As in the previous Report “The Real Tubes on Mars: Part I” found HERE and as you can see in the above first image of additional evidence drawn from MOC strip E12-03186, we now see more but also a bit different giant tube evidence and from a different location. Fortunately, this time the image quality in the original science data strips is a bit better allowing a little clearer view.
Right away you can see a number of facts demonstrated in this scene that are shared in common with the previous Part I evidence. For example, the top or northern most tube is again the most fully formed. All these new images also demonstrate that the northern most fully formed tubes border on what appears at first view to be natural adjacent terrain to the immediate north with the same look and texture as in the evidence in the previous Part I report. Additionally, as with the previous evidence, the tubes here are a part of the much larger but more lower profile cohesive mass to the immediate and adjacent south. Finally and most important, you can more clearly see the sunlight reflections gleaming off of the top surface of the main top tube system just as in the #4 image in the previous report.
Notice the clear at least semi-translucent equality of the main tube and that the cohesive mass to the immediate south of the tube has many parallel wrinkles in it. Notice also the many vague light color spots all over the mass and their not well defined but still uniform spacing as well as size and shape appearance. This is new evidence. These spots were not visible in the previous Part I report evidence and that was no doubt due to the fact that the previous report evidence was of poorer quality original imaging that would have eliminated such subtle detail from view. In my opinion, the previously reported on system imaging has been heavily tampered with at official level as to finer small detail where the smaller detail had been destroyed leaving only the largest overpowering detail available to be seen, but only in basic form.
The appearance of these spots in this evidence tends to encourage speculation that these spots may not just be discolorations on the surface of the mass, as might first be assumed, but something under and/or within the flattened mass as seen through its semitransparent surface. If true, this in turn encourages speculation that the underside of even the flattened/wrinkled area of the mass may provide hollow air and/or water space rather than making full and complete flattened contact with the ground.
Notice to that the light gleam and reflection reveals the edges of a narrow band of depression indentation that runs the entire longitudinal length axis of the main tube top surface and note it is fairly uniform in its width. This looks very much like something due to fairly recent expansion stress. This factor may be an indicator that this entire giant tube system may have undergone an enlarging expansion as to its width and girth after it was already fully formed which in turn formed this healing depression down its length. Notice also the vague darker streaks on or inside the main tube. This more subtle evidence is also new relative to the previous Part I evidence. These streaks appear very similar to or the same as very pronounced dark meandering streaks in the thousands that cover much of the open terrain in the general region surrounding both of these Part I and Part II tube system sites outside of the craters they sit within. The question is, is there a relationship?
The above second and closer 200% view of the E12-03186 tube site with too much blur doesn’t really add much information except possibly one thing. The dark narrow band that separates the north perimeter edge of the main tube from the terrain it sits in is, in my opinion, suspicious. It’s a little too fuzzy and streaky and, although I can’t be sure, it looks a little too suggestive of image tampering rather than a genuine part of the image to me. If that dark narrow band is tampering hiding something, what does that say about the rest of what we’re seeing here? At least the caution flag is raised that, despite these Part II images being somewhat clearer, tampering is still present in these images to.
This above third image is from a different E11-03408 strip but is a section of the same tube system as in the first two images here but this scene is a little further right or east. The combined strips reinforce the fact that this giant tube system is many kilometers long and that knowledge gives us a little better insight of the huge colossal scale we are really looking at here. Here again we have light reflections off of the tube’s top surface and this is again is strong evidence that the surface of these tubes is very smooth to the point of being slick like glass or resin and rounded as to their circumference width and girth. The visuals in the above third image also again indicate strongly that this tube is occluded but also semitransparent. These factors alone demonstrate the glaringly obvious fact that we are not looking at any kind of sediment sand dunes here.
In fact, it looks very much like a moist stuffed stretched very thin animal intestine with veins running through the membrane doesn’t it. Okay, I guess we could have all done without that visual but clearly it is extremely unlikely that anything like this, especially on this gigantic elevated scale, could occur as a part of any kind of natural geology.
Note that the spots are now more pronounced here in or on the lower profile mass area and there is what appears to be a second tube beginning to form in a fold under, next to and parallel to the main full blown top tube out of the low profile obviously cohesive lower profile mass. However, note that these spots are at best only very faintly seen in or on the main tube itself. Could it be because these spots represent a great many fixed height objects within whose lighter color reflective tops are close to the underside of the lower profile part of the mass so that we can see these object tops through its semitransparent surface a little better and they can’t be seen as well in the main tube simply because it is hollow and much taller above them and they are much further away from the underside of the colossal arched dome like top surface and therefore harder to see? Could these be the tops of buildings or some sort of vegetation, such as for example huge tree tops?
In this strip, you can also see the meandering streaks on or inside the main tube better. Notice that these streaks are confined to the main tube and do not extend out beyond its dimensions either into the terrain above the main tube or below into the newly forming tube or the lower profile mass below that. This is a strong indicator that the streaks are something formed inside the interior of the tube rather on or part of its exterior. As I said before, the general region around this crater as well as the one presented in our Part I report has a great deal of this meandering dark streaking but characterized by being out in open topography. There may be a relationship here that we don’t understand. It is my strong suspicion that this streaking, when it is like this holding to a general direction rather than characterized by curling back around on itself in loops as is sometimes seen, represents the activity of life of some kind.
I have also seen other strange semitransparent constructs around the planet that sometimes have these streaks holding generally to a course or path in evidence inside them. For example, my 2/26/2001 report “A Puzzle! What is this?” last year found HERE delves briefly off into a similar situation but there the constructs that contain the streaks are not shaped like these very long uniform width and shape rounded forms but present a different folded sprawling shape of networked forms that bulges in a elevated rounded fold on one side and then goes into a long taper to ground level on the other side that thins and feathers out onto the ground. I have long suspected that water is contained within these earlier reported constructs but cannot say for sure. Also, although I have not yet specifically reported on it, I have also identified a relationship with shallow water in open topography locations where this generally straight but meandering streaking evidence occurs. In other words, I suspect that the paths represents the residual passage evidence of some life form(s).
You should be aware that this streaking actually generally takes two different visual forms. One is like that which you see here where any one streak meanders but still holds to a general single direction. The other is characterized by very strong meandering including looping back on itself and wandering all around randomly. You should also be aware that scientists have lumped all these streaks undifferentiated into one bag and speculated that this strange streaking evidence found all over the planet and very thick and pronounced in open terrain in some places, are whirlwind, dust-devil, or tornado trails left in dry dust conditions and their generally meandering path tends to support this conclusion. Of course this semiofficial explanation dovetails nicely into and promotes the official party line that Mars is a frozen world, dry as dust, and dead as can be.
However, this explanation ignores type differentiation and this streaking evidence is not just out in open arid terrain, where such a explanation might have more validity, but also clearly contained within the perimeter confines of strange massive objects and also in open terrain shallow surface water as you will eventually see in future evidence posted here. Strong pronounced streaks seen confined within an object’s dimensions, such as evidenced in the previously reported SP1-23008 strip linked to above, are all characterized by the straighter meandering path that will come right up to the outer perimeter of these objects and stop sharply at that perimeter demarcation line without any sign at all of passing out into the surrounding terrain. This is also true in evidence such as presented in SP1-23008 where the streaking comes right up to the outer edge of even the lower slanted profile feathering out into the terrain where height may be a limitation. That implies that the official “dust-devil” trail concept may be in the interior of these objects rather than on its outer surface. Obviously, the official explanation is just too over simplified and entirely inadequate to fit this widespread and large amount of anomalous streaking evidence.
As for these giant kilometers long tubes reported on here that entire cities could fit into, I am fully satisfied that they at minimum represent the activities of life of some kind but we just can’t yet be sure as to what form of life. The most obvious speculation is that these are artificial construct hollow covers providing protective habitat and therefore may represent intelligent civilized life. But, remember that the tubes appear to be a part of a much greater lower profile cohesive mass. Therefore, we can’t yet be sure and it is still possible that some strange and different natural life form is the cause of this, just on a much more massive scale than we are used to seeing here on Earth. One thing is for sure, I hope that detractors will not be so lame as to try to put forth that these gigantic, smooth, dome like, semitransparent, kilometers long massive tube systems are a function of some sort of natural geology as such explanations would be further out on the fringe of reality far more than my speculation here extrapolated from viewable hard evidence.
Here again, the above E11-03408 closer 200% image doesn’t add very much useful information on the tubes. It does tend to indicate that spots very faintly and vaguely seen are also a factor in the big main tube system and not just in the lower profile mass. Here again, as in the previous Part I report, the dark band at the north or top edge of the main tube does not look like true shadow but more like a narrow band of image tampering including a separate very narrow band of opaque blur treatment color blended to the terrain (hard to see) at the top edge of the dark band itself and running parallel to it.
Now, if you will examine very very close by getting your eyes close to the screen, in the jumble of the assumed natural terrain north of the main tube in the above image, you may be able to see what appears to be very tiny densely packed vertically oriented rectangular structures, many with uniform color tiny tops, defying and not aligning with the normal zoom pixel distortion. You have to look extremely close to see this and it helps to have a lot of experience with looking at very tiny detail in the MOC imaging to.
Is this city building structure civilization evidence as it appears to possibly be but mostly destroyed and hidden by direct blur and light color over saturation tampering? I so, that gives one a better idea of the colossal scale involved here and an understanding of how the distant resolution reduction technique combined with blur treatment and light color over saturation technique is able to effectively hide smaller civilization evidence when seen in relation to these colossal size objects. The mind forces adjustments, makes assumptions, and just doesn’t realize how colossal the main objects really are and therefore doesn’t think to look closely enough at the tiniest detail along side it. First impression is that it is just natural geological terrain because that is what it is intended to look like and no need to examine it closer. Convenient for secrecy purposes isn’t it.
I’ve included the above E12-03187 wide-angle context image to give you an idea of where these two Part II evidence strips and the tubes in them are in the crater and in relation to each other. The E12-03186 strip outline on the left as well as the basic image itself is the official original and the E11-03408 strip outline to its right is my drawn addition following the original official location faithfully. According to the MSSS supplied statistics, the strip on the left is 2.98 km wide and the strip on the right 2.94 km wide. Remember that the tubes in both strips extend from one side edge to the other and off the strip with no signs of diminishment in size. Note that this is a total of 5.92 km or 3.68 miles in just the tube length we can see in the two strips.
However, you can also visually see that the space gap between the two strips is at the very minimum 3.0 km wide and probably more. When you add this minimum figure, you get 8.92 km or 5.54 miles of tube length. However, we can also reasonably assume that there is still plenty of tube system unseen off the left or west edge of the E12-03186 strip and off the right or east edge of the E11-03408 strip. Note that the dark area spread on the crater floor that is mostly the tube mass tends to confirm a much greater mass size beyond the limitations of the strip views and therefore probably substantial more tube length. So, we’re talking about a colossal tube system substantially longer than 5.5 miles and in fact many kilometers or miles longer than that.
Even though I’ve used them here for calculating and reporting purposes, I must admit to you that I do not trust the correctness of the official supplied statistics. I have seen too much evidence of tampering on such a fine level and small scale to convince me that this could have been done only with much larger closer in views. That implies that the MOC cameras are capable of much higher resolutions than are being publicly reported and that someone is artificially pulling back to lesser resolution distances for our benefit to hide small evidence and to hide the tampering that now shrinks down to appear a more natural part of the terrain. I have seen evidence of this in the older 1994 Moon Clementine data and the even older 1970s Mars Viking data as well. If that is being done, then the potential is there that the official MOC statistics are being arbitrarily manipulated as well.
So how does this impact the tubes system measurements that I’ve put forth here based on the official data? I suspect that the resolution here in these tube system strips is actually more distant than being reported. That would mean that these massive objects are even larger than the measurements outlined here. Of course this is all supposition but still I suspect it is fairly close to the mark.
ARE THESE SAND DUNES?
Following the decades old official lead of Mars being a frozen, dry as dust, and dead as can be planet, many and especially at official level will want to characterize these tube systems as sediment dunes piled up by the elements or some other such natural geology. Some will buy this simply because they are not used to trusting their own judgment and therefore default to the official safer sounding explanations of others on the faith that they are more experienced and familiar with this type of thing. That is anyone’s prerogative but I would be remiss if I didn’t at least say something about this sediment dune counterpoint concept.
First, piled sediment shaped by elements like wind or water, while the lower profile mass could be confused with this, would most definitely not naturally take a single rounded semi-translucent form or shape kilometers long such as demonstrated by the main colossal tube. A pile of sediment implies of course that the interior of the pile is constituted of the same collective relatively loose sediment as the outer surface layers. So, we are talking about this much monstrous dense mass standing elevated in a great uniformly rounded height over most skyscrapers we are familiar with here on Earth and, if it was hollow, you could fly a number of 747s abreast down its inside length and never come close to the interior sides and it being able to support itself in a rounded elevated unsupported form. Can you imagine the bursting and collapse forces that must lurk inside such a dense huge elevated height rounded form? Not even a thermal heat fused exterior skin surface could contain such forces. Need I say more!
It must also be remembered to that these highly anomalous objects are down in impact crater pits below open terrain level. While it might be possible for this crater pit to catch, hold and collect wind blown sediment blowing across the general surface of Mars, such sediment would settle all over the interior of the crater and not be confined in such limited well and sharply defined shape. To get in such well defined shapes would require tremendous forces operating within the crater itself. Needless to say it is difficult to envision how for example wind could get down in this pit location in sufficient force to move and mold such massive tonnage into such well defined shapes and also replicated in other different location sites to. As for water turbulence, the force required would leave general erosion evidence and I see no evidence of mild forms of this either inside the crater pit or outside in the open terrain, must less the kind of huge water turbulence force it would take to move and mold such massive tonnage.
Next, it must also be remembered that these tube shapes are very self contained and isolated from and do not appear to mix with the immediate terrain they sit in. This is not a characteristic of element formed loose sediment piles. Further, in the Part I report, we were fortunate to have a number of different strips of the same tube system down its length. Much is missing but much can also be viewed to. Some of the strongest pieces of observational evidence from this is how sharply defined the tubes and their associated mass are from their immediate surroundings just as here at this site. Also, in the previous Part I report, to the left or west in the strip views, the tubes completely dominate and have used up all of the associated lower profile mass in their formation process while more the right or east the views demonstrate a lack of formation of fully blown tubes and predictably increasingly more lower profile unused mass. This clearly demonstrates a dynamic changing environment within the overall mass and that the total mass is cohesive and almost certainly pliable and malleable in addition to being tough enough to exist in such a upright unsupported massively huge fully blown tube form. Obviously, none of this is characteristic of loose sediment piles.
Such evidence clearly points to at least the dynamic and changing fully formed tubes as being constructs of some kind out of this cohesive mass rather than natural geological sediment collection processes of any kind at work here. To exist in such a massive elevated rounded unsupported form, the most obvious explanation is that they are lighter and less massive because they are hollow and their dome like semi-translucent quality and rounded dome like shape and very glassy smooth outer surface clearly supports such a conclusion. This does not take rocket science mentality, only common sense.
As I stated in the previous Part I report, in my opinion, this is all about water, its preservation, and the capitalization on it by life of some kind including perhaps more than one life form and at different stages. The most obvious conclusion is that the fully blown tubes are artificial constructs of some higher intelligent life form based on a super elongated dome principle forming a protective shielded habitat of some kind. Such technology is in evidence on Mars as I have reported on in previous reports. Further, I suspect that is what we are looking at here.
However, it is still possible that this is the creation of a somewhat less complex life form, possibly even originally aquatic or semi-aquatic, that has adapted over great time to living under and on the generally arid surface of Mars by the manipulation and preservation of upwelling water turned into ice masses, including further modifying them to develop protective tough outer layers and eventually inflating them into the giant tubes. Remember that certain jellyfish (a collective cooperative life form) in our Earth oceans has developed membrane inflation techniques to provide themselves with the ability to travel via winds, water currents, and their own propulsion. Also, these are also characterized by all living within a gelatinous form that could also be a alternative explanation for this giant tough mass as a collective organism. The point is that some such basic principles are known to us and can’t be ruled out without more and better information that the MOC visuals do not supply, at least not at the resolutions that have been released to us.
Even so, I still doubt this latter scenario because I’m reminded of that image tampering at official level (in my opinion) with that terrain bordering north on the main tube in the above #4 image and what cautions it requires of us. One ignores and overlooks the impact of image tampering and its ramifications at ones peril when it comes to making projections about what is or is not on Mars. Remember, image tampering is itself evidence to.
THE PHILOSOPHY OF WHO IS RESPONSIBLE
Since this particular report will be getting some limited media exposure and reaching a few more in the public, I want to share some thoughts with you here about the philosophy of responsibility that will characterize most of my investigative work. It’s easy to give into emotions and start looking for someone to blame over this secrecy business but a little harder to take a more rational and constructive approach that keeps one’s eye on the ball.
All this information gives us an idea of the scale involved here in these strip scenes of these tubes. Further, it gives us an insight into of how really distant resolution wise this imaging truly is at 389.97 km or 242 miles from camera to target according to MSSS statistics. These technicals in turn give us insight into the fact that the terrain around these tubes and the mass they are a part of is far too tiny and obscured by tampering in visual size detail to be able to trust and assume that what you see there is the natural geology it appears on the surface to be. Yet, even knowing this, it is still very difficult not to do this very thing. This particular aspect of human behavior offers us a little insight into one of the many methods of how even paid professional scientists perceptions of this science data are so easily manipulated by capitalizing on known human habitual patterns of thinking and forming basic assumptions.
Further, if this slight of hand business is ever caught onto by enough of the public and scientists and begins to want to unravel on the secrecy types, their built in defense will of course be that we can’t be held responsible for the natural and universal interpretive idiosyncrasies of human behavior. Further, remember that we to are subject to the same perception problems and are no different than you in that regard. Who is to say differently? In other words, it’s a winning situation from different angles for the secrecy types with its built-in escape and denial of responsibility potential. It’s easy to become angry at this kind of slipping and sliding manipulation and start thinking about offender head hunting.
However, in the end and in the spirit of keeping one’s eye on the ball, the only real thing that is important is that we recognize and then shrug off this manipulation we’ve allowed to be perpetuated on us and get on with the business of waking up to the real world and realizing what is really on Mars and what that in turn means to our world, our lives, and the lives of those that come after us. Which is more important, getting on with the business of meeting the new age that is already upon us and our destiny in this regard or getting mired down in blaming someone for being able to successfully con us for so long? Certainly fault is with those perpetuating the con but then it is also just as much with us for not being more alert and vigilant in what we accept from our acknowledged leadership. Remember the old saying, when the cat isn’t home the mice will play or something like that.
What has happened to us has happened with our acquiesce and help. It happened because, by our lack of attention to these issues, we provided the fertile vacuum that others filled because we didn’t want to deal with it as a people. The bottom line is that as a people we’ve got to stop floating and wake up to the whole of this reality, not just the part of blaming others as that is always easier and represents escaping from the real issue at hand. When it comes time to fix the one, then our own flaws that others capitalized on must also be fixed at the same time. When we are ready to do the one, then we we must also be big enough and prepared to do the other.
http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/e07_e12/images/E12/E1203186.html: This link takes you to the official MGS MOC E12-03186 raw science data image strip that is the source of my first and second images in this report. The companion E12-03187 wide-angle context strip is also found there from which my fifth image in this report was sourced.
http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/e07_e12/images/E11/E1103408.html: This link takes you to the official MGS MOC E11-03408 raw science data image strip that is the source of my third and fourth images in this report.
Note that the tube system anomalies are in dark tinted areas of the strips and graphics software will be required to lighten and clarify to achieve the best results matching mine here. All views have the same correct orientations and are useable but if your goal is to obtain the best views possible similar to what you see presented here, you will still need to download the higher detail GIF strips and work them with graphics software to clarify.