By Mark Frauenfelder at 9:15 am Wed, Jan 23, 2008
Could it be related to our gentle friend of Earth's forests? (right)
Except that Marsquatch is only about 12 inches high.
How cool would it be if Mars was inhabited by teeny tiny martians afterall? Would that finally be impetus enough to get us there?
…Oh God/Yahweh/Roddenberry! Now Richard Hoaxland has another imaging artifact to abuse and foist as “proof” of life on Mars!
haha. Om beat me to it. poor Richard Hoagland, probably messed himself in excitement when he saw that.
Yes, they’re related. They’re both laughable crap.
You said Marsquatch.
It looks like a Tusken Raider. Are you sure this isn’t Tatooine?
Yes. Yes I did say Marsquatch and all y’all are my witnesses that I came up with that name first!! Any copyright lawyers up in here? Can I call dibs on that moniker?
well, they know where the rover was, they can send the rover back there… and if it’s a rock, it’ll still be there…
Is news this slow today? It is obviously the vertical edge of a rock outcropping that has no sand on it.
what I find interesting about things like this is not that there may be tiny sasquatch on mars, but that when we see this blurry collection of vague shadows, we can’t see anything EXCEPT a tiny sasquatch! Same with the giant angry face elsewhere on mars. I think it says a lot about the way our brains are programmed to find patterns, and create meaning out of what we see. I’m sure that if the angle of the photo were just a little different we would just see an uninteresting collection of rocks.
Well, it’s not like we haven’t been warned before.
If a marsquatch is from Mars then clearly a sasquatch would be from Saskatchewan, which it ain’t, so your etymology is flawed.
Also, if you look a bit to the right of the outcrop in the original photo (the outcrop is on the extreme left about 1/3 of the way from the bottom) you’ll see what is obviously a half-brick. We can therefore expect that nearby we’ll find a sock, and a set of empty sandals with a line of footprints running away from them…
Well, of course sasquatch are from Saskatchewan. They just did what everyone from Saskatchewan does. Move somewhere else :)
the astounding thing is how many people instantly flashed on the sasquatch image of decades ago the moment they saw the Martian photograph.
In a few more decades time, will the first surface probe images from Titan, say, have everyone refer to the “marsquatch”?
What were the six armed Barsoomians called again?
How do we know that’s not actually an image of the Virgin Mary?
Is it too soon for me to begin thinking I have coined a new internet meme? “Marsquatch”
Who do I have to see about my royalty checks?!
A simple Google search reveals the word “marsquatch” goes back to at the very least 2005:
Honestly, you people should be fired from the internet.
Finally some solid, irrefutable evidence that Sasquatch is real.
RE: #16 Takuan: We already have the first surface probe images from Titan.
As for Mars Yeti, someone on the BadAstronomy discussion of this figured he’s about three inches tall.
Looks like the Little Mermaid with a beard. Proof that there was once water flowing.
It took me a while to find that miniature thing on the high resolution picture.
But on the same note:
I spy a dinosaur, a frog, a lake
and an old Pepsi can.
What else can you find?
Anyone fooled by this shadowplay would be wise to look up earlier instances of Martian rocks hallucinated into anthropomorphic shapes.
I saw Waldo.
A more detailed view here:
(from The Snow Creature – 1954 – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Snow_Creature )
Never mind the homunculus, I find the shallow, well-defined trenches to the right more intriguing. Just on the off-chance they’re not dune buggy tracks, anybody know what kind of geological or climactic conditions could’ve created them?
I, for one, welcome our new Bigfoot overlords. I’d like to remind them as a trusted blogger, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves.
One of the six-legged creatures on Barsoom is the apt. http://www.erblist.com/abg/plantsanimals.html
ah, of course, thank you
the russian space-roaches have escaped! run, martians! run!
I am not quite understanding why people are so fixated on the idea that the human-like figure in this image represents “Big Foot”…Could it be that someone or a group of individuals are directing our attention towards an age old myth and away from the truth? From looking at the image and others I have found over the internet, this image does not appear to be doctored. Also, this image does not appear to me to be consistent with natural rock formations….In my humble opinion, this image seems to be a statue of some sort……Of course what I am about to state is pure speculation, but maybe this could have been some type of holy ground where people came to worship a particular diety or higher power…..Many of us would like to believe that it is impossible for life to exist on other planets, which I think is quite unreasonable to say the least….It has been proven that the planet Mars at some point in time, did in fact have rivers , lakes and or seas, similar to the ones seen here on earth.
Where there is water there is life!
Man’s ego has been and will always be detrimental to his evolution, because he believes himself to be above that which sustains him…..
Submit a tip
The rules you agree to by using this website.
Who will be eaten first?
Jason Weisberger, Publisher
Ken Snider, Sysadmin