PDA

View Full Version : Mars Anomaly Research - The Book



Eric Vaxxine
2010-Oct-26, 11:46 PM
Has anyone read Mr Skippers book?

John Jaksich
2010-Oct-27, 12:01 AM
No----but I googled and found his web site and the site is, (to me), questionable in accuracy---I am not sure what Mr. Skipper is up to?

Van Rijn
2010-Oct-27, 12:11 AM
No----but I googled and found his web site and the site is, (to me), questionable in accuracy---


That's a nice way to put it. Claims on his website have been discussed on BAUT before. He makes many wild claims that have little connection with evidence. Unless the book is very different from his website I doubt I'd have much interest in reading it.

Eric Vaxxine
2010-Oct-27, 01:22 AM
Since he only ever comments on interpretation of officially
released images, I am keen to hear if his book is as steadfast
as his online work.

Swift
2010-Oct-27, 01:53 AM
No foul Eric Vaxxine (and I realize you are not advocating), but I think this thread is best in the CT forum, as that is where we've discussed Mr. Skipper's ideas previously. However, if you think that's wrong, please Report this post and we'll consider moving it again.

John Jaksich
2010-Oct-27, 01:56 AM
The website seems as if it were a promotional site for his book

Here is a link:

Mars Anomaly Evidence(?) (http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2008/154/nevada-mystery-symbols.htm)

Bobbar
2010-Oct-27, 12:32 PM
The website seems as if it were a promotional site for his book

Here is a link:

Mars Anomaly Evidence(?) (http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2008/154/nevada-mystery-symbols.htm)

Huh... And now bombing targets are 'ancient hard to crack Earth language' and bombing craters are now bushes.

I've browsed the site a few times, it always gives me a headache. It seems Mr Skipper is incapable of looking at things objectively. Absolutely every object or artifact that is unknown to him is a conspiracy, and must be attacked with wild assumptions.

I have no interest in the book, whatsoever.

JayUtah
2010-Oct-27, 05:30 PM
Has anyone read Mr Skippers book?

No, but I am very familiar with Skipper's claims made elsewhere. He demonstrates absolutely no expertise or skill and image interpretation or analysis, and has absolutely no credibility within the relevant scientific community. It is pareidolia dressed up with a bit of pseudoscience and sold to the gullible.

djellison
2010-Oct-27, 06:15 PM
This is the guy who posted a lenghty series of articles about circular features at Eagle Crater being clear signs of life..... when they were very very very obviously airbag bouncemarks? The guy who thinks a sand-dune in the side of a crater is 'tampering' and wrote, again, at length, on the artifacts at Meridiani and Gusev - which were infact the Backshell, Heatsheild and parachute's of Spirit and Opportunity?. The guy who thinks internal camera reflections are puffs of moisture? The guy who sees a rock on one day, that same rock the following day with three dark circles on it and unleashes an accusation of conspiracy rather than finding what the rover did ( do three RAT brushings on it ). The guy who is convinced that a project with barley enough money to keep going, is infact operating a massive coverup campaign of editing and hiding details in 250,000+ images for more than 6 years?

And, FWIW, my attempts to educate the guy fell on exceptionally deaf ears.


As books go - it might be useful to prop up a particularly wobbly table.

Van Rijn
2010-Oct-29, 06:41 AM
The website seems as if it were a promotional site for his book

Here is a link:

Mars Anomaly Evidence(?) (http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2008/154/nevada-mystery-symbols.htm)

That page is hilarious. Now I'm imagining someone going to some desert spot and marking it with a couple of "words" in large Klingon letters with high contrast material just to see if anyone would notice. Not that that's necessary here with this master of pareidolia.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Oct-29, 10:52 AM
What is the picture of a tent camp doing on that page? It doesn't look like it has anything to do with the text.

John Jaksich
2010-Oct-29, 12:11 PM
What is the picture of a tent camp doing on that page? It doesn't look like it has anything to do with the text.

The website "seems" to have been updated---I believe---I viewed it for a second time this morning---as I said I am unsure what individual is up to---the website looks very "slick" and appears to change with his want or needs for attention(?)

I posted "that" link since it seemed convenient at the moment ---I am not trying to muddy the issue anymore that it needs to be:confused:

Paul Beardsley
2010-Oct-29, 01:39 PM
Does anyone know if the book is self-published? If so, it seems he can't afford a proof-reader. In the linked page I found:

"bare with me" instead of "bear with me".
A question mark at the end of a reported question.
"no where" instead of "nowhere"; the rest of the sentence isn't too hot either.
"Over all" instead of "overall".
So far I've counted two instances of "well north of <location>", which is acceptable informal English but not exactly scholarly.
Amusingly, a geographical feature is "known as huge Lake Lahontan".

Elsewhere, the writing is clumsy. I rather liked, "This could negatively impact this area a bit with higher surface water conditions..." Also, "The most desolate part of this area where little living thing grows is the location of this evidence." We need more information about this "little living thing" and how it manages to grow in such a desolate area!

"As you can see in the above first image, the location of the symbols looks more like the gray moonscape (humm!) we've all seen than any place on Earth." Is it just me or does that "humm!" indicate a hunger for conspiracies? It doesn't matter what the conspiracy is, it doesn't matter if it has been conclusively discredited, and it doesn't even matter if the conspiracy version of events is a lot less interesting than the reality. The conspiracy is still favoured by some simply because it is a conspiracy.

And I've lost interest in reading further.

John Jaksich
2010-Oct-29, 03:21 PM
Does anyone know if the book is self-published? If so, it seems he can't afford a proof-reader. In the linked page I found:

"bare with me" instead of "bear with me".
A question mark at the end of a reported question.
"no where" instead of "nowhere"; the rest of the sentence isn't too hot either.
"Over all" instead of "overall".
So far I've counted two instances of "well north of <location>", which is acceptable informal English but not exactly scholarly.
Amusingly, a geographical feature is "known as huge Lake Lahontan".

Elsewhere, the writing is clumsy. I rather liked, "This could negatively impact this area a bit with higher surface water conditions..." Also, "The most desolate part of this area where little living thing grows is the location of this evidence." We need more information about this "little living thing" and how it manages to grow in such a desolate area!

"As you can see in the above first image, the location of the symbols looks more like the gray moonscape (humm!) we've all seen than any place on Earth." Is it just me or does that "humm!" indicate a hunger for conspiracies? It doesn't matter what the conspiracy is, it doesn't matter if it has been conclusively discredited, and it doesn't even matter if the conspiracy version of events is a lot less interesting than the reality. The conspiracy is still favoured by some simply because it is a conspiracy.

And I've lost interest in reading further.


Google lists the publisher as: Planetary Publishing

Here is the image of the book---The ISBN is on the back of the book cover--I also tried to find the book in Amazon and to no avail.

Bobbar
2010-Oct-29, 03:37 PM
Yeecccch!

Selenite
2010-Oct-30, 01:08 AM
I must confess I enjoyed this oxymoron only a CT could think up....


....also well north of the famous Area 51 super secret facility...

But the thing that floors me most is that this is a spot here on earth, not the Moon or Mars. He has no problems asking for volunteers to interpret his mystery Mayan jpegs but can't be bothered to make the trip to check these anomalies out from a ground level view or to find a local volunteer to look? Pseudo-science research must consist of staying cocooned in front of your nice safe computer, mincing over digital photos and files and never dealing with the real world and it's mundane realities. It reminds of the Niburu crowd who can never be bothered to lift a pair of binoculars to their eyes or even venture outdoors on a clear night.


Here's another question. If this represents some kind of secret covert operation, as I suspect it does, why would these symbols be appearing on Google Earth so readily accessible all over the world? Surely this would have at the very minimum been hidden by image tampering applications. Surely it is obvious that not everyone who browses Google Earth has a closed mind and would quickly identify this as anomalous and particularly since it is relatively near Area 51 by air transport. I do see image obfuscation on Google Earth, so it does exist and why not here covering over such anomalous and highly suggestive evidence?

Does someone want this to be found to fulfill .....what? Or, is this a sign of over confidence and/or incompetence on the part of the secrecy types thinking that hiding something in plain sight is the way to go? On the surface it just doesn't make much sense to a normal thinking person. However, I suspect it makes plenty of sense to those who normally think in convert circuitous ways.

Wow. Talk about having your cake and eating it too. It's sooo secret they hid it in plain sight. The mind boggles.

Graybeard6
2010-Oct-30, 05:21 AM
His grabs from Google Earth piqued my curiosity, so I checked them for myself. As a WAG, I would say that they're associated with Fallon Naval Air Station; it's the Navy's Strike Fighter/ Air Combat center. Slightly to the east of the "artifacts" are two large, graded circles with a white structure in the center. They look like targets or instrumentation for bombing. I know that part of Nevada is heavily instrumented for air combat training.
In 1998 SWMBO and I made a lap of the USA in our motor home. Our Nevada route was US 95 through Winnemuca, Mina (Where people keep airplanes in their carports and take off on the street.) and Las Vegas.
I knew about Fallon, because Jr. is a Naval Aviator, and spent time there. Wife was amazed at all the military stuff out in the desert, as I pointed out things you could see from the highway. If anyone lives in that area, it's not that far from the highway, and a road leads right up to them.
OTOH, he'd probably just accuse us of being misinfo agents.

Paul Beardsley
2010-Oct-30, 10:13 AM
I didn't see that typo before: "However, I suspect it makes plenty of sense to those who normally think in convert circuitous ways."

It occurs to me (again) that there is absolutely no point in trying to reason with entrenched CT types, even hypothetically. If The Government confessed that they were keeping alien technology in a shed - or hangar, as it were - the CT types would say, "Ah, they admit to a small thing in order to draw attention away from a bigger secret..."

Selenite
2010-Oct-30, 05:22 PM
he'd probably just accuse us of being misinfo agents.

He's already covered himself on that regard somewhat with this rather leading sentence. :)


Maybe we'll also see if anyone wants to hit us with a little spin control as to what is going on here and why there is no reason to be suspicious.

But then this is the same guy who tried to pass off the Opportunity Rover backshell and parachute in a NASA image as a possible Mars anomaly and decried the official explanation as imposing "dismissal psychology." He'd probably do the same thing to anyone who captured decent ground level images showing a more mundane explanation.

Having worked with Photoshop and other editing software I'm aware they are excellent resources, but I always cringe that there are people who think that they some sort of magnifying device akin to Rick Deckard's Esper device in Blade Runner. Like the internet it's a powerful tool, but easy to misuse.

Graybeard6
2010-Oct-31, 04:45 AM
I asked GB, Jr. about NAS Fallon and described the screen shots that "prove" an ET connection. He says that such structures are scattered all over the range, which is very large. Of course, a Navy Commander is not a trustworthy source.

Eric Vaxxine
2010-Nov-01, 12:22 AM
OK, so no one here owns his book and that
answers and ends this thread, but.....

I want to explore this individual further, in relation
to ourselves.
Please make valuable comments, offer insight and open yourselves up
with personal ideas and beliefs in the new thread following this one
in 'Life In Space' called.....

Mars? I think it is......

Bobbar
2010-Nov-01, 01:08 PM
His grabs from Google Earth piqued my curiosity, so I checked them for myself. As a WAG, I would say that they're associated with Fallon Naval Air Station; it's the Navy's Strike Fighter/ Air Combat center. Slightly to the east of the "artifacts" are two large, graded circles with a white structure in the center. They look like targets or instrumentation for bombing. I know that part of Nevada is heavily instrumented for air combat training.


Yup, Bravo 20 - Lone Rock range.

The entire area is littered with bombing craters and other targets. Why Skipper would disregard the obvious explanation and ascribe the 'symbols' to something mysterious or even malicious is -- well -- just what he does best.

captain swoop
2010-Nov-01, 02:22 PM
In the Forests of Northumberland you can see on Google Maps an entire Russian Air Base with Migs ready to fly. It is surrounded in the forests by various Russian Armour, Scud Launchers, SAM and Radar Sites. IF you have the right gear you can 'hear' the Russian Radar search sets.
Is this some secret invasion of Northern England?

http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafspadeadam/