Why Did NASA Use Two Pictures and Make One Photo Out of Them to Give to The American 'Taxpayers' as an  Original 'Photo' of Mars????
Go Back to Page One
to Understand How this Trick Photography was Used to Design the Photo
BELOW IS A PHOTO OF PETRIFIED LOGS FOUND IN THE PETRIFIED FOREST OF ARIZONA.
CLICK HERE TO READ STORY OF THE PETRIFIED FOREST AND ITS 225 MILLION YR OLD FOSSILS
COMPARE THE PETRIFIED LOGS OF ARIZONA NOW WITH THE LOG OF MARS  IN THE FOLLOWING
I cut the Mars 'petrified log' and enlarged its image. Following is the result.
As you see, just like in  the logs of the petrified forest this log shows a
hole in the center ...and it also shows signs of a smooth cut...possibly a
saw?
This is one of the images that Sir Arthur C. Clarke says makes him 95% convinced  that it represents large forms of life on Mars:

Find at:

msss.com/moc_gallery/m07_m12/images
/M08/M0804688.html

He wrote to me via e-mail on March 9, 2001 and stated:

I'm 95% convinced that there's no other reasonable conclusion....

I fully agree that this is close to incontrovertible evidence of large present or past tree-like organisms on Mars. I do not believe that these will be explained as  
geological features or illusions.
Only closer-in imaging will decide the matter of ignoring these images will not. There is much more, as time will tell.
THE NEXT PHOTO IS OF A "CUT" PETRIFIED LOG ON "MARS"
Jeff  Birk wrote in regards to the picture's smudge marks. Apparently there is a belief out there that they may have been the results of the airbags landing on
the surface:  
And we should be seeing evidence of these airbags hitting the surface , bouncing and rolling causing a disturbance of the ground.

Jeff's email below.

"Maybe I'm mistaken but wasn't the whole idea of the airbags design to bounce and roll on impact before settling into it's final position?  We see supposed evidence of airbag retraction but
has anyone seen any evidence at all of the disturbance that would have been caused by the bounce and roll?" Jeff


Mike Orrell contacted me  on the photo:
"Great work Mary on the Mars photo...I was wondering if you could find another cut and paste background in todays panoramic photo from mars?. The sky is after all the same color as the
other one. Let me know if it is..thanks"   Mike Orrell

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mary,

I have been following the Mars endeavor very closely ,and I would like to point out a few discrepancies and inconsistencies that are very evident in the photos and information we have
been offered by NASA and J.P.L.

1) Mars is 4200 miles in diameter,with a 24 hour/37 minute day. Earth is 8,000 miles in diameter ,with roughly the same day length.(23 hours ,56 minutes).This means that Mars spins at
about HALF the speed that earth does(earth's rotation speed is roughly 1,050 mph,meaning Mars' rotation speed would be about half of that). This means that the earth holds down an
atmosphere with a Brownian motion factor that would need to be DOUBLED to have a similar effect on Mars.
In other words ,imagine you are in a swimming pool ,with a beach ball and a basketball,floating with you. If you were to roll the beach ball at a given rate  on the water surface,it would 'suck'
water up along with it ,entirely covering its surface. Spinning the basketball at the same speed as the beach ball would NOT be enough to cause this 'suction' to occur. The basketball
,assuming it was roughly HALF the size of the beach ball,(like Mars compared the to earth) would need TWICE the spin rate to get the water to cover it up as it was in motion. This is
precisely where the discrepancy lies: Mars would have to rotate TWICE as fast as earth ,to have a similar atmosphere.


2) Thermodynamic laws dictate that particulate and gaseous suspensions in an atmosphere MUST,by definition ,be WARMER than the ambient temperature ,or the surface temperature.
This is why a hot air balloon works-the air inside the balloon is warmer than the ambient atmospheric temperature.. Mars - Earth Temperatures  According to this chart ,the average temps
on Mars are between 0 degrees and -100 degrees. This means that any potentially gaseous or particulate matter would crystallize instantly ,and never be warm enough to rise from the
Martian surface. If in fact a few noble gases or particles did become suspended above the surface , they would immediately fall back down to the surface,as the temperatures plummeted
every night. Mars would need to entirely RECREATE its atmosphere every morning ,instantly,with this temperature range. I think this is highly unlikely ,even close to impossible.


3) The blue of the sky on earth is caused by enormous amounts of chlorophyll suspended in the atmosphere,from the vegetative life here on earth. This is also what colors our oceans.
For  there to be even MINIMAL blue coloration in the Martian atmosphere ,there would need to be abundant ,plant life of some sort. Even if the entire surface of Mars were covered with
fungus,or algae (even a meter deep!) it would be impossible to attain the chlorophyll concentrations necessary to tint the atmosphere blue.A blue sky is indicative of thousands of billions of
tons of plant matter ,metabolizing light, and excreting chlorophyll byproducts.I am doubtful this scenario exists on Mars.


4) From the descriptions on the JPL links and on the news ,they are claiming that the lander was slowed during descent and entry into the atmosphere by retrorockets and a parachute. A
parachute  works by accumulating AIR inside it,creating drag. WHAT filled the chute? A minimum air density and pressure is necessary for a parachute to fill and open. A parachute will
NOT work in a vacuum or a very thin ,light atmosphere. The lander ,according to my calculations, would have hit the Martian surface at over 30,000 miles per hour,instantly disintegrating.
For there to be enough accumulated drag from any latent noble gases around the Martian surface -even a thinner atmosphere-I estimate the chute would have had to have been   a
minimum of 15-18 miles in diameter, to have had any significant effect on the descent rate in these conditions.


5) In the JPL photos ,it appears very bright and sunny on Mars. Mars is in fact an average of 42 MILLION miles farther from the sun that the earth. The sunlight reaching the Martian
surface should be approximately 44% of that reaching earth,meaning there should be only 66% of the light level observed here on earth ,at the peak of the Martian day. In the JPL feeds,
the Martian day appears very bright,clear,and sunny,and the reflection patterns on the observed surfaces such as rocks indicate a much brighter light source,or a much closer proximity to
the sun than Mars would be able to provide. The light levels are comparable with those here on earth. At  the brightest point in the Martian day ,there should be about as much light as we
would observe at twilight ,here on earth.


I hope this information can be of benefit to you and your readers ,Mary.




As I have stated earlier ,I am convinced this project is in fact earthbound ,likely in the American southwest. From the reddish soil appearance ,I would favor an alluvial or volcanic
site,possibly Sunset Crater,Arizona or a similar place. As you yourself have stated ,Mary ,Chaco Canyon is an excellent possibility. The light levels in Chaco Canyon are consistent with
what we are seeing here,as well as the rocks and terrain.
Thanks again ,Mary ,for an excellent site ,and for your good work on these issues. If there is anything I can be of help with, please let me know.
                                                 Shadow


Hi Shadow,
.Jeff Birks . Contacted me by Instant Messenger.  Here is the response to the above theory.


PhobosUK> he is wrong about the gas temperature mind
<PhobosUK> eg. helium gas can be cold, but will still rise
<BUFOmary> oh really.
<PhobosUK> whereas hot co2 will fall
<BUFOmary> i will let him know
<PhobosUK> its a factor of mass
<PhobosUK> gasses when heated will expand
<PhobosUK> that lowers their mass
<PhobosUK> (per unit square that is)
<PhobosUK> so hot air ballons will rise
<PhobosUK> however not all gasses have the same mass
<PhobosUK> the same principle is behind how submarines work

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Mary, Regarding Shadows comments;


1) Mars is 4200 miles in diameter,with a 24 hour/37 minute day. Earth is 8,000 miles in diameter ,with roughly the same daylength.(23 hours ,56 minutes).This means that Mars spins at
about HALF the speed that earth does(earth's rotation speed is roughly 1,050 mph,meaning Mars'rotation speed would be about half of that). This means that the earth holds down an
atmosphere with a Brownian motion factor that would need to be DOUBLED to have a similar effect on Mars.
In other words ,imagine youre in a swimming pool ,with a beachball and a basketball,floating with you. If you were to roll the beachball at a given rate  on the water surface,it would 'suck'
water up along with it ,entirely covering its surface. Spinning the basketball at the same speed as the beachball would NOT be enough to cause this 'suction' to occur.The basketball
,assuming it was roughly HALF the size of the beachball,(like Mars compared the to earth) would need TWICE the spin rate to get the water to cover it up as it was in motion.This is
precisely where the discrepancy lies: Mars would have to rotate TWICE as fast as earth ,to have a similar atmosphere.
Mars does indeed spin at approximately half the velocity of Earth. however this has nothing to do with Brownian motion.  Brownian motion  The following link explains what Brownian motion
is;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_motion
Quote: "There are two meanings of the term Brownian motion: the physical phenomenon that minute particles immersed in a fluid will experience a random movement, and one of the
mathematical models used to describe it."

Quote: "
Brownian motion was discovered by the biologist Robert Brown in 1827. The story goes that Brown was studying pollen particles floating in water under the microscope, and he observed
minute particles within vacuoles in the pollen grains executing the jittery motion that now bears his name. By doing the same with particles of dust, he was able to rule out that the motion
was due to pollen being "alive", but it remained to explain the origin of the motion. The first to give a theory of Brownian motion was none other than Albert Einstein in 1905.

At that time the atomic nature of matter was still a controversial idea. Einstein observed that, if the kinetic theory of fluids was right, then the molecules of water would move at random and
so a small particle would receive a random number of impacts of random strength and from random directions in any short period of time. This random bombardment by the molecules of
the fluid would cause a sufficiently small particle to move in exactly the way described by Brown. "

As you see from above explanation of Brownian motion there would appear to be no connection between Brownian motion and discrepancies and inconsistencies that are very evident in
the photos and information we have been offered by NASA and JPL.
The beachball example is also mistaken.  The "sucking" effect is due to capillary action which is explained below;
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/feb98/887637827.Ch.r.html

2) Thermodynamic laws dictate that particulate and gaseous suspensions in an atmosphere MUST,by definition ,be WARMER than the ambient temperature ,or the surface temperature.
this is why a hot air balloon works-the air inside the balloon is warmer than the ambient atmospheric temperature.. Mars - Earth Temperatures  According to this chart ,the average temps
on Mars are between 0 degrees and -100 degrees. This means that any potentially gaseous or particulate matter would crystallize instantly ,and never be warm enough to rise from the
martian surface.If in fact a few noble gases or particulates did become suspended above the surface ,they would immediately fall back down to the surface,as the temperatures plummeted
every night.
Mars would need to entirely RECREATE its atmosphere every morning ,instantly,with this temperature range. I think this is highly unlikely ,even close to impossible.
Gas temperatures are by no means the sole reason why gases rise or fall.

Heating a gas will cause the molecules to separate out and thus reduce the density and weight of that gas in say a cubic metre, however the mass of the gas molecules is equally
important.  This explains why a cold hydrogen gas ballon will actually rise over warmer CO2.

3) The blue of the sky on earth is caused by enormous amounts of chlorophyll suspended in the atmosphere,from the vegetative life here on earth. This is also what colors our oceans.
For  there to be even MINIMAL blue coloration in the martian atmosphere ,there would need to be abundant ,plant life of some sort.Even if the entire surface of Mars were covered with
fungus,or algae (even a meter deep!) it would be impossible to attain the chlorophyll concentrations necessary to tint the atmosphere blue.A blue sky is indicative of thousands of billions of
tons of plant matter ,metabolizing light light,and excreting chlorophyll byproducts.I am doubtful this scenario exists on Mars.

Chlorophyll has nothing to do with the colour of the sky - If it did our sky would be GREEN.  Chlorophyll is the substance that is used by plants in photosynthesis and is what gives plants
their green colour..
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/glossary/gloss3/pigments.html

Quote: "Chlorophylls are greenish pigments which contain a porphyrin ring. This is a stable ring-shaped molecule around which electrons are free to migrate. Because the electrons move
freely, the ring has the potential to gain or lose electrons easily, and thus the potential to provide energized electrons to other molecules. This is the fundamental process by which
chlorophyll "captures" the energy of sunlight"


4) From the descriptions on the JPL links and on the news ,they are claiming that the lander was slowed during descent and entry into the atmosphere by retrorockets and a parachute. A
parachute  works by accumulating AIR inside it,creating drag. WHAT filled the chute? A minimum air density and pressure is necessary for a parachute to fill and open. A parachute will
NOT work in a vacuum or a very thin ,light atmosphere.The lander ,according to my calculations, would have hit the martian surface at over 30,000 miles per hour,instantly disintegrating.
For there to be enough accumulated drag from any latent noble gases around the martian surface -even a thinner atmosphere-I estimate the chute would have had to have been   a
minimum of 15-18 miles in diameter, to have had any significant effect on the descent rate in these conditions
The air density of Mars is indeed considerably thinner than that of Earth, however the atmospheric density on Earth varies with altitude.  As you rise higher into Earth's atmosphere so the
density drops, and it eventually falls off to near zero as you start to escape the Earths Atmosphere.

This is the case with planets with an atmosphere.  Whilst the atmosphere is thin the effect it has on a falling spacecraft is considerable - well before atmospheric density rises to something
above that on the surface of Mars a freefalling spacecraft is experiencing enormous friction factors - and that is WITHOUT any deployed parachute.  It is these heating forces that
destroyed space shuttle Columbia  Jeff

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I received this email in today on the atmosphere and the notation that there are no roll marks in picture as being very unusual
See below:  All John Combest  Comments will be in Light Green and initialed.

Mary,

I have recently reviewed all that is available regarding your photo analysis presented by "BUFO Paranormal and UFO Radio" at the www.burlingtonnews.net/spiritmars3/html site.  I have
also studied the NASA Mars Rover site, some material presented by JPL, and a few other sites relative to the Mars Rover mission.  I too find some inconsistencies in some of the
photographs, but I also show in the attached documents and photographs that it is possible without very careful study to jump to conclusions regarding things seen in photographs.  For
instance, on first look, there seems to be at least one footgear print in the sand near the Rover, but I demonstrate that something else is most likely involved in that photo.  There are some
critical and yet reasonable comments forwarded to you by "Shadow" relative to some of the NASA claims regarding Mars and the alleged path by which the Rover vehicle reportedly got to
the surface of Mars.  Only time - and close examination - will demonstrate whether or not the public is being given the "straight story" relative to the Mars Rovers.  Let me know what you
think about the attached presentations, and ENJOY!

John E. Combest
Inspection Engineer

OBSERVATIONS Determined by Viewing JPG Version of the above 360 Degree Panorama from www.space.com

1. As observed and stated in relationship to photos #03 in this JE Combest group of photos that a disturbance of the surface material - the surface sand and some rocks - can result in a
darker surface area where the disturbance has occurred because the darker side of some rocks and most (?) of the sand now appears instead of the lighter side which had been bleached
by the sun.  Such a notable change in the surface color is very evident in photos #03, and it is therefore reasonable to conclude that - whether bouncing, skipping, or rolling - the
Rover-and-air-bag assembly would have left easily detectable marks on the surface.  Some writers have already commented that in scenes such as this panorama there are no such marks
showing the Rovers path in getting to its resting place.

2 The video available at the NASA web site gives this scenario: Lander with heat shield enters Mars atmosphere at about 12,000 MPH.  When it has slowed to about 1000 MPH a parachute
opens, and when that arrangement slows it to about 250 MPH the retrorockets fire to reduce its horizontal velocity to about zero.  A radar system on the lander was to check the terrain
three times during final descent for the presence of craters or other objects to be avoided by firing small rockets.  About five seconds before touchdown the airbags are inflated, and the
Rover package is released to separately fall to the ground at about 54 MPH descent.  Upon initial touchdown, the lander assembly will bounce many times, and finally roll to a stop.

3. The lander assembly with airbags inflated has a very non-round configuration, and would not therefore either bounce or roll in a straight line,but would bounce around at different
angles, and probably not roll in a straight line.

4. This article appeared in USA Today on January 14th: Spirits touchdown and resting spot were pinpointed in photo maps at a briefing Tuesday.  The airbag-cushioned craft bounced 28
times after its landing Jan. 3, like a super-ball, JPL engineer Rob Manning says.  Rebounding 57 seconds to nearly 30-foot heights, Spirit ended up within 1,000 feet south-east of its
impact site.   Just before landing, stabilizing rockets prevented wind gusts from sending the rover due east on its bounces.  That path could have landed Spirit in the small crater, possibly
making contact more difficult.

Those numbers in the USA Today article yield the following: From its impact point it moved 1,000 feet in 57 seconds (18 feet per second average velocity, 12 MPH), and bounced 28 times
(average of one bounce every 2 seconds).  The first bounce(s) of 30-foot height probably took 3 to 4 seconds per bounce with the bounces becoming lower and faster as it slowed down.

5. Some writers have written that the Martian atmosphere is too thin to cause a parachute to either open or to reduce the fall of a Rover.  There is no apparent evidence in the above
360-degree panorama of any rolling up to the Rovers final position (track would have appeared as a darker-than-the-average surface color with a trail which became wider as it
approached the position of the camera).  There is no evidence of any such trail, however, yellow arrows have been posted on the panorama to show the location of five
darker-than-the-average-surface blotches which may indicate locations where the Rover package bounced its way to its final resting place.  But still - there is no evidence of any rolling
motion - which seems unavoidable, and would have occurred according to NASA.  Even a rapidly moving cube (dice) on a gambling table rolls until it has almost stopped its forward motion.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OBSERVATIONS Determined by Viewing JPG Version of the above Cut Rocks photo from www.mars.jpl.nasa.gov

1. Whats wrong with this picture?: The large, light-colored rock in sections 5-9/C-F appears to have most of its mass well above the sand surface, and there is no sand piled around it at
any point.  But most rocks which have been in position for a long time have sunk somewhat into the sand or have some sand piled against them.  Further, the relatively straight and flat
break along the edge of the rock is notable.

2. Unusual Characteristics: Only about half the large rock seen in sections 11-12/G-H is evident - as becomes apparent upon viewing a snap shot from the Rover Sunday Drive photos
available at jpl.nasa.gov. and included within this JECombest set of photos.  This rock is elliptical at its flat cut end, has several seemingly flat surfaces around its elliptical shape, and has a
rectangular hole which (per the Sunday Drive photo) seems to extend all the way through the rock.  Those four characteristics all found on a single rock seems to be very unusual if those
characteristics all have a natural origin.  Notice also, that this rock also is on the surface of the sand and seems to have no sand piled around it.



John goes on to further comment on photos found on
spiritrover3

CONTINUE HERE FOR MORE PHOTOS AND COMMENTS ABOUT MARS
Petrified wood of Arizona
Petrified
Wood of Mars
Martian Rock Abnormalities
Either NASA is photographing petrified wood on Mars...or....they are photographing an area in Earth's Petrified Forest and claiming that the photos are coming from Mars
Exploring the Unknown   
with
Mary Sutherland
CONTACT US TODAY

Brad and Mary Sutherland
248 Carver Street
Winslow, Illinois 61089
815 367 1006