The Past Environment of Cydonia

The morphology of the terraces seems to say much about the geologic environment of this area of Cydonia. The continuity of the terraces suggests that they may have been formed in part as erosional features and may reflect evidence of wave-cut benching. Since several of the terraces appear to encircle the central core of the landform, the landform may have been an "island" in the midst of a paleo-lake at some time in the Martian past and the landform may have been modified by both aerial and subaerial geologic processes. The identification of the four distinct terraces at varying elevations suggests that periods of regression and transgression occurred and that the lake was not a constant feature.

The horizontal continuity of several distinct "outcrops" at the tops of the terraces suggests that the form of the terraces may also be structurally controlled because of the composition of the sediments and their resistance to erosion. The rills suggest that the landform is composed of coarse-grained sedimentary rocks, which would have been deposited in some "other" Martian environment prior to the formation of the lake. The rills also suggest that the landform was eroded by precipitation and surface runoff.

Though the new MGS image of "The Face" has been compared to "any mesa one might see in the western United States from an airplane," a detailed analysis as shown in this paper, indicates that statement to be both premature and prosaic. The landform appears to be the product of heterogeneous lithologies rather than one specific rock type. Evidence of other erosional and structural elements suggests that "The Face" is a complex feature resulting from a variety of geologic processes, rather than a homogenous, volcanic knob eroded to its present form. This is not a surprising conclusion since layered rocks have been noted in some MGS images, suggesting that sedimentary processes may have been occurring on Mars over a great span of time.

In the Great Pyramid, the distance from the truncated Apex (450 feet above the ground) of the Pyramid to the roof of the Queen's Chamber is 360 feet. The distance from the roof of the Queen's Chamber to the floor of the horizontal passageway entering the subterranean chamber is 188.42 feet. The ratio of 360 to 188.42 is 1 to 0.523.

The radius of the Earth is 3,959 miles. The radius of Mars is 2,106 miles. The ratio of 3,959 to 2,106 is 1 to 0.532.

.523 is 98.3% of .532. Superimposing such a margin of difference onto Mars would result in the floor of the horizontal passageway falling less than 36 miles from the exact equator of Mars.

However, the subterranean chamber (also known as the "Pit") extends deeper, and at a certain point hits the value of 191.5 feet below the roof of the Queen's Chamber (3.1 feet below the floor of the descending passageway leading into the Pit). This particular point corresponds exactly to the equator of Mars, when overlayed over the circle representing Mars in our diagram. In other words, the ratio of the Earth-Mars radii (3959/2106=1.8798) is exactly equal to the ratio of the distance from the top of the Great Pyramid to the roof of Queen's Chamber, and from the QC roof to this point in the Pit (360/191.5=1.8798). Thus, there is a direct geometric and numeric relationship between the inner design of the chambers in the Great Pyramid to its outer dimensions, and the relative radii of Mars and Earth.

Additionally, the ratio of "A" to "C" in the diagram, where "C" = "A" + "B", is 1 to 1.5319. This very closely corresponds to the semi-major axis ratios of the Earth and Mars. The Earth is 1 AU (Astronomical Unit = 93 million miles) from the Sun. Mars, on average, is 141,635,349 miles from the Sun, or 1.5230 AUs. The value of 1.5230 is 99.42% of 1.5319, or these ratios are within 0.58% of each other. Thus, the arcs touching on the roof of the Queen's Chamber and on the point in the subterranean chamber just below the floor of the horizontal passageway are proportionate not just to the radii of Earth and Mars, but to their respective orbital distances from the Sun as well (shown as "D" and "E" in the diagram).

Further, as a note of sidelong interest, the point at which the roof of the descending passageway, leading to the Pit, bisects the Mars arc, corresponds approximately to 41 degrees N latitude (line "F" on the diagram), which is the latitude of Cydonia, a region of mysterious structures on the Martian surface which many researchers have suspected to be artificial.

Yea, now all you have to do is explain how a group of pyramids and other artificial buildings formed in the same area and you're set.

Might also help if you explained the sacred geometry inescapably linked between the positions of the structures. Oh, also explain in the inescapable relationships between the Great Pyramid and Mars, a bit of which can be seen here. http://www.geocities.com/annubis33/TheDesi...e/geometry.html
Your skepticism in the light of such overwhelming evidence makes me wonder if you are even capable of knowing or seeing the truth about pretty much anything. Because not only are there pyramids and a face in the same area on Mars but we have a virtually exact same place here on Earth and not only that but mathematical and geometrical relationships between the two. What is it going to take for you to realize, YOU ARE WRONG.

http://www.metaresearch.org/solar######sys...files/proof.asp

Yea, now all you have to do is explain how a group of pyramids and other artificial buildings formed in the same area and you're set.

Might also help if you explained the sacred geometry inescapably linked between the positions of the structures.

In The Monuments of Mars, Richard Hoagland dismisses the possibility that the numerical relationships and alignments that he refers to as the "Geometry of Cydonia." could just be coincidental. He seems to find those relationships too remarkable to be just a set of random coincidences. Apparently, that is what his intuition about such things led him to believe. But I have looked at all of those relationships too and my intuition told me that they could easily be completely unintentional coincidences. My purpose in doing the "Telephone Number Experiment" was to demonstrate in a simple and concrete way to Hoagland and others that my intuition about such things is quite well-founded. My choice to use eight numbers formed from telephone numbers in the experiment was to make it obvious that whatever relationships involving e, pi, or other mathematical constants that exist among those numbers must be coincidental since no one could reasonably suggest that such relationships were intentional. I discovered many such relationships, some of which fall into rather striking patterns. And so, if one can find an abundance of numerical relationships from a set of numbers found in the telephone directory, why should one put any significance on similar kinds of relationships for a set of numbers found in some other way? I have raised this issue a long time ago, but Richard Hoagland and his associates have failed to offer an adequate response. Coincidences abound. One needs good, sound arguments to believe that something is not a coincidence and so the burden must be on Hoagland to provide such arguments, especially because of the quite unextraordinary nature of the relationships that he presents.

Oh, also explain in the inescapable relationships between the Great Pyramid and Mars, a bit of which can be seen here. http://www.geocities.com/annubis33/TheDesi...e/geometry.html

Your skepticism in the light of such overwhelming evidence makes me wonder if you are even capable of knowing or seeing the truth about pretty much anything. Because not only are there pyramids and a face in the same area on Mars but we have a virtually exact same place here on Earth and not only that but mathematical and geometrical relationships between the two.

Is this just a game to you?

Is your sole purpose to antagonize, to pick a fight?

Or are you truly interested in learning why we believe what we believe?

Damn, you two are so hopeless that I almost don't want to believe it. Dismissing everything of value as randomness.

The reason I'm not interested in why you believe in what you believe is because you aren't even sure why you believe what you believe otherwise you wouldn't be running around like Lilly making posts saying "Could the 'face on Mars' have been formed by water?!". So this tells me you obviously aren't even sure about your own convictions.

You also could care less what I think to begin with because every ounce of evidence I put infront of you, you dismiss are mere coincidence. You are such a hypocrit it is unbelievable. All you want is for people to buy into your skeptical, close minded garbage and you could care less for any argument that in anyway shape or form, disagrees with you. Yet you want others to listen to "why you believe what you believe".

The reason I'm not interested in why you believe in what you believe is because you aren't even sure why you believe what you believe otherwise you wouldn't be running around like Lilly making posts saying "Could the 'face on Mars' have been formed by water?!". So this tells me you obviously aren't even sure about your own convictions.

If you do not wish to listen to my reason for beliving what I do, please do me the favor of not throwing a completly off-topic point into a thread, insulting and antagonizing everyone in your very first post, and then pretending like it is others who are acting against you.

Ok so pyramids onm mars.... im very intrested in pyramids.... how come this isnt public knowledge.. do you have any pictures from stelittes etc.... so many questions.. ok pictures first..

I am not doing this because I want you to "buy" my point of view, because I do not believe you are capable of doing so. I am telling right out, however, that if you are interested in an explanation, I can give it to you, which is a claim that you cannot make. If you do not wish to listen to my reason for beliving what I do, please do me the favor of not throwing a completly off-topic point into a thread, insulting and antagonizing everyone in your very first post, and then pretending like it is others who are acting against you.

I just ran across an interesting article indicating that the enigmatic 'Face on Mars' (in the Cydonia region) is far more indicative of a past Martian ocean, rather than *Martians*. Take a look at this article. From that article:
There have been recent tantalizing clues that Mars may have been a far more "watery" world in it's past than initially suspected, this information seems to fit nicely with that hypothesis.

These were formed by other civilizations like the egyptians that were advanced and could travel to other planets. They left those faces their for human exploration.

two words: prove it.

but its just like jesus times. When the devil tempted him to convert the rock into whine (something like that) he didnt do it. He didnt have to prove it to him. Other beleived.

What other way you think this happened? What some water just made it like that?

Please!!! Thats bs!!!

Old civilzations were advanced. They were capable of farther things it would take us in our current time to do, because they werent bs about wars and other crazy sh** the goverment is doing these days.

Please give me a break and lets face the facts even if you still want me to prove it. What do you want me to do take you on a time machine or some space rocket and take you to mars= lol. Anyways this paragraph should= 2 words prove it!!! :rofl:

Science deals with empirical evidence, not with belief...

Now, if you want to arrive at a conclusion based on faith and belief, then naturally you are free to do so. However, please do not shout that others are "WRONG" when they do not accept answers based on faith and belief. Many people desire evidence in order to consider something to be a valid explanation.

Theres nothing detailed about the "mar's face" you can kind of see two eyes and a mouth but there are no ears, hair, nostrils, eyebrows,etc.

The third image in aquatus1's post shows us that the mountain looks nothing like a face.

Lilly, you remind me a lot of a friend of mine with a Corgi. His explanation of science and rational thought are almost verbatim to yours

If only more people followed the same lines of thought. Maybe we wouldn't have so many people killing each other over in Iraq right now, having bought 100% into unproven mythologies.

Here's three pictures of the "Face" on Mar's, taken at three different points in history, as technology got better and better. Note that the first pic is pretty much the only one in which you will see anything resembling a detailed face:

Of course it was formed by water!
Wasn't earth indeed formed by water?
Everything was once completely under water...

OK but no one has commented on how such a symmetrical shape occured
by natural forces. (unless you all believe in the alien civilization theory)

Ok well, let's go there then. Say Earth loses it's atmosphere, eventually the oceans dry up. The Hawiian Islands start to no longer be islands but just bumps in dirt. Eventually they erode from wind and whatever volcanic activity is still going on in the reigon. After several thousands of years or even longer (I'm no geologist) you'll eventually have a series of big funny looking bumps and shapes in a big flat area that used to be an ocean. Now think of how many thousands of islands there are on Earth and how many there were on Mars if there was water. The idea that some of them might happen to look like a face, or a pyramid, or a building from above is not in any way extraordinary. Occam's Razor: "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one."

All theories are indeed fascinating and worth exploration, but it seems the most boring explination in this case is also probably correct.

I think there is an answer to be found in natural forces, because truth is way stranger than fiction.

What other natural forces are there besides what's found in the environment? Wind, water, etc etc. Not trying to sound sarcastic, just trying to figure out what you are getting at...

I know that wind water, rain, etc are at work, I'm just curious as to how these forces have made such a symmetrical shape.

"the face was created by "exterrestrial beings" It was a symbol of their beliefs and was a landmark not too different from the carvings in Earth's Mount Rushmore.
I will say this, if Earth wants to look at it's past, then it needs to look more at Mars.
The pyramids are a clue. Too much numerical simalarities....

Since noone has actually set foot in the Cydonia area of Mars, then the most we can do is to pose various hypotheses about what these formations could be. However, the evidence being used to support the hypothesis that these formations are artificial is far from strong. The hypothesis that the "face" is of geological origin, and a result of weathering that may have included water, is far more compelling.

Really? You wouldn't happen to have, let's say, irrefutable evidence that this is indeed the case? I would refer you to this exchange earlier in the thread.
To quote myself:
To base one's conclusion on personal beliefs instead of following the evidence would be not only unscientific, but also highly "illogical".

Sound like spock, I dig it : )

Chance? Any rocks jutting out from the main structure of the hill or volcano that formed the shape would erode away with time giving it a more symmetrical look.

Nassau, one of the Cook Islands in the South Pacific is pretty similar.


Hilton Head island off of South Carolina (US) is shaped like a shoe. Gogooroa island is shaped like a nearly perfect "G". There were rumors about Google buying it last year but so far they've just been rumors.