My Facebook friend Paul McNamara in Great Britain was kind enough to share with me some enlargements of the following image from NASA's Mars Rover taken in the McMurdo region, and I thought these were just too good to pass up, and wanted to share them here, if you have not already seen some of them on Mr. Hoagland's site or on the sites of others tracking the strange pictuures coming back from our strange celestial neighbor. So I'd like to take a couple of days in these coming blogs to share these with you, because I think you will find them as intriguing as I and others have found them. First, here's a link to NASA's original image, which you will, if you're like me, find it in itself endlessly intriguing upon close analysis:

NASA Mars Rover McMurdo Image

I am deeply grateful to Mr. McNamara for allowing me to post his image enlargements here, and over the next couple of days.


Rock or Object at Mars McMurdo?


Rock? Or Machined?

What we have here are, in my opinion, three ambiguities. I'd like to believe there is a simple geological explanation, a process that might account for the suggestively artificial looking nature of these things, whatever they are. But that's the problem: a single geological process to explain three very distinct objects. But by the same token, what if they are artificial? We'll address that question, after a look at more images in the next couple of days.

Posted in

Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".


  1. marcos anthony toledo on December 9, 2011 at 12:49 pm

    I have seen Mars photos showing what seems to be a robot head that llooks like CP3PO from Star Wars . But like the face on Mars that NASA denies exist and the real color of Mars sky and soil I would not dismiss these photo out of hand. I just what more confrimation of these photos.

  2. Юрий on December 7, 2011 at 10:43 am

    НАСА столько уже врало, что верить им нельзя. Нужна экспертиза снимков и только после этого можно что-то обсуждать.

    • Don B on December 7, 2011 at 11:55 am

      I agree NASA is not to be trusted, but there is a certain artificial look to the photos.


  3. Paul McNamara on December 7, 2011 at 2:45 am

    There is something highly unusual at Mars. I do not accept the same old argument about the mind “seeing faces in trees” it is a weak argument. Since I have been finding these images I have questioned them myself. I look everyday on this planet for patterns that resemble artificial objects. When I see one, it is 100% of the time ….artificial….. I look on beaches, in forests, baron terrains, I never see these “faces in a tree”.

    Yes, I receive emails from friends and professionals with wonderful images of hexagons in nature, to prove nature does design right angles and such, however, these are RARE designs. I accept this is Mars, but, nearly every image I observe I find a right angle or a form that looks artificial. This is NOT a rare event on Mars, it is in every PAN shot we observe, which, in essence, makes it more than likely, these objects are artificial.

    Yes, proof is needed to validate this hypothesis, but the whole subject is tainted. If we accept these are artificial in origin, then NASA are involved in a huge cover-up. You then have to accept that proving the hypothesis would be like trying to construct a chemistry set whilst wearing oven gloves.

  4. Jon Norris on December 6, 2011 at 10:26 pm

    Having followed Hoagland’s work for some time, and Moon/space anomalies a lot longer than that, I have to say that WEX does have a point – these images are just hints of the wonders that exist on other planets. If even one of the hundreds of anomalous images are indeed artificial, then the impact of that is substantial.

    I have seen dozens of impressive images on the sites mentioned, as well as in the videos Hoagland made. How about a series of identical pairs of craters on the Moon, evenly spaced and aligned along parallels? I’d like to see a “natural” explanation for that one, even excluding the visible patterned terraces in them.

    Then there is the intricate, advanced math and physics encoded into the ruins at Cydonia. No critic has ever been able to produce anything even remotely similar from any other “natural” geological area.

    Given the number of eyewitness reports of NASA and the military doctoring/destroying images, it does not take much to accept that here, too, the government is lying to us. (Is there any arena where they DON”T lie to us? – It is beginning to seem like they think that is their job….)

  5. romanmel on December 6, 2011 at 8:32 pm

    I agree with WEX on this one. I have followed Skipper’s research for years on:

    No one does a better job of carefully representing true NASA images, actually notating what, when and where the image was taken and giving the NASA photo number.

    Quite honestly, I find these images to be unclear and obviously miscolored.. If you want to see a truely amazing group of images and detailed analysis check this out:

  6. WEX on December 6, 2011 at 7:20 pm

    Think of these as the staging for the coming “Fake Alien Invasion”: Just like the photo of the martian miniature figure statue released a couple of years back photo tagged “Bigfoot on Mars” that was supposed to be just a “rock formation” yet none of the terrain remotely looked like this.
    William Milton Cooper and Werner Von Braun called it, right before their death. HG Wells was a part of it– John Dewey– Ronald Reagan –all members of the same “Fraternity” pulling one over on you: “What if.. we all were UNIFIED by a common threat from another world.”–A long planned ruse for embracing One World Totalitarian Socialism.
    These are extremely poor representations of martian debris. I suggest if you want fully embrace life on another planet, go to:
    This site shows actual raw NASA photos in 300 mile strips of martian terrain showing dead cities, glass tubes, giant statues, lakes, forests, space craft –all from the orbital surveyer.
    BTW, Disney/ Pixar is releasing in March, 2012 (Mars’ month) a mega-blockbuster movie adaption of my personal favorite SCIFI epic series, Edgar Rice Burroughs’ JOHN CARTER (of Mars)–Another tip the Invasion is going to be in the sheeple consciousness first!

    • romanmel on December 7, 2011 at 4:22 am

      I agree with WEX on this one. I have followed Skipper’s research for years on:

      No one does a better job of carefully representing true NASA images, actually notating what, when and where the image was taken and giving the NASA photo number.

      Quite honestly, I find these images to be unclear and obviously miscolored.. If you want to see a truely amazing group of images and detailed analysis check this out:

  7. Donny on December 6, 2011 at 6:57 pm

    it looks like a car that went head first into a ditch. But what about those 2 identicle looking rocks at 10 o’clock and 2 o’clock??

  8. Johnycomelately on December 6, 2011 at 6:35 pm

    If NASA was run by the Nazis why would any release be credible?

    Seems like controlled release.

  9. joseph on December 6, 2011 at 6:33 pm

    The first image does appear to have left a trail preceding it, aka it crashed. Any way to get a slightly “zoomed out” version to confirm this? And of course there is the possibility that “the elite” are playing with us…

  10. bdw on December 6, 2011 at 6:10 pm

    I would suggest caution reading too much into seemingly man (alien?)-made objects on Mars.

    I used to get a magazine that focused on weirdness in general (Fortean Times), and they used to have pics of all sorts of things like human faces appearing in trees, bushes, rocks, mountains, clouds (I’m just listing anything I can think of: maybe they didn’t have any with clouds, can’t remember).

    Unless some object on another planet is ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, UNDENIABLY “of intellilgent origin,” it really cannot be PROOF of anything. I’m not saying I know one way or the other, just pointing out that nature does on a fairly regular basis produce all sorts of strange looking things. Vague shots of things that could be anything at all will not make or break any argument.

    If you read up on the electric universe ( folks have to say about Mars, you’ll realize that there is good reason for mars to have odd looking stuff laying around: electrical arcs that are large enough to create canyons three times larger than the Grand Canyon.

    One thing that Farrell has led me to accept as a possiblility is that at least some of the electrical activity that the electric universe folks see all over the solar system may actually have been caused by intelligent weapons (very, very big weapons, of course). There is probably no way to know for now.

    Again, not saying I KNOW that the above (or any other) Mars objects are natural: perhaps they are intelligently-designed and manufacured.Just saying we need to keep our feet in the Newtonian world of science (actual proving of what is claimed) at least a little bit or you will end up in the “dark ages of physics” (dark energy, dark matter, black holes) (where no claim requires any justification whatsoever) where I don’t think anyone here wants to end up.

  11. LSM on December 6, 2011 at 5:22 pm

    I apologize profusely for being off-topic here but if one has not yet done so and has the time and interest, please check out the recent interview with Douglas Dietrich posted on Charles Frith’s website

    Dietrich’s info corroborates very much with Dr. Farrell’s research in regard to the identities of the occupants of the Roswell crash-

    the interview is very long (1 hr. 40 min.) but absolutely fascinating-

    also for more info about a lot of unknown “shit”:

    well, assuming Dietrich has credibility- you decide-

    Larry in Germany

  12. Ken Lemon on December 6, 2011 at 2:26 pm

    The first photo looks like some sort of tank that is climbing out of its own track.

    Also look at the “shadow” under the front of the object, which seems to suggest that the object is at an incline.

    The track or what looks like a indentation made by the object seems to indicate that the object is, or was, mobile.

  13. HAL838 on December 6, 2011 at 6:04 am

    I don’t follow the Mars Enigmas much.
    I have all I can do to keep up with
    ‘problem solving’ here on Earth.

    [Then again information does come to me]

    Dr Farrell adresses this somewhat in his
    “Giza Death Star” trilogy
    the possible demise of a ‘missing’ planet.

    I tend to agree somewhat, with his
    theory / premise / thesis (?)
    I have also recently mentioned how
    (comparably easy) this can be done—
    that is
    blowing up a planet !

    At any rate, Joseph, you now have multiple
    listings in
    under “HAL838”

    I do get around and now we are linked
    together. Smile 🙂
    It’s advertisment for your site.

  14. Richard on December 6, 2011 at 5:37 am

    Mr Farrell, I’m a long-time lurker and first-time commenter. A huge fan of all your books…

    Anyways, aren’t you concerned about how bat-shit crazy Hoagland is sounding these days? He’s ruining his reputation with even his most ardent followers, with his ridiculous predictions and theories that never come to fruition. I personally believe he meant well before but has either been co-opted or threatened into simply discrediting himself through lunacy.

    Just my two cents. These pictures are incredible though, as are most of the Mars Anomaly Research photos I’ve seen.

Help the Community Grow

Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.

Upcoming Events