It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by masqua
Ack...my brain hurts trying to fathom all those nested quotes. I count a triple.
Please be kind to the readers who must disect such madness.
Originally posted by Blaine91555
The first thing to catch my attention is when I clicked on the link $34.95 stood out very clearly. The second was the type of filtering he was using on the images and that statement about flipping photo's made no sense. You can flip a photo a thousand times without altering it. You are just reversing the pixel order either vertically or horizontally.
The tree like objects are from extreme misuse of sharpening and unsharp masks. The pixel radius was set to ridiculous and you end up with patterns. They show that he either does not know what he is doing or he is perpetrating a hoax to get $34.95.
I do not know which. In reading what he says he may think he's developed a way to pull out the detail and does not truly realize he's trying to accomplish the impossible. Whatever data is in the file is all their is and no amount of manipulation will bring out data that is not in the file.
He is working from images downloaded from the net I'd guess which means they were compressed. This also means lots of artifacts from the compression. If you then take these dirty images through a un-sharp mask or other sharpening algorithms and set the pixel radius too high you end up with little shapes (his tree's).
He may not even realize what he is doing. Then again he may know exactly what he is doing. I have the best forensics software on the market and I can not add a single pixel of data to an image. I can only use filters to interpolate information into the photo that gives the impression of more detail by producing sharper more distinct edges. The algorithm makes a best guess as to what lies between the pixels and creates additional pixel to fill in the edge or detail.
I've shied away from getting into what is wrong with photo's I've viewed on UFO sites because it angers people so much. It is like no one wants the truth about them, they just want people to agree with them. Clay Pigeons are not UFO's. Lamppost fixtures are not UFO's.
Blurred birds in the distance are not UFO's. Objects attached to the sides of tree's are not UFO's. Small aircraft flying away from the viewer are not UFO's. Lens anomalies caused by a bright light source hitting the edge of the one of 5 to 20 optics in a modern lenses and bouncing around inside the camera are not UFO's. Orb's caused by a droplet or dust speck on the surface of the outermost optic are not UFO's. Well, you get my point.
Now to the weird part. I have seen two objects I believe to be genuine UFO's and would like nothing more than to find legitimate photo's to back me up. There are photo's that may be real but since there is no way to get a copy of the original negative or digital file I can't confirm any. There always seems to be some reason that no one can come up with the original other than a few of the blurry bird and small aircraft flying directly away from the viewer photo's. I can't tell you how many of those I've seen.
Originally posted by StellarX
Originally posted by Apass
By coming to the wrong conclusions!
Don't take anyone's word for anything just because others do.
Einstein contributed fairly little as even the basis of his main 'discovery' had already been in evidence for a very very long time indeed.
I have provided plenty of links which you then set about superficially attacking by proposing that there are alternative 'possibilities'
( it could after all be giant well hidden fans causing global weather phenomenon)
All you did was play devil's advocate which would have been fine if you stated from the get go that life MUST be impossible on Mars. The moment you realistically approach the evidence not only the odds but the PHOTOGRAPHIC evidence proves without a doubt that there is running water on Mars.
NASA OPENLY ADMITS THIS.
I have given more than enough evidence to convince those who are interested in reality and discovering the truth and if you are not convinced the problem lies in your own mind and you should stop project your own bias on others. We are not all close minded and set in our ways like you quite clearly is.
Originally posted by Apass
When somebody claims the wrong things again and again, the scientific comunity does ignore him.
Not only the scientific comunity, but also the rest of the people. That's how things work.
Have you ever thought why Aesop created that fable about the boy who cried the wolf?
I'm not. That's why I choose to ignore MarsAnomalyResearch.
Not quite that long, but the point was to take a person who dared to think different that the current dogma.
And Einstein is a good example for that. The current dogma was that the light speed is not the same in every reference frame.
And also Bohr is a good a example. He postulated that indeed, the electron behaves also as a wave around the nucleus. The current model was of an planet like electron!
And both Einstein and Bohr got credited for their work. But they could explain a lot of things about the world around us.
Not exactly the same thing with
What alternative possibility is for the 21%oxygen in earth's atmosphere?
That was not superficially attacking. That was a thorough analysis of current evidence. You are now attaking me for that analysis.
And you still refuse to show us your research on how those alternative explanations contradict other known facts! (mars being geologicaly dead is not a known fact, is a supposition)
Yep...and our meteo models take that into account....
What you are suggesting is a biased approach to do science. A true scientiest will never say The world is flat and then try to find evidence for that, a true scientist would analyse facts first and then would give some hypotheses that can or cannot be verified.
So the proper aproach for life on Mars would be: These are the facts, can there be life on Mars?
Are there other possible sources/explanations for the observed phenomena? If neither hypotesis can be proved 100% (or if you want, 99.999999....%) one can not say that sure, there is life on Mars. That's science!
If you start from : there is life on Mars, you will then chose only the supporting evidence and ignore the other explanations.
New images of Mars reveal that flowing water, large glaciers and active volcanoes have scoured the planet in recent geologic times.
Scientists say Mars has been geologically active in the past few million years -- an eyeblink in the planet's 4.5-billion-year history.
Three studies appearing in the March 17 issue of the journal Nature add to a growing body of evidence that points to recent liquid water and present vast stores of underground ice near the planet’s equator.
Combined, the research provides further impetus to search Mars for signs of life, scientists said.
"The three papers provide an overwhelming case for new thinking about recent geological activity on Mars," writes Baker in an analysis of the work.
Baker said the findings support a 1991 hypothesis, then considered outrageous, that Mars has experienced episodes of cataclysmic flooding in modern times. Water is thought to have formed temporary seas, but researchers had long assumed it all evaporated into the thin Martian air.
Many scientists now agree that much of the water remained.
When you look at the watershed upstream today, you see lots of gullies there, lots of things that look glacial. And if they are there now, and they are part of the most recent climate change, it means that when the obliquity was right (thousands of years ago, when Mars was more sharply tilted on its axis, which would have warmed some regions of the planet), something was happening in that region. And obliquity changes cyclically on Mars, which supports the hypothesis that there was some kind of repetitive action here.
So we're looking at the morphological evidence. Many people agree that it's probably one of the best examples of a hydrographic (water-carved) system on Mars. But you also have many people that think that's not the case. Or even if it is the case, that we have Appolinaris Patera (a nearby volcano) that came afterwards and covered up all the evidence, so that what we're seeing today isn't a lakebed but something else.
In our hypothesis, the lakes in Gusev were at the beginning of the history of Gusev, when Ma'adim was very active. Even in that scenario, though, the most recent release of water from Ma'adim wouldn't have been enough to form lakes. All you would see are some very small channels incising what we have called a delta, where Ma'adim flows into Gusev. This would deposit some cobbles and blocks from Ma'adim but it wouldn't form lacustrine features. And, interestingly enough, the landing site is sitting on material from this most recent activity.
On Mars the globally-averaged surface pressure of the planet's atmosphere is only slightly less than 6.1 millibars.
"That's the average," says Haberle, "so some places will have pressures that are higher than 6.1 millibars and others will be lower. If we look at sites on Mars where the pressure is a bit higher, that's where water can theoretically exist as a liquid."
The feature suggests that "vast flooding events, which are known to have occurred from beneath Mars’ surface throughout its geological history, still happen," the Muller, Murray and their colleagues write. "The presence of liquid water for thousands of millions of years, even beneath the surface, is a possible habitat in which primitive life may have developed, and might still be surviving now. Clearly this must now be considered as a prime site for future missions looking for life."
The researchers propose that the ice has been protected from sublimation by an overlying layer of volcanic ash.
"I think it's fairly plausible," Michael Carr, an expert on Martian water at the U.S. Geological Survey, told New Scientist. "We know where the water came from," said Carr, who was not involved in the work. "You can trace the valleys carved by water down to this area."
Rumors about what has been actually identified are about as fluid as liquid itself, from water-ice deposits, concentrations of iron, to Martian springs, and even Old Faithful-like geysers.
The findings announced Thursday -- evidence of water seeping to Mars' surface in recently cut gullies -- bridge a gap in the beliefs of astrobiologists, taking them from strong suspicion to near certainty about the existence of liquid water on Mars.
"There's a subtlety between having every reason to believe [water] is there and having this higher level of certainty," said Bruce Jakosky, a professor of geological science at the University of Colorado, and the director of the university's center for astrobiology.
"We now know pretty convincingly that there is liquid water on Mars, and that it's relatively accessible near the surface," he said.
The field of space studies is known to throw curveballs. For instance, scientists last week said the latest evidence of water was found in cooler and darker areas facing away from the equator, while many had previously assumed that liquid water near the surface could only exist in hotter, sun-facing areas.
The discovery of evidence of liquid water on Mars boosts astrobiology.
WASHINGTON -- Researchers using NASA's Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft announced Thursday that they found puzzling signs of water seeping into what appear to be young, freshly-cut gullies and gaps in the Martian surface.
The startling discovery of recently-formed, weeping layers of rock and sediment has planetary experts scratching their heads.
The wet spots show up in more than 120 locations on Mars and in the coldest places on the planet, said Michael Malin of Malin Space Science Systems in San Diego, California, which built the spacecraft's camera.
And that presents a "perplexing problem," he said, because logic says that Mars sub-zero temperatures and thin atmosphere should have kept those wet spots from ever forming.
The wet spots, which turn up in 200 to 250 different images from the Global Surveyor spacecraft, "could be a few million years old but we cannot rule out that some of them are so recent as to have formed yesterday," Malin said.
SPACE.com has learned that NASA hasdiscovered evidence of water on the Red Planets surface. The finding, made bythe Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft, fuels hopes that there may be life onMars.
Sources close to theagencys Mars program said the discovery involves evidence of seasonal deposits that could be associated with springs on the planets surface
NASA announces discovery of evidence of water on Mars
Once again, you are attaking me...
But sorry, almost all the links you provided offerd an alternative explanation for the observed phenomena...I have run down these alternatives...and didn't find that they contradict other known facts.
Originally posted by Nerve
The pyramids on mars do not prove there is alien life or secret government base on mars.
It is more likely to believe that at one point Mars and earth were at one point one planet. That there was a civilization on this planet and something happened such as a meteor collision that split the planets into what they are now.
Although mars doesn't have life on it now look at how similar it looks when compared to earth.
It has a north pole, canyons with dried out rivers and the pyramids where compared to the ones on earth and they are very similar in size and layout of the “city”.
So it is possible that that species survived on the part of that planet which is now earth and continued evolving on earth.