Mystery 'monolith' spotted on Mars

[Hugh]

the giant's steps in ireland are very artificial-looking natural formations on Earth. if these were to appear on mars we would think they were made by aliens too.

This structure seems to be alone... hence the "mono" part... it seems out of place...

What we need is a closer up investigation of it.

[Leonardo]

This structure seems to be alone... hence the "mono" part... it seems out of place...

What we need is a closer up investigation of it.

Buzz Aldrin called this a monolith (and the rock feature on Phobos), and he has a book to promote.

Monolith does indeed mean "single stone", and this is a "single stone", however, it is the book/movie 2001 that has given the word a popular context of being unnatural (and Mr Aldrin was very aware of this when he made his statement. As I said, he has a book to promote.) Natural monoliths occur all over our planet.

[dazdillinjah]

Buzz Aldrin called this a monolith (and the rock feature on Phobos), and he has a book to promote.

Monolith does indeed mean "single stone", and this is a "single stone", however, it is the book/movie 2001 that has given the word a popular context of being unnatural (and Mr Aldrin was very aware of this when he made his statement. As I said, he has a book to promote.) Natural monoliths occur all over our planet.

Cool post ..please provide links to any individual and isolated monoliths that are here on Earth for us 'very' interested readers thx

[Leonardo]

Cool post ..please provide links to any individual and isolated monoliths that are here on Earth for us 'very' interested readers thx

Certainly.

Here are a couple of picture of natural monoliths - admittedly from a gardening/landscaping website - but these are natural stones in situ, not artificially shaped rocks. Please note the natural cuboid shape of the large monolith in the lower picture.

Here are some pictures from Google image (which you could easily have used to provide your own evidence) of other natural monoliths:

Monoliths

More monoliths (you may be familiar with these).

A smaller natural monolith.

A whole site full of natural monoliths!

Another, rather recognisable, monolith.

Perhaps you can now search for more yourself? Thx.

Edited August 6, 2009 by Leonardo

[dazdillinjah]

Certainly.

Here are a couple of picture of natural monoliths - admittedly from a gardening/landscaping website - but these are natural stones in situ, not artificially shaped rocks. Please note the natural cuboid shape of the large monolith in the lower picture.

Here are some pictures from Google image (which you could easily have used to provide your own evidence) of other natural monoliths:

Monoliths

More monoliths (you may be familiar with these).

A smaller natural monolith.

A whole site full of natural monoliths!

Another, rather recognisable, monolith.

Perhaps you can now search for more yourself? Thx.

Thank you very much for the fast and informed response

I am going through these pictures as I type this ....

Pic 1 - This pic would not be visible via the format the martian monoliths are captured ..they would be indiscernable specks among similar specks

Pic 2 - comes up with "the website declined to show this webpage"

Pic 3 - shows formations remnant from volcanic activity and clearly shows three formations in close proximity

Pic 4 - shows another object that would appear less than a speck compared to the martian monoliths thatt have been photographed, irregularly shaped and smaller that a sapling tree

Pic 5 - shows several (three at least monoliths) that are about 30 ft in height and next to one another

Pic 6 - shows Devils Tower ala close encounters ..another formation made from ancient volcanism circular as would be expected

these are nothing like the monoliths we are seeing on Phobos and Mars ..now show me a vast area 'on Earth or anywhere' for that matter that shows individual Monoliths in the middle of nowhere that cannot be accounted for by volcanism which are approx. 28 stories high with a height to width ratio of between 2:1 - 2.5:1 and I will bow down that there are other known natural formations such as these

...and no ..Im not suggesting anything alien or ET about these objects just that they are highly unusual and deserve closer investigation

thx

[dazdillinjah]

Certainly.

Here are a couple of picture of natural monoliths - admittedly from a gardening/landscaping website - but these are natural stones in situ, not artificially shaped rocks. Please note the natural cuboid shape of the large monolith in the lower picture.

Here are some pictures from Google image (which you could easily have used to provide your own evidence) of other natural monoliths:

Monoliths

More monoliths (you may be familiar with these).

A smaller natural monolith.

A whole site full of natural monoliths!

Another, rather recognisable, monolith.

Perhaps you can now search for more yourself? Thx.

Thank you very much for the fast and informed response

I am going through these pictures as I type this ....

Pic 1 - This pic would not be visible via the format the martian monoliths are captured ..they would be indiscernable specks among similar specks

Pic 2 - comes up with "the website declined to show this webpage"

Pic 3 - shows formations remnant from volcanic activity and clearly shows three formations in close proximity

Pic 4 - shows another object that would appear less than a speck compared to the martian monoliths thatt have been photographed, irregularly shaped and smaller that a sapling tree

Pic 5 - shows several (three at least monoliths) that are about 30 ft in height and next to one another

Pic 6 - shows Devils Tower ala close encounters ..another formation made from ancient volcanism circular as would be expected

these are nothing like the monoliths we are seeing on Phobos and Mars ..now show me a vast area 'on Earth or anywhere' for that matter that shows individual Monoliths in the middle of nowhere that cannot be accounted for by volcanism which are approx. 28 stories high with a height to width ratio of between 2:1 - 2.5:1 and I will bow down that there are other known natural formations such as these

...and no ..Im not suggesting anything alien or ET about these objects just that they are highly unusual and deserve closer investigation

thx

[Leonardo]

Pic 1 - This pic would not be visible via the format the martian monoliths are captured ..they would be indiscernable specks among similar specks

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. I take it this is based on you being well-versed on the technology being used and the ability of the various agencies to image objects on Mars?

Regardless, visibility on Mars was not among the criteria you listed. Changing the goal posts?

Pic 2 - comes up with "the website declined to show this webpage"

Apologies, I don't know why it won't display. No matter, it is simply a picture of monoliths.

Pic 3 - shows formations remnant from volcanic activity and clearly shows three formations in close proximity

And? They are monoliths. What you requested.

Pic 4 - shows another object that would appear less than a speck compared to the martian monoliths thatt have been photographed, irregularly shaped and smaller that a sapling tree

From a distance relative to that from which the picture of the 'Martian Monolith' was taken, making this monolith appear in the same scale (and resolution), I have little doubt it would appear as regular as the Mars rock. Unfortunately, that will have to remain my opinion (and yours, your opinion) as we have no way of proving this.

Pic 5 - shows several (three at least monoliths) that are about 30 ft in height and next to one another

Pic 6 - shows Devils Tower ala close encounters ..another formation made from ancient volcanism circular as would be expected

See my response to what you said about pic 3, above.

these are nothing like the monoliths we are seeing on Phobos and Mars ..now show me a vast area 'on Earth or anywhere' for that matter that shows individual Monoliths in the middle of nowhere that cannot be accounted for by volcanism which are approx. 28 stories high with a height to width ratio of between 2:1 - 2.5:1 and I will bow down that there are other known natural formations such as these

...and no ..Im not suggesting anything alien or ET about these objects just that they are highly unusual and deserve closer investigation

thx

Have you any evidence the Martian monolith is not the product of ancient volcanism on Mars? If not, your discrediting my images on the basis that many of the monoliths have a volcanic origin is baseless.

I would also like to know where you derive your "28 stories high" figure from? Perhaps you are mistaken in your recognition of the scale (and, maybe, the perspective) of the images taken?

Edited August 6, 2009 by Leonardo

[dazdillinjah]

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. I take it this is based on you being well-versed on the technology being used and the ability of the various agencies to image objects on Mars?

Regardless, visibility on Mars was not among the criteria you listed. Changing the goal posts?

Apologies, I don't know why it won't display. No matter, it is simply a picture of monoliths.

And? They are monoliths. What you requested.

From a distance relative to that from which the picture of the 'Martian Monolith' was taken, making this monolith appear in the same scale (and resolution), I have little doubt it would appear as regular as the Mars rock. Unfortunately, that will have to remain my opinion (and yours, your opinion) as we have no way of proving this.

See my response to what you said about pic 3, above.

Have you any evidence the Martian monolith is not the product of ancient volcanism on Mars? If not, your discrediting my images on the basis that many of the monoliths have a volcanic origin is baseless.

I would also like to know where you derive your "28 stories high" figure from? Perhaps you are mistaken in your recognition of the scale (and, maybe, the perspective) of the images taken?

Hey, I appreciate your argument ...sorting out our difference in opinion is healthy ....so

1stly ...I have not the expertise nor qualification to discredit that either the Phobos or Mars monoliths are of volcanic origin, however I will accentuate that neither monolith appear too have any volcanic crater or evidence of any volcanic activity anywhere near them and they basically 'stand alone' among their respective vista's

now as for the 28 stories high figure ..I wish to alert you to these two links that have been developed by people of high credentials in these matters..these links are very technically worded but they are my source for the estimate that at least the Phobos monolith is approximately 28 stories high

check here and here for my source of the 28 stories high estimate

I need to stress that I have yet found no information at all about the dimensions of the martian rock (monolith) although I am eagerly awaiting this information as I guess many of us are

thanks again for the healthy debate regarding this matter

[Leonardo]

Hey, I appreciate your argument ...sorting out our difference in opinion is healthy ....so

1stly ...I have not the expertise nor qualification to discredit that either the Phobos or Mars monoliths are of volcanic origin, however I will accentuate that neither monolith appear too have any volcanic crater or evidence of any volcanic activity anywhere near them and they basically 'stand alone' among their respective vista's

now as for the 28 stories high figure ..I wish to alert you to these two links that have been developed by people of high credentials in these matters..these links are very technically worded but they are my source for the estimate that at least the Phobos monolith is approximately 28 stories high

check here and here for my source of the 28 stories high estimate

I need to stress that I have yet found no information at all about the dimensions of the martian rock (monolith) although I am eagerly awaiting this information as I guess many of us are

thanks again for the healthy debate regarding this matter

I understand, thanks for clarifying.

I was nowhere in my posts referring to the Phobos monolith, and assumed the entirety of the discussion was about the Martian rock. Hence my confusion over the "28 stories" figure. I have not familiarised myself with the monolith on Phobos, so I don't feel comfortable in commenting on that yet.

For your "no evidence of volcanism" argument. There is evidence of past volcanism on Mars, and much of the Martian surface is covered in sand/fine dust which might hide some features. A volcanic extrusion might not be accompanied by an apparent crater, and I am very uncertain that your "no other volcanic evidence nearby" statement is made from any position of knowledge. I would request, if you wish to stand by this statement, that you provide your evidence of this.

It is far too early to discount the rock imaged being of volcanic origin, imo.

Edited to add: I provided a link in an earlier post to a newspaper article which had other pictures and more information about the Mars rock. The article quoted 'scientists at the University of Arizona' who stated the rock may be up to 5 metres across. They were also of the opinion it is simply a rock which has weathered/broken out of the bedrock.

Edited August 6, 2009 by Leonardo

[Ell]

I suspect that the first monolith is just a rock. Perhaps it has deposits of carbondioxide ice on its top?

The monolith in the second picture is more remarkable. However, I seem to discern a capstone on its top, which may indicate that when the terrain eroded away, the soft rock under the hard capstone was protected from erosion by the capstone.

Both objects are interesting nevertheless and I am sure will eventually be inspected from a closer distance.

[dazdillinjah]

I understand, thanks for clarifying.

I was nowhere in my posts referring to the Phobos monolith, and assumed the entirety of the discussion was about the Martian rock. Hence my confusion over the "28 stories" figure. I have not familiarised myself with the monolith on Phobos, so I don't feel comfortable in commenting on that yet.

For your "no evidence of volcanism" argument. There is evidence of past volcanism on Mars, and much of the Martian surface is covered in sand/fine dust which might hide some features. A volcanic extrusion might not be accompanied by an apparent crater, and I am very uncertain that your "no other volcanic evidence nearby" statement is made from any position of knowledge. I would request, if you wish to stand by this statement, that you provide your evidence of this.

It is far too early to discount the rock imaged being of volcanic origin, imo.

Edited to add: I provided a link in an earlier post to a newspaper article which had other pictures and more information about the Mars rock. The article quoted 'scientists at the University of Arizona' who stated the rock may be up to 5 metres across. They were also of the opinion it is simply a rock which has weathered/broken out of the bedrock.

Your most welcome..and you are correct regarding my lack of 'qualified' statement, its incidents like this where I wish we could access high quality close ups ..I guess its simply human nature to be curious

however I suppose we shall hold our personal opinions until we have some reasonable imagery and comment from experts regarding these objects

but hey.. thats alright by me and I respect your opinion though it may be different to mine

Cheers Leonardo & I look forward to your comments here at UM

[Ell]

I now read the MailOnline article. It is a five metre boulder on the steep side of a cliff. So no two different monoliths. Just one boulder that broke off and fell down the cliff.

[dazdillinjah]

I now read the MailOnline article. It is a five metre boulder on the steep side of a cliff. So no two different monoliths. Just one boulder that broke off and fell down the cliff.

please can you provide the link to this information thx

[Feanor]

Well, I am not a skeptic or a blind believer. I walk a path between both and I tri to use reason and common sense. I believe that somewhere on the vastness of space, there must be life, etc. Oh well, regarding to the topic issue. This looks like a rock, nothing more, this conclusion of mine is based on the pictures provided. I wish I had the original image link, direct form NASA, like a raw format of high resolution. Maybe with that, I would be able to zoom more efficiently and look for some kind of feature, etc.

MRO can take even closer pics of this object if NASA wants or find it worth the trouble but I think they already know it is just a rock.

[Ell]

please can you provide the link to this information thx

See the link in Leonardo's post 27.

[:PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR:]

Can you tell me a religion that isn't fictional

Touché!

[Hugh]

Another photo of the monolith and a close-up:

and more info from an article at Telegraph.co.uk:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/5...alien-life.html

Article from above site:

____________________

Mars 'monolith' fuels theories of alien life

A rectangular object found jutting out of Mars's surface and caught on camera by the University of Arizona has caused speculation over the nature of the "monolith" and its origins.

Published: 9:45AM BST 06 Aug 2009

Scientists at the university, who captured the image from a powerful camera on board an orbiting satellite, insist that the structure is a normal, if striking, natural phenomenon.

But sci-fi fans are said to be drawing parallels with the mysterious monoliths used to mark a change in human evolution in Stanley Kubrick's classic film 2001: A Space Odyssey.

The latest image was taken as part of the University of Arizona's HiRise (High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment) project. The camera is able to take high-resolution images of Mars's surface from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter.

In Kubrick's adaptation of Arthur C Clarke's novel, the origins of the monoliths are never fully explained.

The University of Arizona has no such problems with their structure.

Alfred McEwen, professor of planetary science at the university and HiRise's principal investigator, said: "Layering from rock deposition combined with tectonic fractures creates right-angle planes of weakness such that rectangular blocks tend to weather out and separate from the bedrock."

He added: "It is not that unusual. There are lots of rectangular structures on Mars.

"It is striking when you see one that is isolated, but they are common."

Veteran astronaut Buzz Aldrin recently stoked space conspiracy theory further by announcing that a similar "monolith" had been detected on Mars's moon Phobos.

Calling for money to be pumped into space exploration, Mr Aldrin - the second man to walk on the moon - told US network C-Span that scientists should focus on Mars's moon: "There is a monolith there, a very unusual structure on this little potato-shaped object that goes around Mars once every seven hours.

"When people find out about that, they are going to say 'who put that there?'. Well, the universe put it there, or if you choose, God put it there."

Edited August 6, 2009 by Hugh

[TRUEYOUTRUEME]

Another photo of the monolith and a close-up:

This new photo is very interesting. It now shows three objects forming a triangular formation. There is the monolith or marker, then there is the pyramid I mentioned before and now also a third object forming a triangle from above.

Very cool.

Edited August 6, 2009 by TRUEYOUTRUEME

[supervike]

NASA should use the hell out of these images, solely as a fund raising effort to send some more probes!

[Hugh]

Let's not forget that the surface of Mars has a rock filled surface to begin with:

So the odds are that some of them will look like tall monoliths from space...

Edited August 6, 2009 by Hugh

[ninjadude]

is this isolated enough for you?

[Sardukar]

or perhaps this is?

[Zamor]

Those who believe we have been or are being visited by alien lifeforms hope that this is the evidence they are looking for.

To those who are sure there are and never has been any other intelligent lifeforms visiting our corner of the galaxy this must be a rock.

All you can say is that it is an interesting pic and we won't be sure what it is until we get a better pic, no photos of different rock formations on earth will change that fact, just shows that anything is possible, unless you KNOW aliens doesn't exist, then a rock is the only option.

[BaneSilvermoon]

Maybe it was put there by an alien race as like a "Hello" type thing. Maybe they figured by the time we can put a man on Mars to see it that we're ready to see that we really aren't alone.

Prolly says "Mergel was here" on it

[sickpuppy]

wonder where this will lead to..?

that ain't no 'rock' O_o