Fossil on mars?

From the first color image by the Phoenix Mars Lander. Looks a lot like a fossil, especially considering the good symmetry. Can also be a vulcanic rock or formed by water, but anyway looks interesting.
http://democraticscience.scribblewiki.com/images/democraticscience/6/6f/Phoenix3.jpg

I'm not sure about this photo, but Mars is a graveyard. If you look long and hard enough, you'll begin to find pairs and sets of objects, aligned similarly or even perpendicular to other pairs or sets, in the same photo. It's a bizarre scene up there.

The question we should be asking our lying government, is how come the photos sent down from Viking in the 1970's, look about as good as those we're seeing today? These snakes think the average American is stupid, and given the failure to ask the tough question, I tend to agree.

Nice enlargement crop of a smaller Phoenix original. I can see the two part repeat system at two angles. Strangely, basalt rock can show a degree of large scale symmetry, I have read, but never have I seen it here on Earth. It's like hints of geology spoken at times in some of the literature of Earth examples, but the suggestions are so vaguely stated that I pass them by, and have lost the passing referenced quotes. They never refer to specific sources of mineralogy or crystallographic technical explanation, just descriptive suggestions that bulk mineral mix/chemistries can potentially produce elaborate repeating shapes and organized patterns. With the newer solar system exploration, this may become a full studied sub-set of geology/mineralogy someday, with some technical accessibility for us.
The elaborate Jarosite shaping was one of those large 3D item types, described and hand drawn diagrams, now matching the first MER spheroid 'blueberries' patterns. So few persons knew of that , and only a couple references to it on the Web, that the roar of human confusion is still underway. That system of shape produces a 'fetal tetrapod' type slightly asymmetrical shaping pattern, and looks very recognizable as possibly organic. I still think the pattens denote our path to organic structure, in a system of automated assembly as creatures on Earth. That however is conjecture based on the vague references which are not assembled as a full science as yet. Mars samples can help with that development of a system of examples and reasoning.
Can you add which original this came from by number and date? That helps to substantiate the example, and allows us to follow and confirm your work. Thanks .
Good example.
Right at the lander wheel in the shadow, on the right side of the footpad, is a very symmetric ovoid 'bead' shaped object which rolled onto the side of the footpad. It smells as a crystal of some chemistry specifically, but wee would have to break it into pieces and then take a sample for the spectrometer, but we could never grind it, probably never reach under the lander body to the leg with the scoop, and even then it looks like a possible iron associated mineral crystal example probably. At least we are seeing segregated or dominating mineral/chemistry samples which are concentrated in ways which cause shaping and symmetry to be viewable right from the start.
If these below the sun and radiation baked surface can show the sought after organic components in this mission it will be a suggestion of possible Earth type water based remnant organic materials. Why the carbon and other chemical elements of life are not measured as yet, I believe, should be testimony to the need for a study in surface conditions, as the inorganic CO2 seems to be the only acknowledged finding thus far in mission to Mars and distant measurements. As though the drift was away from solid Carbon chemistry to a inorganic gaseous condition by a stable process ongoing. Carbon should have been measured at a percentage of Mars chemistry in solids, and C60 as a sub-percent quantity, even from meteoritic infalling. The planets holds it's mysteries for our explaining. Will Phoenix do some of the work in that regard?

More examples?

I seriously think this guy (danajohnson0) posts from inside a mental hospital.

I found this object on this image in the original Phoenix mission site
http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=620&cID=15
I did not process the image anyhow, except that I applied the automatic white balance to it with GIMP, before I cropped and scaled that object. The color balance on that image is obviously wrong, after applying a simple white balance, the sky is bluish, and I think I even noticed some patches of frost on some rocks. But look at the rocks on that image with a zoom 800x, you would never regret this, there are many interesting rocks.

Max, you aren't the infamous 'Headroom', are you? I used to try to listen to your news casts with such rapture, and stubborn-ness, so as to eek out a shred of intellect applied to the real world. It was all just television reality, corrupted by masked intent, and the steamroller of money-making violence against the constructs of distributing science to others. Take a closer look at myself and my work, please. We all have limitations until effort is applied.

This photo above is a great example of the type of challenge to find order repeated in samples from space missions. If we refer back to nearly all landings, there have been only a few examples of visual pattern repeats in all the missions, until these Mars landings. This is a well ordered planet. Any repeats which are complex, show a smaller scale of ordering, generally.

I have color corrected images which show graduated colors in some rocks, some dark blue rocks, nearly glowing white rocks, and more. Variation is present at the landing site. I'll place them on the blog here shortly.

I am going to study the image myself up close, and suggest that to others as well.

tk, it was good of you to help me find the original, as I am always behind the times, not able to browse the archives to find images as references. I am finding these Phoenix images are difficult to study at an enlarged size. They are at the 'max' size, as they are.

Max. Please give a detailed vision of your direct application of thought to the image, or it's cropped enlargement presented. Possibly present your contradicting image or assessment.

No sorry i am not "headroom"