View Full Version : About M-Albion-3D's Mars image analysis

Bill Ryan
7th June 2016, 15:42
Dear All:

We’re taking the rather unusual step of explaining in a little more detail than normal why we’ve made the decision to retire the account of M-Albion-3D. (Malcolm, from here on out.)

Many members will be aware that he started a number of threads about his image analysis of NASA photographs of Mars, all of which are found in this Ancient Aliens (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/forumdisplay.php?161-Ancient-Aliens) section.

The bottom line is this:

We respect Malcolm’s clear sincerity and good nature.
We cannot support his conclusions and analysis of his images. The mods team unanimously believes

His own image analysis is to a large degree (or maybe completely) a case of pareidolia (seeing apparently meaningful patterns and shapes in objects which aren't really there); and at the same time,
There really are anomalous, intelligently-created artifacts on Mars, including some very large ones in the Cydonia region and possibly elsewhere.

The issue is also weighted because Malcolm’s posts and threads have to a significant degree been on this one topic, which is his personal specialty and passion. To promote his research is the reason he joined the forum. That’s no hanging offense. :) But if the research is flawed, then it becomes a question of what the forum finds itself supporting.

More background on this can be found here.

An amendment to the new members' Welcome Message - please read (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?90689-An-amendment-to-the-new-members-Welcome-Message-please-read)

This is all important stuff (not the Mars images, which is just one particular local instance, but what this all represents); and which is why we’re posting this issue as a discussion topic in itself. Avalon is (among much else) a kind of university, in the broadest sense, and we have entrance and maintenance standards.

We have to. Avalon just is not the kind of place where anything goes. That very policy defines the quality (and the high quality members) that we all benefit from, and learn so much from, here.

We wish Malcolm well, sincerely. He’s a good man, and a pleasant one, too. He’d be a good neighbor to any of us. But I and we are absolutely certain his theses are flawed, and the incorrect information, persistently presented, is, quite inadvertently and with no ill-intention whatsoever, detrimental to the community and to what we all stand for.

7th June 2016, 15:54
Tough call but the right one at the end of the day I believe. Thanks for the explanation.

Star Mariner
7th June 2016, 16:00

Several times I felt like posting a response to some of M-Albion's Mars image claims, along the lines of seeing what you imagine to see in random noise, ie pareidolia et al, but stopped myself because it wouldn't have added anything except to spark a quarrel more than likely. I thank Bill and the Moderators for making this decision, because I do think it is the right one, and as always for doing it in such a fair and cordial manner.

7th June 2016, 17:51
I enjoyed M-Albion-3Ds passion about Mars. I also liked the huge quantities of images. Other than the beautiful passion I didn't pay much attention to the conclusions because I can't buy into certainty. There are just more questions from good evidence than answers. However the failure is mine. Why didn't I challenge the certainty? Because I don't like causing a fuss and I was enjoying the passion. It's not an excuse it's confession. This is the first time I've thought about the downside of being a peacemaker.

Much love M-Albion-3D hope to meet you again another time, another place, another lifetime ;)

8th June 2016, 04:32
Bummer Mal- you have some mad skills with image analysis. I never viewed them with 3-D specs, so I was short on the full effect of your image analysis. Having said that, after watching Dr. J Brandenburg's " Death on Mars" lecture, and viewing the JPL images Brandenburg presented of anomalous structures on Mars in the Cydonia region. I was looking to correlate the various images and expand my awareness of what is the Mars phenomenon. I thought the JPL images with Brandenburg's work on them and Mal's work that we were on to something. I didn't delve into it deeper because well, there is sooo much stuff on the plate and I was looking to read posts and other member's informed inputs . Retired for flawed theses. :facepalm::confused: How does it correlate? If at all, Mal's work with what Brandenburg theorizes are anomalous structures even ancient cities on Mars?

8th June 2016, 06:55

Mal may have been a tad myopic, but big deal, and he would certainly not be the only one. I see his threads as evidence of his enthusiasm and passion for his subject, and feel that the forum benefited from his presence. If other members were miffed by his work, it would have shown by a lack of replies. This, I believe, was not the case. In time, he may well have joined in the wider discussion.

Either way, all the best Mal!

8th June 2016, 07:53
Speaking of NASA photoshop magic ..

http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll256/PaldenLhamo/zoltan_levay_hubble_final_05-m16-final_zpselonsdvh.jpg (http://s290.photobucket.com/user/PaldenLhamo/media/zoltan_levay_hubble_final_05-m16-final_zpselonsdvh.jpg.html)


Hubble’s photo editor, Zoltan Levay, explains how he captures the invisible colors of the cosmos.

Zoltan Levay is eager to clear up a misconception about his job. Yes, he edits photos from the Hubble Space Telescope, but his work is not about subjective aesthetics. He’s an astronomer, and he’s not editing the images so much as enhancing them to reflect what’s really going on in distant galaxies. Thing is, galaxies can look awfully dim by the time their light makes it to Earth. Our eyes, which are wonderfully attuned to sunlight, are just plain “crappy,” Levay says, at seeing space, even in photographic form. So to make a vivid image of what’s actually going on in space, he has to make the invisible, visible. How? Here he describes his editing process for the “Pillars of Creation,” NASA’s iconic photograph of three gaseous plumes, 50 trillion kilometers in height, rising from a cluster of newborn stars in the Eagle Nebula, some 6,500 light years from Earth.

Thanks for the courtesy :raining:

Bill Ryan
8th June 2016, 11:36
If other members were miffed by his work, it would have shown by a lack of replies.

Actually, there were very few responses indeed, compared with his [certainly evident] enthusiasm. His threads were 80-90% a showcase for his own theses.

Our feeling, though this is hard to substantiate (apart from the first two replies above), is that many members were reluctant to appear openly critical because Malcolm is clearly a very nice person.

I agree about the importance of the images of the Mars landscape. Some of them are extraordinary, and there are details, including some large ones, that certainly beg for explanations. The Cydonia region, where the Face of Mars is, contains a whole taxonomy of apparently highly unnatural features that are pretty clear to the naked eye. We absolutely encourage an intelligent, informed discussion of all this.

The issue was paradoxical. The mods team agrees unanimously. There are so many anomalies that we could and should be talking about, but were pushed to one side because Malcolm's focus was on things that were (in our clear opinion) almost certainly not there at all. With every good intention, the entire valuable subject had been hijacked.

The analogy might one that someone was claiming, as their singular committed passion, that the 9/11 Twin Towers had been brought down by aliens, or by black magic.

Aliens exist, and so does black magic, but to put all that together in the same stew with 9/11 would discredit and divert from the really valuable evidence-based topic of what really DID happen, and push serious discussion into something looking like the lunatic fringe. (This is happening all over the alternative media, on a number of fronts.)

And bright but curious people who've always believed that Osama bin Laden really DID mastermind it all, just stop reading.


In the meantime, and separately, Malcolm has asked to post the following in his behalf, which of course we're happy to do.

Hi Bill and and fellow Avalonian's.

I understand and respect the position you have taken and accept your decision. I wish this were not the case, but there you are.

In defense of my conclusions, I have taken considerable time and research into these anomalies discovered on the Martian surface and while many claim that my findings are the result of so-called pareidolia, I could (and many do) argue against this “human condition”. The fact is, the shapes and forms are there on the surface, there's no denying that and while one person may say “it's all in the way your mind is interpreting it” another may say; “well, they may very well be, large artificial alien art forms”.

The fact is, unlike all cases of pareidolia seen here on earth where the “target data” can absolutely be verified as pareidolia, the same cannot be said (until we go there) for anomalies observed on the Martian surface.

So, who is expert here to say that these apparent geoglyph's are NOT the work of an alien specie? Frankly, this is just opinion….as are, of course, my own interpretations. I leave that decision up to you.

My effort on Project Avalon has been to share with other “deep minded” people the results of my research for the sole purpose of opening greater discussion and to see close up and in 3D our beautiful planetary neighbor and the wonders that lay before us in the not too distant future

I thank you all for this opportunity, I wish you love and wellness.

Keep looking close up!

Star Mariner
8th June 2016, 13:15
Just to say one more thing, for M-Albion if he ever reads it - where I say I agree with the Mods' decision, it's not necessarily that you leave the forums, that is unfortunate, just that this particular subject be gently put to bed now. The wider consensus, which I agree with, seems to be that there is less in these patterns and formations that meets (tricks) the eye.

Like others have said to Albion, I have very much appreciated the tone and energy of your threads, the analysis, the obvious passion you have for this, and the effort you put into your work. I have read each case you've presented, and have studied all the images. Though I don't find myself in agreement with your claims, there is still a high degree of weirdness to be found in many other existing Mars images as Bill stated, (and possibly lots more to discover) but weirdness doesn't constitute evidence of anything, or even vague evidence. All it is is interesting, provocative, and another peice of the puzzle...

What I have looked at in the past is signs of settlement (ie the Pyramids (https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.burlingtonnews.net% 2Fsitebuilder%2Fimages%2Fmars3-661x439.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.burlingtonnews.net%2Fma rs.html&docid=uS4-cnTcdVWH1M&tbnid=TGEFaWhITBtsWM%3A&w=661&h=439&hl=en&bih=766&biw=1600&ved=0ahUKEwii-JzEvpjNAhWiKMAKHVWhCOUQMwgsKBAwEA&iact=mrc&uact=8#h=439&w=661) in Cydonia), possible indications of architecture (https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.mirror.co.uk%2Fincom ing%2Farticle7440912.ece%2FALTERNATES%2Fs615b%2Fal iens.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mirror.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fw eird-news%2Flife-mars-conspiracy-theorists-discover-7440693&docid=xMCh6T0s_BqlHM&tbnid=UmHCYzdR4YZH1M%3A&w=615&h=410&hl=en&bih=766&biw=1600&ved=0ahUKEwjl8cOSvpjNAhUKIcAKHQmgAWMQMwhhKD0wPQ&iact=mrc&uact=8) and technology (https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fscottcwaring.files.word press.com%2F2011%2F07%2Faaf30307-8f5a-4ce9-b0b2-edaccf963b18175.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ufosightingsdaily.com%2 F2011%2F07%2Falien-base-discovered-on-mars-close-up.html&docid=XTMpp1yz4BDJNM&tbnid=FOAM8hZoBWgKEM%3A&w=960&h=640&hl=en&bih=766&biw=1600&ved=0ahUKEwjl8cOSvpjNAhUKIcAKHQmgAWMQMwhfKDswOw&iact=mrc&uact=8#h=640&imgdii=FOAM8hZoBWgKEM%3A%3BFOAM8hZoBWgKEM%3A%3BKR6 uPDMOBU6wYM%3A&w=960) - or just the clearly unusual and out of place, which defies explanation (https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffiles.abovetopsecret.co m%2Ffiles%2Fimg%2Fbn545d1f54.png&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abovetopsecret.com%2Ffo rum%2Fthread1041229%2Fpg1&docid=_raWwYVjwZYtgM&tbnid=X8_AiWe7vAlF9M%3A&w=1603&h=805&hl=en&bih=766&biw=1600&ved=0ahUKEwie5eafupjNAhUQOsAKHVSlAEYQMwgjKAUwBQ&iact=mrc&uact=8#h=805&imgdii=X8_AiWe7vAlF9M%3A%3BX8_AiWe7vAlF9M%3A%3B8Hw Pr5dswUeo-M%3A&w=1603). I wish instead, if you turned your attention and undeniable skills to charting and analysing the many many martian surface anomalies like these, things could be otherwise and hopefully who knows, still could be(?)

Citizen No2
8th June 2016, 15:21

Yet Avalon supported the likes of Corey Goode...... With Not A Shred Of Evidence

I will agree, to some extent, that some of the images Mal posted took more than a casual glance....... I invested in the 3D glasses, I corresponded with Mal, I took the time to investigate a little deeper......... And guess what?

I, for one, believe that what Mal has found within those images deserves deeper investigation. Mal presented us with something tangible, something other than words and wild, at best, stories.

Maybe the Mod team is right, maybe this is not the place for Mal's research.

What a shame.

Bill Ryan
8th June 2016, 15:25

Yet Avalon supported the likes of Corey Goode.


Not after he turned sociopathic! Before that, his claims, though always interesting, were (in comparison) measured and moderate.

Citizen No2
8th June 2016, 15:31
That may be Bill.

I just think that it is a very sad day for Avalon.

I do not understand the decision........... I think it sets a very dangerous, and uncomfortable, precedent.

How does this decision stand up to some of the members who post their UFO footage, and tell us what we should be seeing?

Honestly, I am gob-smacked.

Have you studied the images in 3D Bill? I can tell you this much, in one of them there is absolutely clear evidence of a 'city', of some sort of intelligently designed area of 'buildings'............ how can the word 'pareidolia' be bandied about when you are talking about potential alien architecture? What is the base line? What is the control? What is it that you have to compare against?

I am really upset at this decision, I don't mind admitting it. This is a guy, a professional in his field, that is an architect...... somewhat qualified, in my eyes, to study and report on what it is he is seeing, bizarre architectural features........ ON MARS.

At least Mal gave us something that we could take and look deeper into, more than just words.....................

Now, I understand that I am a little upset because I have corresponded with Mal, I've put some time in to this, and as I mentioned earlier, I did not agree with everything that Mal reported, but guess what? I just concentrated on the amazing finds that blew my mind. He never came across as anything other than a polite, well meaning guy, the type of guy you could easily have a pint with and a long and interesting conversation. Maybe I'm not privy to all of the facts, that I can understand, but to ban the guy.............. ? !

Please tell me that I am missing something Bill, that there have been shenanigans behind the scenes, that Mal has an ulterior motive, some sort of money-making scheme, or he is a limited hang-out, or part of a psy-op to discredit Avalon........... Anything other than this:

His own image analysis is to a large degree (or maybe completely) a case of pareidolia (seeing apparently meaningful patterns and shapes in objects which aren't really there); and at the same time,
There really are anomalous, intelligently-created artifacts on Mars, including some very large ones in the Cydonia region and possibly elsewhere.

You even state yourself, in the quoted text above, that there ARE anomalous, intelligently-created artefacts on Mars!

Bill Ryan
8th June 2016, 15:59
part of a psy-op to discredit Avalon

Not a psy-op — Malcolm is totally sincere: but the effect is the same.

there ARE anomalous, intelligently-created artefacts on Mars!

Yes, absolutely. If anyone wants to start a thread about the highly strange 'Mars tubes', I'll share what Henry Deacon told Kerry Cassidy and myself: that he had actually stood in them.




Citizen No2
8th June 2016, 16:15
You do know that those are not tubes Bill.

Have you seen this images in 3D? Do you know how big those features are? Have a look at the shadows that are cast by each ridge Bill, and also the perpendicular angle to the 'shore' line might give you a better idea as to what it is you are looking at.

It is more than a little mystifying to me that you mention pareidolia in regards to Mal's case, but because Henry Deacon told you these are tubes, and he stood in them, then that is what they must be, right? Because they look like tubes, right?

This is madness Bill, madness.

8th June 2016, 16:42
Those aren't tubes, they're sandworm tracks.

OK. I don't know, but there's some evidence to hint that Mars=Arrakis.

Citizen No2, what do you think those tracks are?


Bill Ryan
8th June 2016, 19:00
It is more than a little mystifying to me that you mention pareidolia in regards to Mal's case, but because Henry Deacon told you these are tubes, and he stood in them, then that is what they must be, right?I knew Henry very well, and talked with him in person for literally hundreds of hours. There was a 5 or 6 week period early in 2007 when Kerry and I would have dinner with him every week for maybe 4 hours each evening. The conversations we had were pretty interesting, to say the least. None of them were recorded.

Later that year he stayed in my apartment for a week, and we spent much of that time talking about Mars.

Do watch this. (Not easy, but the content is compelling.)

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?89859-The-Avalon-Library&p=1072602&viewfull=1#post1072602 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?89859-The-Avalon-Library&p=1072602&viewfull=1#post1072602)

Re Malcolm's images, I'd bet you £100 that if I printed out Malcolm's large images in good quality, spun them around on the table, and asked you to spot the 'intelligent design', you'd be stumped without being told exactly where to look. (More than £100, actually. You'd never see a thing. No-one can. I can't see anything, even when I am being told where to look.)

But tubes are tubes. Ask a child. :)

Not everything on the internet is real, no matter how nice the person is or seems to be. Data analysis isn't a skill the community has learned very well just yet. Not a hanging offense: but we have to be aware, and focus, and be smart, and be prepared to draw lines, and make the effort to get better at it all.

If we don't, we may as well give up now. Please see these posts of mine.


http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?91074-What-Have-You-Learned&p=1072295&viewfull=1#post1072295 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?90689-An-amendment-to-the-new-members-Welcome-Message-please-read)

Also pertinent may be part of a PM I just sent to a member who'd written to me privately. I can't quote that, and rightly so, but I can quote an extract from my reply:

His claims were nonsense. They really were.

I privately implored him to focus on the better-known (and far more plausible) Martian anomalies — like Cydonia and the famous 'tubes' — but he was insistent on showcasing his own work. He was never unpleasant... just fixated in his ideas and focus.

Re Laura Eisenhower, yes, a "new-agey disinfo artist" isn't too far off the mark, though that's maybe a little sharp. I don't think she's knowingly offering false information. But she's either been got at in some way (which she may not deny) — or has taken a lot of drugs in the past, which I have to say may not be impossible.

The pragmatic effect of Laura Eisenhower's story (and Andy Basiago's, and Malcolm's work) is to make serious inquirers run a mile. I referred that to Malcolm as well, and his statement was that he didn't care, as his work was not for mainstream thinkers.

That's where I strongly disagree: if we only talk to each other, nothing is achieved. You and I could talk together over many cups of coffee, all day — we'd not move an inch further forward. It's others we all need to reach.

8th June 2016, 19:29
I'm an oddball. I completely do understand Bills decision on that matter because M-Albion3D was such a nice person ( as Bill said ) so I thought he's just smart and wants to show us these interesting and beautiful images of Martian surface and perhaps .. play a little trick to attract the forums oddballs ... which isn't fair enough,
from where I look at it.
It just says 'look how beautiful and detailed images of ''another planet'' we've gotten and you folks believe in aliens and they're not there'.
I saw a prank. I love those images too ( Malcolm ), unfortunately do not have 3D glasses so missing some of the perspective but ... does a person trained in visualisation need those , anyway.

Tubes .. very interesting . Henry Deacon has been there , ah . Before we've ever put a man on Mars, Henry and Magdalene and Andrew , and Corey have been there .

I can't see that well to spot Henry in the tubes ( pun intended ) and who knows what are they filled with other than you do believe it now because he's repeatedly told you.
It's all a case for pareidolia for me , so far . But that's just because I'm an oddball.

I can't believe that people do believe some things but that's because I've not been there and from my spacy outlook , Mars has been pretty infertile for last couple of million years and that does not mean that there wasn't some form of primitive life in deep past but where my ET perspective goes I am not aware of any advanced 'martian civilisation'.

That's about .. pass it to the congress ..


Citizen No2
8th June 2016, 19:40
But tubes are tubes. Ask a child.

Please, don't Bill. Do not insult my intelligence.

I will agree to disagree and leave it at that. No harm done.

Thank you.


Citizen No2, what do you think those tracks are?

They are the tracks of my tears friend, the tracks of my tears.

8th June 2016, 21:55
Reposting from M-Albion-3D (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?90775-Architecture-on-Mars-with-Human-settlement.) :

In the image below, we see some truly incredible structures as they careen down the side of this huge embankment. These structures are quite numerous in this region and have embedded in their form, beautiful artistic patterns of abstract facial features.


the reason for pareidolia : with high pixelation of abstract but differentiated image of unknown landscape , doublechrom spectre is applied to be able to filter mirror effect of the bright surface.
The two colour filter in itself connects to your abstract mind the way Rorschach test (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rorschach_test) does .

I also see all these images of various people, ETs and some androids in the last image , countless ..

it means the pixelation can connect to the part of our brain where those images are preserved .


9th June 2016, 10:00
I never saw anything in M-Albions work and I think it would be fair to say I 'wanted' to. I could see no way to say so without it being construed negative.

The 'tubes', when I first saw those so many years ago I was convinced they were part of an underground transit system that had been exposed by surface weathering/movement.
Now? Well they look very organic. We have some amazing nature sculpted geographical features on our own planet.
(Which is not to say this is a definitve answer, who knows the aesthtics of another culture nor their ability to build organically).

9th June 2016, 10:16
Sounds very credible Ewan. Definitely something worth thinking about. As you said, we can't make assumptions about Martian tastes. They could be disused transit systems that have been covered over by years of soil and sand buildup. I genuinely have no idea. They look both natural and artificially constructed at the same time. Terran architecture, especially subterranean and desert homes, shows the same mix of organic looking and man made geometry...

Or maybe the whole thing was filmed in Greenland with a red filter.

Who knows?

Star Mariner
10th June 2016, 16:29
Personally, I think the 'martian tubes' phenomena are natural geological features. There was an argument a while back that stated the perceived roundness of the features, making them look like tubes, could be an optical illusion, after all these images are taken from above (so depth of perspective is lost).

So they might not be tubular (having an upper convex surface) at all, but concave. If so, it just illustrates (in the theme of this thread) that what we "think" we see from one perspective in a Mars image, might not be the case from another. We can't know for sure what a thing actually is viewing it from a single angle.

I'm going with the explanation that the 'ribbed' effect of the tubes are sand dunes filling narrow cracks and ravines in the martian surface, as seen (more clearly) in these images:



Or most intriguingly, as has been postulated, they might be "Ice" - frozen water formations, as seen here on Earth (there are interesting similarities):



Maybe Henry Deacon really did stand in them. Or maybe he didn't, and they're the natural constructions of nature/erosion/martian weather. Who knows!