnews/oceangeo/sandiego/cnm_rs01.jpg

Where did they come from? Where did they go? :confused:

[Reginald]

And what unearthly force lifted that massive boulder and placed it so delicately and with such precision there??? eh? eh?

;)

[Bjorn]

... and the protruding rocks are not pointing towards the North as we know it today, but exactly at 351.89 degrees, which happens to be directly towards where the true magnetic North Pole were in 4,352 BC, the moment when Atlantis disappeared!

Coincidence? Hah! :confused:

[Reginald]

I don't for one moment, expect that you honestly believe that that picture is going to fool me do you.....?

Look at the inconsistancies in it!

a) The light...Quite obviously taken in broad day light, the type you get on say...The Earth.

b) The water there...look, theres no free water on mars in that kind of quantity, you will have to try harder than that!!!

c) The sky is the wrong colour!

d) The rocks are just "Wrong" I cant put my finger on it but shouldnt they be more "reddy"?

Try again!!

;)

[Tricky]

Here's another example. This looks exactly like a patio paved with hexagonal stones, yet it is entirely natural.

If you want to know how it occurred, I'll be glad to explain.

[CWL]

Jedi Knight,

If you want to revisit the Martian issue why don't you please begin by explaining why our DNA and the DNA of chimpanzee are virtually identical (about 98 % I believe). When studied it is obvious that we and the other larger primates have a lot in common. Why is that? Perhaps chimpanzees, gorillas and orangu-tangs came from Mars aswell?

What about our apparent kinship with other mammals or to other vertebral animals for that matter. Where did for instance our caudal vertebra come from?

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by CWL
Jedi Knight,

If you want to revisit the Martian issue why don't you please begin by explaining why our DNA and the DNA of chimpanzee are virtually identical (about 98 % I believe). When studied it is obvious that we and the other larger primates have a lot in common. Why is that? Perhaps chimpanzees, gorillas and orangu-tangs came from Mars aswell?

What about our apparent kinship with other mammals or to other vertebral animals for that matter. Where did for instance our caudal vertebra come from?

Just show me one skeleton which proves man evolved on Earth. For some strange reason, no one can find one. Perhaps you dug one up somewhere. Let me know so I can get you the Nobel the next day.

JK

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
Just show me one skeleton which proves man evolved on Earth. For some strange reason, no one can find one. Perhaps you dug one up somewhere. Let me know so I can get you the Nobel the next day.
I'm no archiologist, but don't you need as succession of skeletons in order to prove that man evolved on Earth? A single skeleton could never show a progression, could it?

Upchurch

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Upchurch

I'm no archiologist, but don't you need as succession of skeletons in order to prove that man evolved on Earth? A single skeleton could never show a progression, could it?

Upchurch

You are right. You need a succession of skeletons. There is no such succession of skeletons for man. There are for apes and chimpanzees, but not for man.

Find the skeletons and win the Nobel.

JK

[Reginald]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Just show me one skeleton which proves man evolved on Earth. For some strange reason, no one can find one. Perhaps you dug one up somewhere. Let me know so I can get you the Nobel the next day.
JK

Just show me one "Martian" artifact which proves man came here from Mars. For some strange reason, no one can find one. Perhaps you dug one up somewhere. Let me know so I can get you the Nobel the next day.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
You are right. You need a succession of skeletons. There is no such succession of skeletons for man. There are for apes and chimpanzees, but not for man.
I'm no biologist either, so I settled for doing a quick web search. PBS had a couple of Flash presentations that I thought was interesting.

Origins of Humankind (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/humans/humankind/index.html)

and

Riddle of the Bones (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/humans/riddle/index.html)

I suppose you'll say they're wrong or fake or something. I suppose it's possible that they are, but how do you know? What evidence do you have for the spaceships that brought us here? Where are the records from that time? And why are we so similar to the indiginous life forms here?

Upchurch

[CWL]

Originally posted by Reginald


Just show me one "Martian" artifact which proves man came here from Mars. For some strange reason, no one can find one. Perhaps you dug one up somewhere. Let me know so I can get you the Nobel the next day.
Ah! I know the answer to this one.

Next our learned friend Mr. Knight will proceed to tell you that the below is not just any old mesa...

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/mars/mgs/msss/camera/images/moc_5_24_01/face/face_e03-824_proc_i.gif

Conclusive proof that humans have evolved on Mars wouldn't you say?

BTW, you can read more about this picture here (http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/mars/mgs/msss/camera/images/moc_5_24_01/face/index.html).

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by CWL
Conclusive proof that humans have evolved on Mars wouldn't you say? A shield or crest with a stylized number "7" on it?

Upchurch

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by CWL
BTW, you can read more about this picture here (http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/mars/mgs/msss/camera/images/moc_5_24_01/face/index.html).
Oh, the face. Gotcha. oops.

Actually, even the older, blurry version looks more like a question mark to me....

Upchurch

edited to add:

Batman: This can only be the diabolical work of The Riddler!
Robin: Holy Planetary Puzzler!

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
You are right. You need a succession of skeletons. There is no such succession of skeletons for man. There are for apes and chimpanzees, but not for man.

I see your knowledge of anthropology is rivaled only by your knowledge of gravity.:rolleyes:

Of course, many hominid fossils (http://www.stanford.edu/~harryg/protected/evolve3.htm) have been discovered and confirmed independantly.

But even if they hadn't, to deny that man evolved on earth would be to deny evolution completely. If embryology, genetics, paleontology, stratigraphy, comparitive anatomy and all of the other sciences with strong evidence for evolution are correct for all the lower species, why should they make an exception for humans? Is it because you have this need to feel more important than you are? Well, in your case, Jedi, that is understandable.

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Mars still has vegetation on the planet's surface. Nasa hides what Mars really looks like with their photographs, but to see Mars as it is check out this (http://www.lunaranomalies.com/colors2.htm) article.

A few decades of terra-forming and we can live there no problem.

JK

The supposedly "true color" image of Mars is questionable. A short while ago, while the planet was at opposition, I saw Mars through a colleague's 14" Schmidt-Cass - in realtime - and there didn't seem to be any greens or blues on the planet. Perhaps NASA has a big giant anti-blue/green energy field in orbit?

Originally posted by Tricky

Here's another example. This looks exactly like a patio paved with hexagonal stones, yet it is entirely natural.

If you want to know how it occurred, I'll be glad to explain.

Volcanic basalt deposits on Easter Island have been known to fracture into hexagonal shapes. I don't think that's what you're showing in the picture, however...

It reminds me of when I grew up in San Antonio. After a long, long time with no rain, and lots of heat, the dry mud would crack. When there was a sudden light shower then, that dried up quickly in the intense heat, it would leave very cool looking and suprisingly regular-shaped "tiles" in the ground. They never lasted more than a while, because the soil was continually disturbed. But, I suppose after a long (long) time, the tiles could "petrify" if undisturbed. Are those tiles in your photo slate? Or sandstone?

I'm not a professional geologist like you, Tricky....so please expose my ignorance.. :D

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi
Volcanic basalt deposits on Easter Island have been known to fracture into hexagonal shapes. I don't think that's what you're showing in the picture, however...
Actually, this is correct. This is a photo (taken by me) on top of "The Devil's Postpile" near Yosemite National Park. There are numerous columnar basalts in the world, but this one is unique in that the top of the basalt was sheared off and polished by glaciation, leaving a patio-like arrangement which is actually the tops of the columns of basalt. It is very impressive and would look to the "believers eye" like it was human made.

The drying phenomenon also gives polygonal mud cracks and preserved versions have been discovered somewhat regularly. In fact, hexagonal patterns are incredibly common in nature, being one of the few geometric shapes (including rectangles, and triangles) in which a continuous pattern of same-sized polygons can fit into an unbroken surface. It is no accident that the cells of beehives are hexagonal.

Pretty good, for a non-geologist, Josh.

[whitefork]

Tricky, regarding the Giant's Causeway.

(must .... derail .... thread .... further)

I've heard there are pentagonal structures (prism-shaped columns, I guess) of what is it, basalt?

If that's the case, how does that fracturing work? Are they actual pentagons, or something in the way of a rough likeness?

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by whitefork
If that's the case, how does that fracturing work? Are they actual pentagons, or something in the way of a rough likeness?
Yeah, I'm curious too. The pentagon pattern looks similar to crystal structures I've seen. Surely the composition isn't uniform enough to cause large-scale molecular formations like that, is it? Or is there another principle involved?

Normally, solid state physics don't interest me as much, but the more I look at the pics, the more it amazes me.

Is this something that should be continued over in Science?

Upchurch

[Tricky]

Originally posted by whitefork
Tricky, regarding the Giant's Causeway.

(must .... derail .... thread .... further)

I've heard there are pentagonal structures (prism-shaped columns, I guess) of what is it, basalt?

If that's the case, how does that fracturing work? Are they actual pentagons, or something in the way of a rough likeness?
Actually, they are mostly hexagonal, but due to the irregular nature of the rock body, some are pentagonal or other shapes. The reason for hexagons is that of the geometric shapes that can form an unbroken surface, it has the most sides, i.e. it is closer to circular. When the basalt cools, it tries to fracture along regular planes but since it is attached in all directions, the planes fracture in the maximum possible directions, making them as close to circles (or circular prisms) as they could be and still be completely contiguous.

Does that make any sense?

[CWL]

While you're at it Tricky, could you please give us your opinion as a geologist regarding the formations that can be seen in the Cydonia Region of the Planet Mars:

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/4_5_00_cydonia/moc2_msss_labels_i.gif

In your reasonable opinion (given your knowledge of how land formations are created), what is more likely - that the formations in question are natural or artificial?

You will find more information here (http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/4_5_00_cydonia/).

[Doctor X]

Just show me one skeleton which proves man evolved on Earth.

Psssst . . . that . . . um . . . sphenoid wing I mentioned. . . .

--J.D.

[Jim_MDP]

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi


The supposedly "true color" image of Mars is questionable. A short while ago, while the planet was at opposition, I saw Mars through a colleague's 14" Schmidt-Cass - in realtime - and there didn't seem to be any greens or blues on the planet. Perhaps NASA has a big giant anti-blue/green energy field in orbit?

See ladies, size doesn't matter!
I get the same result and my SC is only 10".

....

Hey Skepchicks, I got something for ya right here...no, pay no mind to that 14 incher over there...you don't want any of that...hey, wait...where ya gon'?...come back...awww, crap.

[headscratcher4]

I am going off track, because this is all over the board already.

We Know quite a lot about the Maya. More importantly, scattered though they maybe, the Maya still know a lot about themselves...odd, after their experience with the Spanish, they developed both secret rituals and secret places that the Indians know but are not generally shared with outsiders. More importantly, though the Spanish tried to destroy the people and the religion (a little atheistic action JK?), there still is a lot left.

I highly recommend the book A Forest of Kings, which describes the decyphering of the Mayan language and what was found when they were able to read the stele and the pottery, and building sculptures...facinating.

Finally, on the Maya, the hight of their Civilization was only 800 to 1200 years ago. We are still learning a great deal about them, today, for instance, we know a great deal more about dynasties, city histories, wars, language, religion, etc. than they did even 15 years ago, and are learning more all of the time...especially with some key new finds.

Anyway, I say all of this, JK, because I think your use of them as an example is very misplaced.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by CWL
While you're at it Tricky, could you please give us your opinion as a geologist regarding the formations that can be seen in the Cydonia Region of the Planet Mars:

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/4_5_00_cydonia/moc2_msss_labels_i.gif

In your reasonable opinion (given your knowledge of how land formations are created), what is more likely - that the formations in question are natural or artificial?

You will find more information here (http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/4_5_00_cydonia/).

The D&M pyramid unlocks the secret of hyperdimensional physics. Check out the dimensions of the D&M pyramid.

JK

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Tricky

Actually, this is correct. This is a photo (taken by me) on top of "The Devil's Postpile" near Yosemite National Park. There are numerous columnar basalts in the world, but this one is unique in that the top of the basalt was sheared off and polished by glaciation, leaving a patio-like arrangement which is actually the tops of the columns of basalt. It is very impressive and would look to the "believers eye" like it was human made.


So the first, easier explanation I gave, then rejected in favor of writing a long lovely story about memories of Texas was right after all...and I wasted half a post?

Well, it's definitely me. :D

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


The D&M pyramid unlocks the secret of hyperdimensional physics. Check out the dimensions of the D&M pyramid.

JK

Let's check out the dimensions...

Interestingly, the D&M pyramid does not have a regular design. One side - the southern side - looks vaguely suggestive, but the rest of it is rubbish. It doesn't even have an apex, only a ridge, which makes it a rectangular prismoid rather than a pyramid. The north side appears to blend in a smooth fashion with the west side of the pyramid near the "top", and the east side looks collapsed - smudged unrecognizably to the north and west. In fact, from about the northwest "corner" of the pyramid, all the way around the east side down to the misshapen southeast "corner", the pyramid has no base, but blends nicely with the floor.

'tain't no pyramid, sorry to say.

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Reginald
I don't for one moment, expect that you honestly believe that that picture is going to fool me do you.....?

Look at the inconsistancies in it!
a) The light...Quite obviously taken in broad day light, the type you get on say...The Earth.
b) The water there...look, theres no free water on mars in that kind of quantity, you will have to try harder than that!!!
c) The sky is the wrong colour!
d) The rocks are just "Wrong" I cant put my finger on it but shouldnt they be more "reddy"?

Try again!!

;) Well, here we go - this is one of the few known fossiles from Mars, the spine of a marsoknightusflaggellanus minor.

http://www.the-planet-mars.com/pictures/chasma-on-planet-mars.jpg

Not fully examined by scientists yet (and probably won't be until NASA releases the real pictures they took)! :p

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi


Let's check out the dimensions...

Interestingly, the D&M pyramid does not have a regular design. One side - the southern side - looks vaguely suggestive, but the rest of it is rubbish. It doesn't even have an apex, only a ridge, which makes it a rectangular prismoid rather than a pyramid. The north side appears to blend in a smooth fashion with the west side of the pyramid near the "top", and the east side looks collapsed - smudged unrecognizably to the north and west. In fact, from about the northwest "corner" of the pyramid, all the way around the east side down to the misshapen southeast "corner", the pyramid has no base, but blends nicely with the floor.

'tain't no pyramid, sorry to say.

That is because you simply do not understand it. Rather than ask about it, you just use your atheist logic (neolithic) and just "dismiss" it like the clowns in the king's court dismissed the fact that the world was round.

As a Galilleo, I understand that and am patient with people like you.

Here are some math equations (http://www.his.com/~tharsis/pyramid/geometry.html) that you "overlooked" in your dismissing of the D&M pyramid. There are more, but that proves my point rather well.

JK

[Bjorn]

Here are some math equations that you "overlooked" in your dismissing of the D&M pyramid. There are more, but that proves my point rather well. Not that it matters, but it takes one look at the pictures provided of 'the pyramid' and the surroundings to see that either

1) The angles at the 'top' of the pyramid are not 60 degrees, or

2) The lines drawn from top to corners are not pointing at both 'City' and 'Tholus'.

However, the geometry presented to us has nothing to do with Mars or the 'pyramid', but applies to any object with the alleged shape.

What one could write about 'six-fold symmetry', how many 60 degrees angles one could find, how all the triangles would have three sides .... :p

Here's another picture of the fossile I mentioned earlier:

http://www.the-planet-mars.com/pictures/valles-marineris-picture.jpg

Or, to be more accurate - this is the marsoknightusflaggellanus major, that came after minor.

[Jim_MDP]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


That is because you simply do not understand it. Rather than ask about it, you just use your atheist logic (neolithic) and just "dismiss" it like the clowns in the king's court dismissed the fact that the world was round.

As a Galilleo, I understand that and am patient with people like you.

Here are some math equations (http://www.his.com/~tharsis/pyramid/geometry.html) that you "overlooked" in your dismissing of the D&M pyramid. There are more, but that proves my point rather well.

JK

Oh poor, poor Cupcake, you realy have gone too far. :rolleyes:

Between this and the Enterprisemission.com site, I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry.

A Galileo are you?
So sad.

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


That is because you simply do not understand it. Rather than ask about it, you just use your atheist logic (neolithic) and just "dismiss" it like the clowns in the king's court dismissed the fact that the world was round.

As a Galilleo, I understand that and am patient with people like you.

Here are some math equations (http://www.his.com/~tharsis/pyramid/geometry.html) that you "overlooked" in your dismissing of the D&M pyramid. There are more, but that proves my point rather well.

JK

Fine...let's have a look.

http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/sheep2_small.jpg

Here's a closeup. As you can see, the "pyramid" has no apex...only a somewhat flattened and messy ridge of sorts at the summit. The "pyramid's" edges clearly do not come together at a point, which should be cause for dismissal of the "pentagon" theory immediately.

To outline the geometric incongruency of the formation, I offer this second photo, to be compared to the one above for accuracy. The ridges and high points of the formation are defined in red, while the apparent "base" of the formation is outlined in blue.

http://us.f1.yahoofs.com/users/f6fdf682/bc/My+Photos/1.gif?bcnRq_9AfldfwE4p

The southern side of the formation has a suggestive regular base. The west side does not - but we can attribute the "billow" anomaly to a collapse of some sort. But as you can very clearly see, none of the other sides has anything remotely resembling a regular base. An object's perimeter is crucial to its identification as a shape - this object's total perimeter is simply not regular.

But let's pretend that the object has a regular base. Based on the object's discernable "ridges" - using them as internal "rays", as in the pentagon drawing - let's see what shape we come up with:

http://us.f1.yahoofs.com/users/f6fdf682/bc/My+Photos/2.gif?bcnRq_9AnA6vYnuc

Not only is the shape not a pentagon, practically none of the "edges" of the pyramid are regular...they snake around back and forth under the straight superimposed lines.

The main problem I find with the "pentagon" explanation is that it gives prominence to a barely discernable ridge running from the summit toward the northeast - yet a very prominent and complex ridge running due east from the summit is completely ignored. Indeed, the "southeast" base of the pentagon would simply blow right through this ridgeline as if it weren't even there. When the ridgeline is included in the geometry of the formation, as I have done, the "pentagon" explanation collapses completely.

I've looked and looked for a superimposed image of the pentagon on the pyramid, and haven't found any. I suggest that this is because when the pentagon is so superimposed, the folly becomes self-evident. I'm unable to do the superimposing...I did all the work above with the MS Paint utility. If someone else could show us a photo with the pentagon superimposed, I would appreciate it.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by CWL
While you're at it Tricky, could you please give us your opinion as a geologist regarding the formations that can be seen in the Cydonia Region of the Planet Mars:

http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/4_5_00_cydonia/moc2_msss_labels_i.gif

In your reasonable opinion (given your knowledge of how land formations are created), what is more likely - that the formations in question are natural or artificial?

You will find more information here (http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/4_5_00_cydonia/).
Anything I say is pure conjecture, since I have no experience in areology (geo means "Earth", so Geology is incorrect, IMHO.)

However, geology, or specifically geomorphology (the study of landforms) is dependant on the forces that are present. On Earth, those forces are multitude, including glaciation, fluvial (river)erosion, aeolean (wind) erosion, tectonic activity, wave and ocean effects and many more. Geomorphology due to meteor impact is fairly rare, due to the thick atmosphere which burns up most small meteors and to the rapidity of weathering which destroys and covers up meteor impacts. On Mars, the situation is very different. With little or no surface water, erosion effects are mainly due to wind, and even then, much less pronounced than on Earth due to the extremely thin atmosphere. Thus, meteor craters last for a long time, as is evident by the number of meteor craters on scans. However, craters aren't the only effect of meteor impacts. They may throw ejecta (irregular blocks of rock) into the air which travel various distances and land like rough gravel thrown out at random. This could be the cause of the irregular blocks that create "the city". Normally, they land in a somewhat circular pattern around the impact crater, but depending on the material and where they landed, they may have been differentially obscured.

Tectonic activity is also very minor on mars, as they do not have the plate activity that the Earth has, but it is not completely quiescent. It is possible that the "pyramid" is an ancient volcano. it has the correct shape and what appears to be a crater-like top. The irregularly placed "corners" could be lava trails which are more resistant to eolean erosion than the inter-trail areas which are eroded and filled with loess (wind-blown sediment), making them appear flat.

Right now I am grateful that I don't use my real name, because if any real areologists caught me hypothesizing like this, they would probably laugh me back to minerology class. But at least it has some degree of plausibilty, something that Jedi's tale lacks utterly.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi


Fine...let's have a look.

http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/sheep2_small.jpg

Here's a closeup. As you can see, the "pyramid" has no apex...only a somewhat flattened and messy ridge of sorts at the summit. The "pyramid's" edges clearly do not come together at a point, which should be cause for dismissal of the "pentagon" theory immediately.

To outline the geometric incongruency of the formation, I offer this second photo, to be compared to the one above for accuracy. The ridges and high points of the formation are defined in red, while the apparent "base" of the formation is outlined in blue.

http://us.f1.yahoofs.com/users/f6fdf682/bc/My+Photos/1.gif?bcnRq_9AfldfwE4p

The southern side of the formation has a suggestive regular base. The west side does not - but we can attribute the "billow" anomaly to a collapse of some sort. But as you can very clearly see, none of the other sides has anything remotely resembling a regular base. An object's perimeter is crucial to its identification as a shape - this object's total perimeter is simply not regular.

But let's pretend that the object has a regular base. Based on the object's discernable "ridges" - using them as internal "rays", as in the pentagon drawing - let's see what shape we come up with:

http://us.f1.yahoofs.com/users/f6fdf682/bc/My+Photos/2.gif?bcnRq_9AnA6vYnuc

Not only is the shape not a pentagon, practically none of the "edges" of the pyramid are regular...they snake around back and forth under the straight superimposed lines.

The main problem I find with the "pentagon" explanation is that it gives prominence to a barely discernable ridge running from the summit toward the northeast - yet a very prominent and complex ridge running due east from the summit is completely ignored. Indeed, the "southeast" base of the pentagon would simply blow right through this ridgeline as if it weren't even there. When the ridgeline is included in the geometry of the formation, as I have done, the "pentagon" explanation collapses completely.

I've looked and looked for a superimposed image of the pentagon on the pyramid, and haven't found any. I suggest that this is because when the pentagon is so superimposed, the folly becomes self-evident. I'm unable to do the superimposing...I did all the work above with the MS Paint utility. If someone else could show us a photo with the pentagon superimposed, I would appreciate it.

You aren't trained to look at these images. Nothing personal, but it gets in the way of honest debate when you say "gosh, I don't see it".

I know people that don't see quadratic equations either, but that doesn't mean the quadratic equations don't exist.

Your critique of the one wall has already been solved many years ago. That wall is part of the structure that has collapsed, if you can see the debris path (the only one) on the southeastern section of the D&M.

Also, another section you missed with the D&M is the tunnel entrance to the SE. Do more research on it and then come back to debate it if you want to.

JK

[Doctor X]

Um . . . sphenoid wing, Jedi Knight?

--J.D.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Doctor X
Um . . . sphenoid wing, Jedi Knight?

--J.D.

No, alien DNA injections--non-invasive.

JK

[Doctor X]

Jedi Knight:

In all seriousness that fails to address the question.

You claim'd that no skeletal evidence exists of humans evolving. If you wish I can requote your statement.

I asked you to address the actual evidence of progressive development of skeletal stucture.

I await a response.

--J.D.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Doctor X
I asked you to address the actual evidence of progressive development of skeletal stucture.

I await a response.

--J.D.

There is evidence of progressive skeletal development related to evolutionary traits, but there are segments of time missing in the critical comparisons of the human species.

The "missing link" as it is known. I am not denying that there is evolutionary evidence of humanoid-type specimens.

JK

[MRC_Hans]

So, the subject of this thread is now: Do humans come from Mars? Well, its a more substantial subject than Jedi Religion, thats for sure.

Let see:

Evidence that Homo Sapiens is an Earth life-form:

1) Archeological. Man-made structures and man-made artefacts ranging back to very primitive cultures. Time-scale about 150,000 years.

2) Fossil. Fossils of humans and pre-hominids make a fairly continious lineage. Time-scale 2-6 million years (depending on your definition of "hominids".

3) Genetical. Vast similarities between human DNA and the DNA of other Earth mammals.

4) Adaptational. Humans are perfectly adapted to Earth biotops. Our eyes fit the daylight spectrum well, our metabolism fit available nutritients, our skeletal structure fits Earth gravity, our respiratory system fits Earth atmosphere, etc. etc.

Evidence that Homo Sapiens is a Mars life-form:

None.

Evidence for intelligent life on Mars::

1) Certain macrostructures on the surface can be interpreted as artificial.

Evidence against intelligent life on Mars:

1) Present conditions on the planet are forbidding for any higher life-forms we know of.

2) No evidence that conditions have ever been hospitable for higher life-forms.

3) All observed structures can also be explained as natural structures.

Conclusions:

All evidence supports the conclusion that Homo Sapiens is an Earth life-form.

Even if the existence, extant or extinct, of higher life-forms on Mars can be affirmed, this is not on itself evidence that Homo Sapiens immigrated from Mars.

Or on everyday language: There are probably no Martians, and even if there are, there is no reason at all to believe that they are our ancestors.

Hans

[Doctor X]

There is evidence of progressive skeletal development related to evolutionary traits, but there are segments of time missing in the critical comparisons of the human species.

This rather undercuts your original contention that no evidence exists that man evolved on Earth. I would also correct you that the development is more than "evolutionary traits." You have a development of both structure and function.

That you do not find a smooth progression does not mean that a progression did not happened. Thus, once you allow this:

The "missing link" as it is known. I am not denying that there is evolutionary evidence of humanoid-type specimens.

you admit support for the development of man on Earth.

Now, I directed your attention to the DNA homology--particularly the products of DNA--proteins . . . enzymes--between us and even the "wee beasties." I am afraid I find little evidence that an independent--and extraterrestrial--development of man could occur particularly given that rather preponderous evidence for terrestrial development.

Incidentally, why do you wish to believe man developed extraterrestrially?

--J.D.

[Edited to correct a missing negative.--Ed.]

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Doctor X


This rather undercuts your original contention that no evidence exists that man evolved on Earth. I would also correct you that the development is more than "evolutionary traits." You have a development of both structure and function.

That you do not find a smooth progression does not mean that a progression happened. Thus, once you allow this:



you admit support for the development of man on Earth.

Now, I directed your attention to the DNA homology--particularly the products of DNA--proteins . . . enzymes--between us and even the "wee beasties." I am afraid I find little evidence that an independent--and extraterrestrial--development of man could occur particularly given that rather preponderous evidence for terrestrial development.

Incidentally, why do you wish to believe man developed extraterrestrially?

--J.D.

Your mincing my words. I said that there is some small evidence that humanoid-type species evolved here. There is no solid evidence that man did. Finding some ape skeletons helps some corners of science say that man did.

I am convinced that man developed extraterrestrially.

JK

[Doctor X]

Your mincing my words.

I merely take your words for what they say and mean. If you mistated your position, than merely restate it. If you have found yourself in error, merely acknowledge it and move on. No shame exists in learning. Or, to quote the venerable Irish sergent, "There's no shame being born in the *****, lads, but there is a lot in wanting to stay there." [No Sharpe's quotes!--Ed.]

I said that there is some small evidence that humanoid-type species evolved here.

Methinks your conception of "some" and "small" proves rather different than the accepted and traditional. Rather a "large" or "plethora" perchance even a "sizable smidgen" exists.

There is no solid evidence that man did.

Ipse dixit for a rather extense amount does exist. You will have to address it to convince the discerning. Again, explain the sphenoid wing.

Finding some ape skeletons helps some corners of science say that man did.

Unfortunamente for thine position, calling them "ape" does not make them so. They have elements that are more homologous to human than ape. This, of course, denies the DNA homology as stated above. You have to address that. Assuming "alien DNA injections" which are self-contradictory "non-invasive" does not explain it at all.

If the human DNA proved very different from that of other species, you might be able to argue that it came from someplace else. That is not the case.

I am convinced that man developed extraterrestrially.

Based upon what evidence?

--J.D.

[CWL]

Originally posted by Tricky

Anything I say is pure conjecture, since I have no experience in areology (geo means "Earth", so Geology is incorrect, IMHO.)

However, geology, or specifically geomorphology (the study of landforms) is dependant on the forces that are present. On Earth, those forces are multitude, including glaciation, fluvial (river)erosion, aeolean (wind) erosion, tectonic activity, wave and ocean effects and many more. Geomorphology due to meteor impact is fairly rare, due to the thick atmosphere which burns up most small meteors and to the rapidity of weathering which destroys and covers up meteor impacts. On Mars, the situation is very different. With little or no surface water, erosion effects are mainly due to wind, and even then, much less pronounced than on Earth due to the extremely thin atmosphere. Thus, meteor craters last for a long time, as is evident by the number of meteor craters on scans. However, craters aren't the only effect of meteor impacts. They may throw ejecta (irregular blocks of rock) into the air which travel various distances and land like rough gravel thrown out at random. This could be the cause of the irregular blocks that create "the city". Normally, they land in a somewhat circular pattern around the impact crater, but depending on the material and where they landed, they may have been differentially obscured.

Tectonic activity is also very minor on mars, as they do not have the plate activity that the Earth has, but it is not completely quiescent. It is possible that the "pyramid" is an ancient volcano. it has the correct shape and what appears to be a crater-like top. The irregularly placed "corners" could be lava trails which are more resistant to eolean erosion than the inter-trail areas which are eroded and filled with loess (wind-blown sediment), making them appear flat.

Right now I am grateful that I don't use my real name, because if any real areologists caught me hypothesizing like this, they would probably laugh me back to minerology class. But at least it has some degree of plausibilty, something that Jedi's tale lacks utterly.

Thanks Tricky. If that's a conjecture, it certainly seems like an educated one.

Although you are not an areologists, your eye is certainly more trained than mine but I must say that, even to my untrained eye, there is nothing that leads me to assume that the formations aren't natural.

The only reason why the mythology surrounding Cydonia has sprung up is IMHO wishful thinking from the UFO propagators. A case of fitting facts to the theory if you will. People have always wanted Mars to be inhabited for some reason. It appears that some people feel that the vastness of space (and our own apparent insignificance) is less frightening if we are not alone in the solar system.

[MRC_Hans]

It appears that some people feel that the vastness of space (and our own apparent insignificance) is less frightening if we are not alone in the solar system.And at the same time, we dont want to believe that there might be or have been creatures that are superiour to us, (or not created in God's image) thus if a space-faring civilisation once existed on Mars, we must assume they are our ancestors.:rolleyes:

Hans

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


You aren't trained to look at these images. Nothing personal, but it gets in the way of honest debate when you say "gosh, I don't see it".

And you are trained? How does one get "trained" to look for geometric shapes in natural formations? Geometric shapes are regular, and should be obvious.

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
I know people that don't see quadratic equations either, but that doesn't mean the quadratic equations don't exist.

Anyone can see a quadratic equation. People may not be able to work it out, but the long strings of terms are not "invisible", no more than any other mathematical expression is invisible.

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
Your critique of the one wall has already been solved many years ago. That wall is part of the structure that has collapsed, if you can see the debris path (the only one) on the southeastern section of the D&M.

Is there any evidence to support this? Do collapsed walls lose their regularity? Why doesn't this structure have any straight lines?

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
Also, another section you missed with the D&M is the tunnel entrance to the SE. Do more research on it and then come back to debate it if you want to.

JK

The "tunnel entrance" is allegedly to the east, at the termination of the prominent ridgeline you say is a collapsed wall. So which is it - a collapsed wall or a tunnel? How can you discern a tunnel from a straight top-down shot? Why does it have to be a tunnel and not a small caldera, say, or meteoric strike?

[CWL]

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi


And you are trained? How does one get "trained" to look for geometric shapes in natural formations?

Jedi Knight,

This is a fair question. Where did you get your training in these matters?

Why should we trust you as an authority on the topic of artificial formations on Mars?

[Tricky]

Originally posted by CWL
This is a fair question. Where did you get your training in these matters?

Why should we trust you as an authority on the topic of artificial formations on Mars?
I'm curious too. What is your background in geology, Jedi. I would love discuss some of the aspects of Martian geomorphology with you. I admit that I am not terribly well versed in this, but I am always willing to learn from somebody who has studied it more than I.

What is your opinion of peneplanation? (Hint: It's not something you do in the bathroom.)

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by CWL
Jedi Knight,

This is a fair question. Where did you get your training in these matters?

The Jedi Knight Academy.

JK

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
The Jedi Knight Academy.

(Obviously and unaccredited school)
Are you sure it wasn't Bob Jones University?

[headscratcher4]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


The Jedi Knight Academy.

JK

JK -- you know I don't get into pushing matches with you, so this is a serious question, if you are serious in this thread (I have my doubts), is there a particular reason why you wouldn't talk about any training/education you've had in some of the fields mentioned? Is it university level? Are you self-taught (certainly no shame in that, ask Lincoln)? Is there some special reason why you wouldn't share your background as related to this topic?

just curious....

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by headscratcher4


JK -- you know I don't get into pushing matches with you, so this is a serious question, if you are serious in this thread (I have my doubts), is there a particular reason why you wouldn't talk about any training/education you've had in some of the fields mentioned? Is it university level? Are you self-taught (certainly no shame in that, ask Lincoln)? Is there some special reason why you wouldn't share your background as related to this topic?

just curious....

I can't discuss it. Nothing personal.

JK

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
I can't discuss it. Nothing personal.

Then you will understand if we regard your theories about the geomorphology of Mars as... well... suspect?

[headscratcher4]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


I can't discuss it. Nothing personal.

JK

I don't take it personally...just find it curious and unfortunate. It helps to know what a person brings to the table in any discussion...otherwise your statements for good and ill all speak for themselves....

see ya in the funny papers...

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


The Jedi Knight Academy.

JK

Then I believe I'm through with you on this particular topic. You tell me I need to "get trained" to see pentagons in six-sided mountains, and that I "ought to do more research" and "ask questions instead of using atheist logic" to discuss the matter seriously - then you spew something like this. Condescension is not a virtue.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Tricky

Then you will understand if we regard your theories about the geomorphology of Mars as... well... suspect?

Your atheist religion and pressure-group loyalties would force you to disagree with my posts regardless of the additional information that I could provide on the subject.

JK

[CWL]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Your atheist religion and pressure-group loyalties would force you to disagree with my posts regardless of the additional information that I could provide on the subject.

JK

I realize that you find our lack of faith disturbing JK, but seriously - as skeptics - should we or should we not trust your authority without you telling us what that authority is?

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi


Then I believe I'm through with you on this particular topic. You tell me I need to "get trained" to see pentagons in six-sided mountains, and that I "ought to do more research" and "ask questions instead of using atheist logic" to discuss the matter seriously - then you spew something like this. Condescension is not a virtue.

You need training with this type of data feed to understand it. It takes a degree of skill in topo.

You also claimed that there was "no math" whatsoever that could be resolved from the formation and I proved to you by linking the page on the D&M pyramid geometery that the source of the hyperdimensional physics model is derived directly from the D&M structure itself.

That is the problem with JREF forum. There are so many people who post here "claiming" to be "skeptics" that it is a laughable claim with no foundation in reality. You guys are morons who first seek an entirely biased view in anyone first (regarding religious atheism) and once the person admits allegiance to the perversionist atheist religious non-skepticism world-view, then the information they present is "more credible".

Put me on ignore, Jkorski. You guys are morons and you certainly aren't non-biased scientists.

I link to a full page of math on the D&M and you guys attack me for it. If I said I was an "A-Theist" would you believe it then? You probably would.

Pathetic.

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by CWL


I realize that you find our lack of faith disturbing JK, but seriously - as skeptics - should we or should we not trust your authority without you telling us what that authority is?

You pin-heads are not skeptics. Any other comedy you need to get off your chest today?

JK

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Your atheist religion and pressure-group loyalties would force you to disagree with my posts regardless of the additional information that I could provide on the subject.

JK

Super secret training, education and sources.....oh my.
He has lots of anonymous supporters too.

"I will drop in from time to time but will no longer contribute to the forum. I am off to pursue a forum where there is less hate and hopefully more people who share my views and beliefs.

Jedi "There is a God" Knight 11-12-02

Atheists invited me back. JK 11-26-02"


Clowntime is over.

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Your atheist religion and pressure-group loyalties would force you to disagree with my posts regardless of the additional information that I could provide on the subject.

JK

Brave Sir Robin ran away.
Bravely ran away, away!
When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin!

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by headscratcher4
see ya in the funny papers...

Nah, you won't see me in the leftist media.

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by subgenius


Super secret training, education and sources.....oh my.
He has lots of anonymous supporters too.

"I will drop in from time to time but will no longer contribute to the forum. I am off to pursue a forum where there is less hate and hopefully more people who share my views and beliefs.

Jedi "There is a God" Knight 11-12-02

Atheists invited me back. JK 11-26-02"


Clowntime is over.

No, the only clown-time is atheism, the same religion that Hitler worshipped.

JK

[CWL]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


You pin-heads are not skeptics. Any other comedy you need to get off your chest today?

JK

Just play along and pretend that we are for a while.

As skeptics, should we or should we not trust your authority without you telling us what that authority is?

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight

__________________
I find your lack of faith disturbing. -- Darth Vader

The war has begun. -- Magneto [X-Men 2]

In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. -- George Orwell


Glad to see you finally removed all of the quotes from atheists from your signature. :eek:

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by CWL


Just play along and pretend that we are for a while.

As skeptics, should we or should we not trust your authority without you telling us what that authority is?

I linked a page on the math proving the intelligent design of the D&M. Ask yourself, what does that have to do with me?

Your atheism blinds you to simply falling into the gutter and attacking me for linking a webpage. Such is the atheist desperation to monopolize their religious viewpoints.

JK

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


You need training with this type of data feed to understand it. It takes a degree of skill in topo.


Which you obtained from where? How do you know I have no degree of skill in analyzing aerial photography?

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
You also claimed that there was "no math" whatsoever that could be resolved from the formation and I proved to you by linking the page on the D&M pyramid geometery that the source of the hyperdimensional physics model is derived directly from the D&M structure itself.


The "math" doesn't fit the pyramid, JK. You have to stretch and derange a pentagon all manner of ways before it will actually fit over the pyramid. In other words, the argument was not convincing. A whole bunch of numbers do not credibility make. Besides that, I find it hard to believe that the "theory of hyperdimensional physics" as based on a pentagon wasn't evident until somebody saw a satellite photo of a mountain on Mars. Besides, a true pyramid invariably has four sides and a point for an apex - the D&M structure has neither.

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
That is the problem with JREF forum. There are so many people who post here "claiming" to be "skeptics" that it is a laughable claim with no foundation in reality. You guys are morons who first seek an entirely biased view in anyone first (regarding religious atheism) and once the person admits allegiance to the perversionist atheist religious non-skepticism world-view, then the information they present is "more credible".


I interpret the data I've been offered, no matter what the source. You must be missing the serious argument I'm having with Stimpy over in the defining God thread, if you continue to believe your dogma that I'm just another atheist. I think Stimpy and Tricky are wrong in that thread, and I'm arguing the point. You make to many assumptions.

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
Put me on ignore, Jkorski. You guys are morons and you certainly aren't non-biased scientists.


Are you going to post this and then deny that you are condescending? As surely as the "atheists" (according to you) laugh off the possibility of life on Mars, you casually dismiss the possibility that you are wrong in exactly the same fashion. And I don't intend to put you on ignore - why would I?

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
I link to a full page of math on the D&M and you guys attack me for it. If I said I was an "A-Theist" would you believe it then? You probably would.

Pathetic.

JK

I'm sorry if you feel that way, but in my opinion, the math is not truly based on the D&M. Maybe it's based on what people would like the D&M to be, instead. Have you ever even considered the possibility that you may be wrong?

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
You need training with this type of data feed to understand it. It takes a degree of skill in topo.
I have training with this type of data. Geologists use aerial photography and remote sensing all the time. Also, I'm willing to bet I can read a topo map as well as you.

Here's your test. What does it mean when contour lines cross?

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
You also claimed that there was "no math" whatsoever that could be resolved from the formation and I proved to you by linking the page on the D&M pyramid geometery that the source of the hyperdimensional physics model is derived directly from the D&M structure itself.
LOL. You can't even figure out percentages and you expect us to believe that you understand "hyperdimensional physics"? You do realize that HP is purely hypothetical, do you not?

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
That is the problem with JREF forum. There are so many people who post here "claiming" to be "skeptics" that it is a laughable claim with no foundation in reality. You guys are morons who first seek an entirely biased view in anyone first (regarding religious atheism) and once the person admits allegiance to the perversionist atheist religious non-skepticism world-view, then the information they present is "more credible".
hate hate, nothing but hate.

But if you have such problems with the JREF forum, why do you stay? To keep us entertained?

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
Put me on ignore, Jkorski. You guys are morons and you certainly aren't non-biased scientists.
And you are completely unbiased? ROTFL:D
(and Jedi ad hominem noted.)

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
I link to a full page of math on the D&M and you guys attack me for it. If I said I was an "A-Theist" would you believe it then? You probably would.
Only if they could explain it.

Perhaps you can explain this, taken from your linked page.

[Doctor X]

That is the problem with JREF forum. There are so many people who post here "claiming" to be "skeptics" that it is a laughable claim with no foundation in reality.

One should not embody that which one hopes to condemn.

--J.D.

[Franko]

One should not embody that which one hopes to condemn.

Look who's talking ... :rolleyes:

[Doubt]

Originally posted by Tricky

I have training with this type of data. Geologists use aerial photography and remote sensing all the time. Also, I'm willing to bet I can read a topo map as well as you.

Here's your test. What does it mean when contour lines cross?



Just looking in here,

Tricky, I have spent a fair amount of time with toppo maps:

1.) Ex-military
2.) Orienteering, (Current)
3.) Adventure racing, (Current)

I have seen contour lines that run together, (bad map IMHO), but I have never seen them cross. Are we talking map errors here or trick question? Please delay answering if you really expect a serious answer from JK.

I can think of a third possibility, but it would still be a bad map……

(edited to make sense)

[Doctor X]

Look who's talking ...

From the individual that FLED from the field crying and whimpering when confronted with the SCIENCE [All Rights Reserved.--Ed.] OF CONSCIOUSNESS, who could respond to his DEMOLITION with fallacy and behavior unbecoming the more pungent insanities from the lower depths of the Great Unwashed, who hides as the Manifest COWARD and HYPOCRITE behind Puppets of Unwashed and Undarn'd Socks. . .

. . . most deliciously ironic.

Certainly dishonest.

Certainly cowardly

Certainly, hypocritical

--J.D.

[Edited for the codes . . . the codes. . . .--Ed.]

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Doubt


Just looking in here,

Tricky, I have spent a fair amount of time with toppo maps:

1.) Ex-military
2.) Orienteering, (Current)
3.) Adventure racing, (Current)

I have seen contour line that run together, (bad map IMHO), but I have never seen them cross. Are we talking map errors here or trick question? Please delay answering if you really expect a serious answer from JK.

I can think of a third possibility, but it would still be a bad map……
I've done a bit of orienteering in my time too, though not seriously.

No, it is not a map error. Contour lines cross when there are actually two surfaces. How? Simple. An overhanging cliff has another ground surface directly underneath it. The usual way to deal with this is to make the lower set of contours dashed. It's a fairly rare occurrance in topography maps.

In geology maps, though, it can happen a lot, especially in thrust fault zones. A single bed is compressed from both sides and the bed fractures and slides over itself like the plates of an armidillo. Thrust faults are hell to map. Most geologists treat each "plate" as a separate bed. As you can see from the diagram below, a single well could pass through the same bed many times.

[Jedi Knight]

Think about how nasty you people are becoming (except Franko).

I linked information about an intelligently designed structure on the surface of Mars that has clear, vivid mathematical properties and the first response to it is that "there is no math".

Then I get attacked for even mentioning the thing in the first place.

You atheists are evil, nasty people with no personal skills. You guys can't even have a conversation with someone because your religion has total control over you. Then you all claim to be skeptics--that is laughable.

I have been nice to you people and have tried to have coordial discussions with you, but you have to put your bibles down for about ten minutes or it isn't going to be productive.

You can do it--I know you can. Drop your religious fanatacism for ten minutes and you will see that talking about some of the issues I like talking about are pretty interesting and rewarding.

I understand that the shock of the "queen's court" occurs when science provides new information. I am sure that when the non-scientists found out that the earth was round they were pretty shocked about it for some time. They probably all went out and got drunk, drinking to swallow the truth and escape the reality of the new information.

I didn't construct that D&M structure on Mars. I didn't invent the math that the D&M pyramid so fluently proves.

Why attack me for it then? Is it the atheist way? Can't you guys be nice for one day--or are Franko and I the only skeptics on the forum?

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Joshua Korosi



Which you obtained from where? How do you know I have no degree of skill in analyzing aerial photography?




The "math" doesn't fit the pyramid, JK. You have to stretch and derange a pentagon all manner of ways before it will actually fit over the pyramid. In other words, the argument was not convincing. A whole bunch of numbers do not credibility make. Besides that, I find it hard to believe that the "theory of hyperdimensional physics" as based on a pentagon wasn't evident until somebody saw a satellite photo of a mountain on Mars. Besides, a true pyramid invariably has four sides and a point for an apex - the D&M structure has neither.




I interpret the data I've been offered, no matter what the source. You must be missing the serious argument I'm having with Stimpy over in the defining God thread, if you continue to believe your dogma that I'm just another atheist. I think Stimpy and Tricky are wrong in that thread, and I'm arguing the point. You make to many assumptions.




Are you going to post this and then deny that you are condescending? As surely as the "atheists" (according to you) laugh off the possibility of life on Mars, you casually dismiss the possibility that you are wrong in exactly the same fashion. And I don't intend to put you on ignore - why would I?



I'm sorry if you feel that way, but in my opinion, the math is not truly based on the D&M. Maybe it's based on what people would like the D&M to be, instead. Have you ever even considered the possibility that you may be wrong?

If you go back to the page I linked that shows the specific design and mathematical properties of the D&M, what is there left to debate? Are you still trying to say that the D&M is not the shape that those scientists worked hundreds of hours on with that formula page?

This conversation isn't about me--it is about the D&M. Try to get your internal religious feelings to recognize that.

JK

[CWL]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


I linked a page on the math proving the intelligent design of the D&M. Ask yourself, what does that have to do with me?

Your atheism blinds you to simply falling into the gutter and attacking me for linking a webpage. Such is the atheist desperation to monopolize their religious viewpoints.

JK

"Such is the atheist desperation to monopolize their their religious viewpoints"?!?

What does anyone's religious viewpoint have to do with anything remotely related to purported artificial structures on Mars?!?

[subgenius]

Originally posted by CWL


"Such is the atheist desperation to monopolize their their religious viewpoints"?!?

What does anyone's religious viewpoint have to do with anything remotely related to purported artificial structures on Mars?!?
Nothing. Its just the usual "change the subject and call names when I have to face the absurdity of my position" from someone making noises out of their sphincter.
"We are the true skeptics, we who have theories with no evidence, we who can never admit we're wrong, we who can't answer simple questions of our position."
Do you think he ever looked up the meaning of the word? Both of them are the complete opposites of skeptics.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by CWL


"Such is the atheist desperation to monopolize their their religious viewpoints"?!?

What does anyone's religious viewpoint have to do with anything remotely related to purported artificial structures on Mars?!?

It's true. No matter what the subject, atheists have to disagree if the information provided isn't from someone of their own religion. That is typical with many religious pressure-groups so the religious atheists aren't alone in that regard.

JK

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


It's true. No matter what the subject, atheists have to disagree if the information provided isn't from someone of their own religion. That is typical with many religious pressure-groups so the religious atheists aren't alone in that regard.

JK I bet anyone 100 dollars that there are a greater number of Christians than Atheists in the US that don't believe the structure in question is made by 'man' or that our ancestors came from Mars. Christians on the forum, any comments?

How come a poster who is infamous for his non-checked 'facts' always claim that disagreement or doubt must be based on atheism?

Maybe because it is the easy way out? "Oh, that gravity thing, (replace gravity with 'face on mars', 'chromosomes different between a fly and a man', or 'numbers of veterans dead') you refuse to see my point because atheists automatically think I'm wrong just because I'm not an atheist"

Could it be that it's just because it's wrong? :rolleyes:

Aren't we seeing other people fighting each other at this forum all the time (gun laws would be a good example) without any time mentioning that opponents must be of a certain religious belief since they refuse to agree?

Has Ben ever whined that those who disagree with him must be atheists? :rolleyes:

There must be an English word for people who are categorizing anyone who disagrees into a 'special group' - or in this case 'groups': commies, leftists, feminazis, atheists - because by defining them so, one doesn't have to defend a viewpoint or come up with serious answers to serious questions.

[subgenius]

Bjorn:
"I bet anyone 100 dollars that there are a greater number of Christians than Atheists in the US that don't believe the structure in question is made by 'man' or that our ancestors came from Mars. "
Those would be atheists posing as Christians.:rolleyes:
Not taking your bet. But maybe the author of the claim may want to put his money where his sphincter is. Sure would be an easy $100.

[Tricky]

Good points, Bjorn. I've looked at the math on that link (http://www.lunaranomalies.com/Message.htm) that Jedi provided, and though it has been years since I took calculus, I can see that this is an attempt to "baffle 'em with bullsh*t". Looking at their explanations for the numbers they find, it is obvious that they are using the same techniques as numerology or Bible code in trying to fit numbers to their pre-decided meanings. For example, some of the "revealing numbers" are the latitudes and longitudes of the sites. This presupposes that our ancient Martian ancestors used the same cartesian system as we do today.

The point is that Jedi has simply thrown out this link and said "Here is some math. That proves it." He has not shown that he understands the math any better than he understands gravity, statistics or geology.

For example, what do you suppose this phrase means?
Uranus and Neptune -- essentially "twins" in terms of mass, angular momentum and (probably) composition -- provide important constraints on several fundamental predictions of the Cydonia mathematics. The great difference in internal energy balance between the two planets (1.14 for Uranus; 2.7 for Neptune), coupled with the unique configuration of the Uranian magnetic field, leads us to propose that the field orientation with respect to the planetary spin axis is an important element in determining in what form the internally-generated energy appears: in Uranus, with an almost 90-degree field orientation, little energy appears as heat. In consonance with conservation of energy, we suggest it may be "appearing" in some other form -- possibly as a change in the local "space-time metric."

Jedi, if you really understand it then perhaps you can decipher it for us poor stupid folks.

And BTW. Not everyone raising skeptical eybrows at this is an atheist. I've been doing battle with that skuzbag, Joshua Korosi on another thread, and he is definately not in the club. :D

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


If you go back to the page I linked that shows the specific design and mathematical properties of the D&M, what is there left to debate? Are you still trying to say that the D&M is not the shape that those scientists worked hundreds of hours on with that formula page?

In a word - yes.


Let me simplify my entire argument:


Item One: The mathematics on the page you linked to deal directly with the imperfect pentagon illustrated on that same page.
Item Two: The imperfect pentagon is not the exact same shape as the D&M structure. This can be demonstrated by printing out the pentagon and manually superimposing it over an image of the pyramid. (again, if anyone can do this with some Photoshop program or whatever, it would be cool)
Item Three: When providing the link to this page, you mentioned that it had solved some problem or other dealing with "hyperdimensional physics". The linked page does not say anything about hyperdimensional anything.

Can you refute any of these three points without changing the subject to religion?

[Bjorn]

I'm a bit reluctant to start the discussion about the 'face' and other structures (it takes more time than I currently have and I am not an expert in any way), but my bs meter is reacting when I read:

He elegantly "decoded" a series of internal angles found within the pyramid, and discovered the two mathematical constants, "e" and "pi," encoded several times and in several different ways (via angle-ratios, trignometric functions, and radian measure) -- to three significant-figure accuracy This is the kind of maths you can develop by looking at every single construction site in the world.

If you interpret something as a triangle, you can 'make' a lot of 'decoding' internal angles. With most figures that fit into a circle, you have 'pi' there automatically, it just takes some clever decision about what to compare. (Oh, the round thing looks like a circle! And the distance across, measured against the distance around it - wow! And that is the same 'pi' as here on Earth!)

The clouds over San Diego today showed more 'faces' and 'pyramids' than ever before. Anyone with a picture of them could find 'pi' all the time.

[subgenius]

"Can you refute any of these three points without changing the subject to religion?"

Will OJ find the real killers?

[CWL]

Before I go on I would like to point out one thing on the subject of atheism I would like to point out one little thing.

I don't know about you guys, but personally (and despite my own unshakable atheist indoctrination) I would find it pretty darn cool if artificial artifacts were indeed found on Mars. The next question is whether a skeptic should let wishful thinking influence the analysis of any theory or the evidence presented therefor...

Having said that, let's now all have another look at the D&M (so-called) Pyramid in a good spirit of religous tolerance towards any and all creeds (including hopefully the Cult of Atheism and its offspring the Holy Church of Secular Humanism).

I think this picture clearly demonstrates Joshua's point (dirty little deist, BTW).

Seriously folks, where the heck is the apex?

[CWL]

Next, let's have a look at the "ridges". I have made an attempt at tracing the contours in red.

Ridges where the walls of a pyramid meet or (as suggested by our friend the geologist - but not areologist NB - Tricky) lava flows?

[MRC_Hans]

--- And CWL's outlines also show why the math speculations are utterly nonsense: Not only are all the features quite irregular, but we are looking at pictures taken from an orbiting probe. The max resolution of these pictures is at best tens of meters. So you can deduce absolutely nothing numerical from the dimensions found --- or absolutely anyting, if you're so inclined.

A real laugh is when people include longitude and lattitude figures: The L/L grid is basically chosen arbitrarily (remember the story of how the with of a railroad track was really derived from the width of a horses ass?).


Hans

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
If you go back to the page I linked that shows the specific design and mathematical properties of the D&M, what is there left to debate? Are you still trying to say that the D&M is not the shape that those scientists worked hundreds of hours on with that formula page?
I took a detailed look at the link you posted and did an analysis of it. It is highly subjective. Here's my analysis:

For a moment, let's take for given the perfect pentagonal shape presented on the page. Also, let's take that the orientation is as described. With the "front" of the pyramid set to be the axis that points to the "face".

The D&M Pyramid displays a complex interplay between five-fold and six-fold symmetry. Both symmetries are present simultaneously, with the front of the pyramid exhibiting six-fold symmetry, and the "ground level" of the pyramid yielding a 36 degree angle that is characteristic of five-fold symmetry.
http://www.his.com/~tharsis/pyramid/symmetry.gif
First off, at best, each design only has three points in common with each symmetry. If this is all that is required to obtain a symmetry, the author has neglected to address the three-fold triangular symmetry, the four-fold rectangular symmetry, the seven-fold [mumble, mumble] symmetry, and so forth to the infinite-fold circular symmetry. Given the fact that this is a idealized perfect geometric shape, almost any symmetry could be applied to it, especially given that apparently only three points must coincide.

It is worth noting that the practice of combining symmetries was widely practiced by the architects of antiquity. It was believed that geometry and certain mathematical relationships were crucial building blocks of the Cosmos, and that architecture should reflect these symmetries. These practices were later revived in the Islamic world and especially in Renaissance Europe.
I can say nothing about the practices of ancient architects, however there is nothing unique or special about a basic pentagram. Conclusions drawn from it's basic shape must be taken in context with the surroundings. As nothing further is said about what significance this basic shape holds, I won't speculate any further about what the author meant. However, the corollation between the significance of this geometry and the geometries used by (un-named) ancient architects is premature and unsupported.

The angles formed by the D&M Pyramid when viewed from above differ from each other. Consequently, they can form various ratios. These angle ratios were studied to see if the values were significant, or merely random.
Here, the author abandons the idealized geometry of a basic pentagon. Thus, the symmetries automatically break down at this point and are no longer valid. I would suggest that this inalidates any correllation between this geometry and those used by ancient architects, since the symmatry obviously no longer exists without a wide range of tolorance.

For simplicity's sake (and time's), I'll accept the numbers in the table. If someone would care to verify the ratios, I'd appriciate it. If not, I'll try do it later.
A table has been prepared displaying a list of the measured angles, and the results of the analysis. The square roots of three and five, and the values of e and pi predominate. The identity of these values is strengthened by the numerous combinations in which they occur.
http://www.his.com/~tharsis/pyramid/ratios.gif
Note that the radian measure and trigonometric functions of some angles yield the same values produced by the angle ratios. The geometry thus has a common contextual thread.
I assume that the author is refering to angle D, which shares its value with C/D, A/F, and H/G, and angle F, which shares its value with A/D. I'm not sure what contextual thread the author is refering to. I see no compelling connection between the angles/ratios given. A little supporting information or explanation here would help.

As mentioned earlier in the section on criteria, all of this geometry is "dimensionless", i.e. it is not dependent on such cultural conventions as counting by tens, or measuring angles in the 360 system. This geometry will "work" in any number system.
I agree with this analysis assuming that everyone take the same primary axis (the one pointing towards the "face"). If any other axis is used for analysis, the angles and ratios change due to the admited irregularity of the shape. Again, this is not compelling since the comparrisons of angles and ratios are only valid within the single given contextual frame.

A Speculation Concerning Tetrahedral GeometrySince the author is making an extra-ordinary claim, the author will require extra-ordinary proof. As such, speculations are out of the question. One could simple speculate anything at this point and it would be equally valid.

However, within this speculation, the author defines a new variable, e', suggesting that e' has some relation to e, but never describes what the relationship is. The author does give a definition of e':

The surface area of a sphere, divided by the surface area of the tetrahedron circumscribed by it, yields a very close approximation of e which shall be termed e':

e = 2.718282
e' = 2.720699
The derrivation of e', in fact, has nothing to do with e or the derrivation of e other than the fact that e and e' are close in value. The author's arbitrary exchanging of values is nonsensical and inappropriate, invalidating the speculation.

Conclusions

This investigation of the D&M Pyramid reveals a morphology that is inconsistent with the surrounding geology. The geomorphological processes observed to exist on Mars not only fail to provide a potential mechanism for the D&M Pyramid's formation, but seem to preclude its very existence.
I cannot say since nothing in the author's paper had anything to do with geomorphic processes. What is this conclusion based on?

Analysis of the object's geometry, and its alignment with other anomalous landforms, reveal intricate relationships that are numerous and logical, and are suggestive of highly sophisticated design.The analysis is based on subjectively choosen data (what about the analysis of the four other major axis?). The geometry is both idealized and then actual numbers are used and conclusions from both are mixed here. The analysis is incomplete and what is given appears to be selected to give the most favorable conclusion, even though the analysis does not actually support the conclusion.

This object has been compared with the elaborate symbolic architecture of antiquity. While much of the geometry is the same utilized by Classical architects, it is important to note that the implementation is totally different. Nowhere in Earth history is this exact type of geometric symbolism to be found.This is an odd and somewhat contradictory statement. It is true that the object has been compared to with "the elaborate symbolic architecture of antiquity", but it was not a good comparison. The architecture of the object was neither elaborate nor complex (unless you consider that it is uneven). The author then states that "the geometry is the same utilized by Classical architects" but that "Nowhere [on Earth] is this exact type of geometric symbolism to be found". It seems that the author is claiming that something is and is not at the same time.

The same techniques used for most of this century in air photo interpretation show that the D&M Pyramid may be artificial, or may be a natural landform modified by intelligence.I see no evidence presented that suggests definitively that there is any intelligent design present in the object. This conclusion is unsupported.

The true nature of this object can be resolved by re-imaging the Cydonia region to obtain high-resolution imagery of the D&M Pyramid and the other enigmatic landforms nearby. The issue of possible ruins at Cydonia is thus the only question involving extraterrestrial intelligence that can be easily resolved with known scientific means.Agreed.

Upchurch

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Tricky
Here's your test. What does it mean when contour lines cross?
Since JK isn't answering, can I take a swipe at it (Noting I know next to nothing about geology and cartology)

I think it's a trick question. Contour lines can't cross. That suggests that two grades are intersecting one another, in which case, part of each grade would be "underground" of the other. You could have a right angle, maybe, but not an intersection.
Perhaps you can explain this, taken from your linked page.
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/attachment.php?s=&postid=270078

edited to add: I can't seem to format the picture correctly. My appologies. Upchurch
The left side represents the inverse of the distance from point (a,b,c) and point (x,y,z) in cartesian coordinates. The right side looks like the same thing, only in cylindrical coordinates?

Interestingly, and I forget where the issue was brought up, this is an example of where mathematics gives more than one answer for the same situation. The left side can have two solutions, one real and one imaginary. The imaginary solution is often discarded, oddly enough, because it is "unreal", but a lot of calculations are done in imaginary space.

Upchurch

[Doubt]

Originally posted by Upchurch

Since JK isn't answering, can I take a swipe at it (Noting I know next to nothing about geology and cartology)

I think it's a trick question. Contour lines can't cross. That suggests that two grades are intersecting one another, in which case, part of each grade would be "underground" of the other. You could have a right angle, maybe, but not an intersection.

Upchurch

Upchurch,

Psssst,

Tricky already answered the question. Your guess was pretty close.

My third guess, which I did not state, was that the map maker could not tell the elevation and got the lines crossed as he made different assumptions about different slopes. This was also wrong. Map makers do often have problems with elevation in dense vegetation, but that has nothing to do with this problem.

Even then, the situation that Tricky described is not one you are likely to see on a USGS map. I suspect the maps Tricky refers to are more detailed. My guess is they are about 1:5000 scale or larger.

Of course, we can always ask JK military map questions. Like what are the supplemental colors used on maps? The normal colors are red, black, green, blue and brown. I know of two supplemental colors. One is easy to find, the other is very rare. But those questions have nothing to do with geology or Mars.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Doubt
Upchurch,

Psssst,

Tricky already answered the question.
D'OH!!
Your guess was pretty close.
Woo-Hoo!!

What about the equation? I couldn't hunt down the original source.

Upchurch

[subgenius]

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh....yet another thread pushed completely off its track (twice) just because someone can't face facts.............what is the subject of this thread?
Have enjoyed the discussion though and am thoroughly impressed with the detailed analyses..................seems a bit much when there's not a shred of evidence to support the claim.........you people are smart though.....give yourselves a pat on the back for me.........and Happy Festivus!;)

[Doctor X]

Rather unfortunate.

I did not intend any insult in redirecting Jedi Knight's attention to his original point. If highlighting his lack of support for his claims insults him he should avoid any debate in the future.

Nevertheless, his support of an individual whose sole claim to the proceedings have proven to represent nothing but malignant fallacy rather leads me to question his motives.

Alas.

--J.D.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by subgenius
what is the subject of this thread?
Well, arguably, it was about challenging JK's more ...how should I put this... alternative statements/claims. I don't know if it's really even worthy of its own thread, but the analyzing the geometry mathematics was kinda fun. I probably should go back and check the figures (I'm guessing there are some descrepencies there too), but that's rather like beating a dead horse, is it not?

Upchurch

[Thanz]

Originally posted by Bjorn
I bet anyone 100 dollars that there are a greater number of Christians than Atheists in the US that don't believe the structure in question is made by 'man' or that our ancestors came from Mars. Christians on the forum, any comments?



Of course, these are really 2 different questions, Bjorn. While JK has posited the idea that the D&M pyramid proves we came from Mars, I simply don't see the connection.

Anywhoo, in my opinion as a Christian I do not believe that man originated on Mars in the way that JK is proposing. I think that there are some interesting theories that life on earth does have at least a partial extra-terrestrial origin, but it has nothing to do with little green men. Rather, I believe some scientists have suggested that some of the building blocks of life were introduced by a comet or asteroid.

Whether the structure is natural or artificial is a more interesting question, and for me, I simply do not know. The pictures are not great, and without more info, we'll never know. I'm all in favour of getting that further info - I find it quite interesting.

BTW, why is it called the D&M pyramid?

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Thanz
BTW, why is it called the D&M pyramid?
about a third of the way down the page. (http://www.his.com/~tharsis/pyramid/background.html) :

"Hoagland named the large pyramid the "D&M Pyramid", after the earlier work of DiPietro and Molenaar. "

Upchurch

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Thanz


Of course, these are really 2 different questions, Bjorn. While JK has posited the idea that the D&M pyramid proves we came from Mars, I simply don't see the connection.

Anywhoo, in my opinion as a Christian I do not believe that man originated on Mars in the way that JK is proposing. I think that there are some interesting theories that life on earth does have at least a partial extra-terrestrial origin, but it has nothing to do with little green men. Rather, I believe some scientists have suggested that some of the building blocks of life were introduced by a comet or asteroid. Thanz, of course it is two different questions, but the background for asking is the same for both of them:

My point was (and is) that Jedi very often 'accuses' people of being atheists when they disagree with him, even if the disagreement is on a matter that has nothing whatsoever to do with religion.

Questioning his knowledge about factual matters can turn you into an 'atheist hater' very fast in his eyes.

Anyhow, I keep my 100 dollars for now and note that yes, one can have doubts about the "Mars connections" even if one is not an atheist. Thanks! :p

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
You also claimed that there was "no math" whatsoever that could be resolved from the formation and I proved to you by linking the page on the D&M pyramid geometery that the source of the hyperdimensional physics model is derived directly from the D&M structure itself.
Just curious, do you have a reference for how the D&M pyramid is the source of the hyperdimensional physics model? And, preferably, how hyperdimensional physics model could be derived from this simple geometry example?

I link to a full page of math on the D&M and you guys attack me for it. If I said I was an "A-Theist" would you believe it then?
To be fair, JK, there isn't much there in terms of solid math. There are some poorly constructed speculations and an incomplete analysis of the geometry. Also, there is very little in the actual paper to support the conclusions the author gives. As a skeptic, when you were reading through this paper, what about it convinced you of it's validity?

Upchurch

[Tricky]

Look! It's a pyramid, just like the ones in Egypt. Oh, except it has five sides. But that's okay. Here is some math. Oh yeah, and it doesn't have an apex, but take a look at this math. Also, the edges are irregular, but the math is great. Okay, some of the sides are much bigger than others. It's all explained right here in this math, though.

What? You wan't me to explain the math? Atheist ad-hominizer!:mad:

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Tricky
Look! It's a pyramid, just like the ones in Egypt. Oh, except it has five sides. But that's okay. Here is some math. Oh yeah, and it doesn't have an apex, but take a look at this math. Also, the edges are irregular, but the math is great. Okay, some of the sides are much bigger than others. It's all explained right here in this math, though.


What? You wan't me to explain the math? Atheist ad-hominizer!:mad:

"Thinking is the hardest work of all, that's why so few of us engage in it."---Emerson
"A conclusion is the place where we got tired of thinking."---Arthur Block
"We see and hear what we expect to see and hear."----Thoreau

Gosh I love those guys.

;)

[Upchurch]

*bump*

I put some thought in to your math link, JK. Don't leave me hangin'.

Upchurch

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Upchurch
*bump*

I put some thought in to your math link, JK. Don't leave me hangin'.

Upchurch

I will post a reply tomorrow.

JK

[Upchurch]

*bump*

Oh, pardon me.

[CWL]

*bump*

Oh, by all means.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
I will post a reply tomorrow.

JK
Awfully long "tomorrow", but I suppose that that could be excused due to the holidays and whatnot.

My question is, in the face of a strong counter-argument, JK, are you going to ignore or forget this discussion much in the same way as your "How Gravity Works" debacle? Or are you going to actually think through the argument and justify the mathematics in the url you posted? Or will you simply admit that the page was bogus? After so strenuously arguing that we address the actual content of the page, you should at least respond now that we have.

Upchurch

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Upchurch

Awfully long "tomorrow", but I suppose that that could be excused due to the holidays and whatnot.

My question is, in the face of a strong counter-argument, JK, are you going to ignore or forget this discussion much in the same way as your "How Gravity Works" debacle? Or are you going to actually think through the argument and justify the mathematics in the url you posted? Or will you simply admit that the page was bogus? After so strenuously arguing that we address the actual content of the page, you should at least respond now that we have.

Upchurch
Talking to a wall.
Accept the things you can't change.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by subgenius

Talking to a wall.
Accept the things you can't change.
Perhaps. I just hate seeing a good argument (or rather, counter-argument) die like that.

I guess I'm off to find peace with imperfection.

Upchurch

[Upchurch]

*bump*

Oh, how clumsy of me.

[CWL]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight 12-20-2002 09:29 AM


I will post a reply tomorrow.

JK
I must say that Mr. Knight appears to have a rahter strange grasp of the concept "tomorrow".

[Upchurch]

Orignially posted by Han Solo

Where did you dig up that old fossile?
Woooooow. I forgot all about this thread. Which, I suppose, was the point.

Looks like I tried to keep it alive for a while, but JK just wouldn't respond. I even PM'ed him about it, if memory serves.

My question is, does this count as JK conceeding to my analysis?

edited to add:

CWL, why bring this up again now? Not that I mind so much, just curious.

[CWL]

Originally posted by Upchurch
CWL, why bring this up again now? Not that I mind so much, just curious.
I just happened to stumble across the thread while aimlessly searching the forum and I just couldn't resist. As you may know by now, I have a painfully weak character.

[subgenius]

Those that forget history are condemned to argue pointlessly.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by subgenius
Those that forget history are condemned to argue pointlessly. In reference to this thread (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=376016#post376016), which somewhat mirrors the thread above, I'm almost done. I expect that Franko won't just abandon it like JK did, but he has stopped coming up with actual arguments.

Come to think of it, he and I did this same thing when he claimed that free will was a modern atheistic invention and I countered with a circa 300 CE Christian (neither modern nor atheist) who belived in free will. (forget which thread that was)

Hm... guess that means I should learn that it's really pointless to argue someone who denies reality, huh?

[CWL]

Originally posted by Upchurch
Come to think of it, he and I did this same thing when he claimed that free will was a modern atheistic invention and I countered with a circa 300 CE Christian (neither modern nor atheist) who belived in free will. (forget which thread that was)

That would be this thread (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=10623&perpage=40). I remember it well as I felt we both fought bravely against the Windmills of Delusion that time - to no avail, yes, but nevertheless bravely in the interest of all that is fair, true and just. I salute you, o brother in skeptisism (and in the funk, of course)!

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by CWL


That would be this thread (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=10623&perpage=40). I remember it well as I felt we both fought bravely against the Windmills of Delusion that time - to no avail, yes, but nevertheless bravely in the interest of all that is fair, true and just. I salute you, oh brother in skeptisism (and in the funk, of course)!
So, what is the proper lesson? To learn from history and not repeat our "mistakes" or to allow misapplication of facts and out right lies to continue unchallenged because a poster cannot admit to being wrong?

Hail to the funk. :cool:

[CWL]

Originally posted by Upchurch

So, what is the proper lesson? To learn from history and not repeat our "mistakes" or to allow misapplication of facts and out right lies to continue unchallenged because a poster cannot admit to being wrong?

Hail to the funk. :cool:

I think you already know the answer. Those windmills are there to be charged. I would rather be a Don Quijote of skeptisism than to look on idly as facts are distorted and misrepresented.

Glory b da funk's on all. :cool:

[subgenius]

We need the funk, gotta have that funk---G. Clinton:D

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by CWL

I would rather be a Don Quijote of skeptisism than to look on idly as facts are distorted and misrepresented.
aw, I'm getting all misty eyed. "To dream the impossible dream."

Funk-a-dilliscious

[justsaygnosis]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
Hyperdimensional physics. Our ancestors left us that information on Mars in Cydonia region. It is the key to the energy development necessary for interplanetary space travel. I am confident that humans will be able to develop it this century.JK

I gues this means I got f*&$ed on my psychic genealogy reading that said we came from Atlantis and Lemuria.
Do the Mormon's have birth records going back to Mars?
I haven't been to Las Vegas in a few years so I could fit in on a trip to Salt Lake City.

[CWL]

To get back on the topic - I think that the so called anomalies of the Cydonia region of planet Mars are excellent examples of the pattern recognition that our brains subconsciously strive for. I have searched the net for another classic example (but unfortunately to no avail) which I recall - an isthmus somewhere which can be construed as the profile of the famous playwright George Bernard Shaw.

Does anybody know anything about this isthmus?