It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


HUYGENS Titan photos have been altered!!

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 02:08 PM
There's some really cool photoshop/macromedia tweaks to the titan fotos up there!!..Great job guys..

Especially the one with the breakdancing alien and the one with the Stature of Liberty in the background..A parady on "Planet of the Apes" I presume??

Btw if this is the kind of paranoia we get with Titan, then I fear what will happen when we send the first Europa probe, with a digger..


posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 02:30 PM

Originally posted by cecil the lost alien
Not sure if this really fits into this sections on ATS but have you guys heard of the cydonia face/pyramids, what do you all think about that. I read a book on it 'Mars Mystery' thought it was pretty cool, but basically by the end of the book it was still undecided if it was just a geological freak accident that created the features...
Eroded highland and light coming from just right angle.

You should really go out sometime and look how much change in angle of illumination can change look of moon's surface features!
Even this small binoculars shows it well.

posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 05:13 PM
So we're supposed to believe that amateurs caught the transmission before even NASA or the ESA...I have my doubts. Most of the "raw" triplets I have seen are at a size of 128 pixels width by 256 pixels height. The "colorized" photo is 314 pixels width by 628 pixels height. Shouldn't the original "raw" images be at least as big as the admitedly-altered image?

Raw Images:

Article About How Amateurs Suposedly Got The Pictures First:

Amateurs beat space agencies to Titan pictures

19 January 2005
Mark Peplow

Online community processed raw images at record speed.

A group of enthusiastic amateurs managed to process raw images of Titan from the Huygens probe faster that any of the giant space agencies in charge of the mission.


posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 05:39 PM

Originally posted by Geneticus
So we're supposed to believe that amateurs caught the transmission before even NASA or the ESA...I have my doubts.

Once Huygens' mother ship, Cassini, had beamed information from the probe back to radio receivers on Earth on Friday 14 January, the raw images were posted on the descent-imaging team's website, based at the University of Arizona, Tucson.
And there's only very limited amount of scientists compared to amount of those "playing" with PCs.

posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 05:49 PM
call me naive if you like but....

personally speaking, my camera has a flash on it...

is it therefore not possible that the camera that took the image also had a flash on it also which may also be able to cast a shadow on objects close by...

just a thought.. feel free to tell me otherwise....

say cheese!

posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 05:50 PM
You get overshadowing from the offset of the lamp from the camera lens. They are not in perfect alignment.

posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 06:59 PM

yeh but i said '...mars as been geometrically identical and if that were true it would be more likely to be a race that built them on mars then earth, rather than a freak natural feature thats exactly the same as the great pyramids measurements' So i meant light boucing of angles on the planet. Anyway i admit it could still be nothing (for example why the hell have they only seen features on one place on the planet?), but i just thought id clarify before you started trying to sell me binoculars, lol

posted on Jan, 19 2005 @ 07:26 PM
Since my explanation sucked im just gonna quote from the book bout the geometry.

'Erol Toruns reconstructed model of the D and M pyramid yields unique mathemeatical constants , including those found in terrestrial traditions of sacred geometry, as well as the tetrahedral angle of 19.5 degrees'

This 19.5 degree thing seems to be the important thing?!

'If a tetrahedron , the simplest of the platonic solids, is placed within a rotating sphere with one apex at the north or south pole, the other three apexes will lie at exactly 19.5 degrees from the eqator. This terahedral angle of 19.5 degrees occurs with unnatural frequency in the measurements of the cydonian anomilies'

Then it goes on later to say that 19.5 degrees is significant in the other cydonia stuff too, the face, city, pyramid..

'According to researchers Richard Hoagland and Erol Torun , major alignments between the cydonia anomillies reveal an underlying coherence based on the tetrahedral angle 19.5 degrees and the polar diameter of Mars'

and it wasnt the great pyramid it was the teotihucan ones that mainly had this 19.5 degree thing, the egypt one was the pyramid of Menkaure in relation to its neighbours.

'The pyramids ofthe sun and Moon at Teotihuacan contain references to the tetrahedral constant 19.5 degrees in both the measurement of the angles of the fourth pyramid tiers and in thier geographical location on the Earth - which coincidentally mirrors the self-referencing of the D and M pyramid on Mars'

the egypt one:

'the pyramid of Menkaure , in relation to its neighbours can be seen on the tetrahedral angle of 19.5 degrees, the same angle bla bla bla'

There is actually a quote in there somewhere too about the actually mathematical chances of a natural occurence of all those angles but ive had enough of looking through the book. Anyway i hope that explained better than i did about what i meant about the features and there angles.


posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 01:11 PM

Originally posted by cecil the lost alien
... as well as the tetrahedral angle of 19.5 degrees'

This 19.5 degree thing seems to be the important thing?!

So because there seems to be those angles when lighting is right and resolution is way too small it must be something not made by nature...
Then also these must have been made by some "unnatural" process because they are very cubical...
or this

Sorry to disappoint but nature invented many geometric shapes before man.

In my eyes credibility of their products is pretty much -273 and they are meant to be taken with bucket of HCl... most rational use for those would be toilet paper... or lighting a stove, althought they wouldn't be good even at that use, paper used in books has too much other "ingredients".

PS. His name is typo, it should be Hoaxland.

posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 04:47 PM

Originally posted by Geneticus
Very interesting the theory that there are no shadows. I am very skeptical about that since the picture of the surface really really looks like there are shadows there...but it may be an optical illusion. This is another planet after all.

If you admit the possibility of the shadows being an optical illusion, what is the reason for this thread, now?

posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 04:54 PM
I have had some luck finding visual evidence that others miss. I want to make people aware that the photo looked odd to me. Still does. Every time I see it.

posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 06:53 PM
First of all im not dissapointed, i dont care, secondly woah man take your head out your ass then listen to what im saying. I am in no way defending the picture here, im talking about the cydonia stuff, not sure if you realise that as the resolution is more of the issure here with this picture than the ones i am talking about. Also please tell me what the hell relevence that devils tower has? where are the perfect angles with that? Where are all the other features that are around it that have the same? Your other link wouldnt load. Personally i think your one of those people that thinks they are right about everything and will argue regardless, also i must point out that yout your tone and attitude when you do argue is very patronising , im guessing you probably meant that though.

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5   >>

log in