Mars, An Alpine Vacation

Terapin

Iapetus 2-D. Never seen this place, not intimately familar with craters on planets, but erm, I think we can agree that the statements i've made about depth perception are accurate. What you are asking me to do is to disavow my own senses and familarity with the common and uncommon physics of water, dust, shadow and light, and etc. I ain't gonna do it. Sowwy!

Originally posted by undo
Among other things, I'm a graphical artist.

Good, in that case you know the tricks that the artists use to fake depth, hight, darkness, light, etc.

The right tube is not only emitting the "dust" which looks as likely to be liquid as not, it's also raised above the landscape and emitting the "dust".

I may have made you understand that I also thought that those things you call tubes are emitting anything, so let me clarify it.

I think that those things you call tubes are just narrow gullies (I think that is the name) where, sometime ago, some dust (or dirt, or sand or ash), with a colour different from that of the rest of the ground, including the sides of the gully, was laid and scattered by the wind (or maybe even by water or other agent).

I think that if they took another photo of that place today, it would look exactly the same because it is a static feature, there is nothing flowing.

What I asked you was... what evidence do you have to show that the tip of the tube is above the surface of the planet. The Photo is 2D, taken from quite a distance, does not show solar shadowing, and is not color corrected. As a graphic professional you surely know that severely blowing up a photo often leads to distortions that may give false impressions. Most photos posted online by NASA and the EU space agency are not super high resolution and better photos are on the way with the newest European Satellite coming online in the next few months. Specific digital techniques and careful comparisons with other photos of the imediate area, along with study of the mineral makeup are needed to form serious postulations. This other data is being collected by a variety of equipment along with thermal imaging, deep scanning, and photographing in a variety or wavelengths. Using PhotoShop is not adequate in any manner and tell us nothing about the mineral makeup.

I suggested that you look at Sat. photos of Earth. GoogleEarth has TONS of them and I didn't think I need to point out the obvious, but if you need help here is a good one showing that erosion can leave behind minerals of a very significant color difference. If you have ever driven out west then you have seen this along the highways where minerals leach out of the rocks, and winds leave behind different colored sediments.

faculty.gg.uwyo.edu...

Death Valley is a good example due to the extreme dryness and severity of the landscape but there are plenty of areas on Earth that have similar formations.

Giving unrelated examples doesn't help much. Aeolian (not alien) landscapes are very interesting and only part of the story on the geological surface formations on Mars.

The Onion: Are you ever disappointed that we haven't come any closer to the technology of 2001 than we have?

Arthur C. Clarke: Not really, because we've already seen far more... For instance, these pictures coming from Mars right now. I never imagined... Well, I may have imagined, but I never hoped to see them within my lifetime.

The Onion: Do you have any particular hopes for what they'll find in this round of exploration?

Arthur C. Clarke: Well, I think they've already found life. There's some pictures from the laboratories which seem to me to be unmistakably vegetation—leaves and stems and things. I don't see what else it could possibly be. And where there's vegetation, you can bet there'll be something nibbling on it. I'm still hoping we'll find some Martians up there, holding up a sign that says "Yankee go home." [Laughs.]

www.avclub.com...

Terapin,

And if I saw a shadow, and showed it to you, you would simply dismiss it because it's a 2-D photo. Let's face it, Tera, you're not here to discover or help to discover or even consider - you're here to discount and obscure and distract. "Look, what's that over there!" Come now, the subject is what is right in front of our eyes in that image. "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect." - Wesley, Princess Bride

Edit:

Not to be discounted out of hand because I didn't even bother to try, here's the same scene, further increased in size so that the shadow under the arching stream of water/liquid/dust/gas/whatever the heck it is, can be seen under the stream as it arches up from the mouth of the tube, over the landscape and down into the darker recesses below the hill the tubes are on. The pink arrows indicate the outer edges of the shadow:




[edit on 2-12-2006 by undo]

Originally posted by undoThat picture above looks like a fossil.

That is nothing like a fossil, at least like the fossils I have found here on Earth, Martian fossils, if they exist, may be different.

Or they may not be different...that is just your assumption based on absolutely no facts whatsoever...

Lets get a little closer detail shall we? What looks like fossils from space would have to be VERY HUGE if indeed they were fossils... They DO look like crinoids, very strikingly so, but I am not ready to accept 5 mile long crinoids just yet, no matter how much water was on Mars...

So lets look at the rover pictures.... the ones that missed the airbrushing...




[edit on 2-12-2006 by zorgon]

Originally posted by undo
The pink arrows indicate the outer edges of the shadow:

I particularly like the whirlpool of the same white material at the bottom of the tube

Originally posted by undo
Not to be discounted out of hand because I didn't even bother to try, here's the same scene, further increased in size so that the shadow under the arching stream of water/liquid/dust/gas/whatever the heck it is, can be seen under the stream as it arches up from the mouth of the tube, over the landscape and down into the darker recesses below the hill the tubes are on.

As I once said to mikesingh about that same photo, if that was the shadow than it should be darker where the "flow" is stronger, at the beginning, getting lighter with the dispersion of the flowing material.

Edit: I forgot to add that if this was a flowing something, the shadow would be constant, without interruptions.

[edit on 2/12/2006 by ArMaP]

ArMap,

It would, if the angle of the tube weren't as steep. The shadow starts later, because the angle is steep at first, then as the flow of material slopes downwards and begins to cascade, that's when the shadow starts. It actually starts before that but because it's shooting upwards at an incline at first, it's faded into the background and not as pronounced. It isn't till the cascade levels out that we see the darker shadow



[edit on 2-12-2006 by undo]

Originally posted by undoThe shadow starts later, because the angle is steep at first, then as the flow of material slopes downwards and begins to cascade, that's when the shadow starts. It actually starts before that but because it's shooting upwards at an incline at first, it's faded into the background and not as pronounced. It isn't till the cascade levels out that we see the darker shadow

Sorry, but I don't understand what you mean by that. I am trying to find photos of water flowing from a fire-hose or something like that, and casting a shadow, but its a little difficult.

So if that's a shadow ... then I guess all of the other unrelated dark areas in the photo couldn't be anything other than shadows too? Or could it be exactly like in the photo of Death Valley that I showed you, where mineral washes can form the same shape? In the larger view of the supposed Spray you can clearly see where those very same dark areas you pointed out begin well before the "spray", starting from off to the right, and cross through them, looking far more like a ravine or similar geological formation. Go back to the wide view photo and you can see what I am referring to. ArMaP also showed you Earth based photos of very similar looking formations. When you questioned his photo about color differences, I showed you how that is a very common occurrence.

I'm curious. You said that you were a "graphical artist." I am wondering in what area? There are many: Photography, Digital photography, Painting, Page layout, photo editing, etc., the list goes on and is long. I am just curious what your specific background with graphics is. As I mentioned, I worked on Mars Quest for the Space Science Institute and for years have dealt in museum quality high resolution graphics. Currently we have a project going on for Harvard/Smithsoninian and the Chandra X-ray space telescope. Just this Friday I was working on a graphic project for the National Park Service. I also have a good background in geological formations, Aeolian landscapes and satellite imagery.

Is there any possibility in your mind that there just might be a geological process forming those shapes and it is only poor image quality, or are you determined that what you think it looks like is the only answer? If you are fixed on your interpretations then there seems little point in your asking for further science on these photos. I remember well those who swore up and down about all the details they "saw" in the first Face On Mars photos, cities, pyramids, roads, etc., yet when better quality images became available with later instruments, everyone suddenly dropped their claims. You could be right, but I'd like to see far better evidence or support for your theories.

I forgot that, if we are talking about shadows, we should know from where on that photo was the Sun shining its light.

If I did everything right, the direction of the sunlight is as follows.

(I am not an artist, as anyone can see )

If that is correct, that could not be a shadow.

[edit on 2/12/2006 by ArMaP]

Grainy photos due little justice to the science being done on and above Mars. You can blow up any photo to "find" what ever you wish but it means little. Mars Express data is still streaming down from HRSC, MARSIS, Omega but also the probe's other instruments, PFS, SPICAM, ASPERA, and MaRS. They are probing all aspects of the Martian environment – studying atmospheric gases, searching for eventual biological processes, detecting high altitude clouds and hidden volcanoes and digging into the scavenging effects of the solar wind. There are also some great NEW images in High Resolution that are fully pan/tilt and zoomable that everyone should look at. You can see them at:

hiroc.lpl.arizona.edu...

check out the "Zoomify images"

I know that I have opened up another can of worms and that there will be people who still "find" cities, pyramids and dragons, but for the rest of us, enjoy some spectacular science and take a close up look at another world.

[edit on 2-12-2006 by Terapin]

ArMap,

Here's guy with a fire extinguisher. The light appears to be coming from over head. Notice that because the hose is inclined, the material is not casting a shadow until it begins to cascade down in the misty blob.
untitledname.com...

Terapin,

Nopers, never completely sold on anything of this nature. Are you? That's the real question of the moment, as you don't appear to be offering suggetions other than it's 2-D, so you can't tell. How did we learn anything with pictures? We use 2-d pics for lots of things, even scientific things. Of course, it's not a hard fact. Iain'tdumb.

I'd love to see your artwork! Is it online?

Originally posted by undo
Here's guy with a fire extinguisher. The light appears to be coming from over head. Notice that because the hose is inclined, the material is not casting a shadow until it begins to cascade down in the misty blob.

Sorry, but that photo is completely useless.

There isn't any clear light source, there aren't any shadows cast on the ground, not even from the guy with the extinguisher, and its completely out of focus.

I am still looking, but this photo may be enough to show you what I mean.


As you can see, the shadow is better defined at the start, where the water flows in a tighter jet, making it more opaque, casting darker shadows. As the water starts to spread, so its capability to stop the lights start to be reduced, making lighter shadows.

In this case the water is always at the same distance from the ground, so its not exactly what I wanted, I must keep on searching.


Have you seen my previous post? Apparently, if I am not wrong, the light from, the Sun is coming almost from the same direction to where to "flow" is heading, making it impossible to have a shadow cast on the ground to the left.

I believe there are pics of the Mars Quest exhibit I did for Space Science Institute online but I haven't checked if they are still up. I guess a Google for Mars Quest will show them if you are interested. We do have a company web site but I prefer to be anonymous for several reasons. I recently did some work for the DEA and you can never be to careful with personal information. Sorry.

Hey have you guys checked out the link to the hi rez photos I posted. They are amazing and hot off the presses. They were just released and more are on the way.

Actually, there IS a clear light source in the fire extinguisher photo. Despite its out of focus nature, If you look at the person with the extinguisher, you can see HIS shadow and that of the extinguisher just slightly off to his left, demonstrating that the light is from slightly behind and to his right and from about his level, not from above as previously indicated. Given that clear shadow, you can then see that there is no shadow on the ground from the powder coming out from the extinguisher. There is only lack of lighting behind it in the background.

Originally posted by undo

mikesingh,

what'dya think about the fact the pedestal has been edited out of the malin pic but not out of the arthur c. clarke pic, of the original glass tubes photo? that's a curious thing, doncha think?

So what's the big deal that these guys are airbrushing these pics? They're being paid for it but they won't succeed in pulling the wool over our eyes for long. Doesn't matter to the skeptics as they are blind anyway!!

OK, so you're talking of image tampering on the tubes? Have a good close look in the image here...


Courtesy: JP Skipper
Long 29.65 West, Lat 39.20 North
Source: NASA JPL MSSS

These guys have sure been ham handed. A pathetic attempt at image tampering. They need to be fired by NASA!!


[edit on 3-12-2006 by mikesingh]

Originally posted by ArMaPApparently, if I am not wrong, the light from, the Sun is coming almost from the same direction to where to "flow" is heading, making it impossible to have a shadow cast on the ground to the left.

You don't have to guess the direction of the sun... the Malin Space pictures come with the exact angle of the sun, how many meters each pixel is in the various images etc. No guess work... What is the original number of the picture in question?

Here is a better look at the Alpine Vacation Spot... You guys just don't see it do you?





The above picturesque scene reminds one of an Alpine Vacation Resort with trees, mountain peaks and snow covered hills. Low hanging clouds drift through the valley on both sides.


And here is another weird picture of tubes...








So no comments on the Martian Fossils I posted earlier? Figures

:shk:

[edit on 3-12-2006 by zorgon]