New Video Depicts 3D model of Glass Tunnel and UFO Pictures on Mars!

This video was posted a week ago, and while the glass tunnel has been discussed before, they also picture many new pictures not seen before, like a very convincing Martian UFO!

The narrator isn't very good, but all the pics and evidence is!
Included is a 3D diagram of the tunnel itself!
Now try saying thats sand dunes!


video link

reply to post by Odessy

The 3D image is created, not something directly derived from the satellite image. This is quite obvious since they even got the "tunnel" hanging free on the side of the canyon. The satellite image doesnt show that and it would be impossible to get the 3D data for this from a 2D image. So I say the 3D is complete bullplop.

The other image of the oval is neat I suppose, seeing the source instead of crappy Youtube quality would be nice.

3D imaging is possible using 2D images ...

research stereoscopy ... in fact, go to the jpl/nasa site and check out their panaramas from the rovers. Most are available as a single clean 2D, a red and blue 3D, and a clean left and right pair 2D, which can be use to create your own 3D image out of the two ... either by using stereo goggles, stereo monitor display system ... and the possibility of a program to render 3D out of the image by the same process that our eyes and brain interpret 2D images into a 3D concept in our mind.


If you search, you will find this process has been around pretty much since photography has existed. There are some very old 3D photos. Smaller images you can cross your eyes and focus on the middle image and focus ... this is a cheap and easy way to get the 3D image out of a stereo pair without expensive equipment.

Stereo imaging is also how theaters and theme parks show you 3D (now usually with polarization, old school with red/blue filtering).



I agree though, seeing source images ... as well as the process used would help the argument.

I watched it, but will have to watch it again when not so tired

reply to post by FreeThinkerIdealist

But you obviously cant see around objects like their interpretation. If I see a satellite image of a house, I could make a pretty decent 3D scene of it. But that's only because I know how a house looks. These tunnels arent that easy... The very fact that they make them round in their final 3D scene is because they knew exactly how they wanted them to look from the satellite image (whether that is correct or not).


[edit on 12-2-2008 by merka]

reply to post by merka


unfortunately there is no other sourcing i can provide, just the video.
I might be able to if I look real hard, so I'll try a little later when I have time to find something.

As to the 3D thing, I would imagine they could tell from the shadows that it was not at the base of the 2 hills/cliffs

Funny how these "tunnels" or "worms" don't really look like worms or tunnels when viewing new high resolution pics of these features. Looks like sand dunes to me...




Glass tubes or worms? hardly

I got one picture for the "Face on Mars" believers.


More info here. www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by FreeThinkerIdealist
3D imaging is possible using 2D images ...
research stereoscopy ...

One of the more interesting things about using stereo pairs to create a 3-D image is that if you swap the pairs, view the right image with the left eye and vice versa, it has the effect of reversing concavity. So, for instance, if you have a crater that is a bowl in the ground, it will look like a dome. I suspect that the same thing has been done here. A channel filled with rippled dunes suddenly becomes a tube with ridges. It helps to use the correct image for with the correct "eye."

reply to post by sensfan


Good links, puts it in perspective. Though, the 'worms' when turned around now look like waves of sand lke you'd find in a dried up river bed. Interesting in itself.

Originally posted by Arcane Demesne
reply to post by sensfan

 

Good links, puts it in perspective. Though, the 'worms' when turned around now look like waves of sand lke you'd find in a dried up river bed. Interesting in itself.

Exactly, and there is lots of speculation amongst scientists and others that that is exactly what they are...dried up ancient riverbeds.

Originally posted by IvanZana
I got one picture for the "Face on Mars" believers.

More info here. www.abovetopsecret.com...

According to Hoagland's expert Dr. Tom Van Flandern, the chances of this being a natural formation (eyes, lips, nostrils, eyebrows) is astronomical...oh wait...that IS a natural formation?

Nevermind.



[edit on 2/12/2008 by Soylent Green Is People]

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

According to Hoagland's expert Dr. Tom Van Flandern, the chances of this being a natural formation (eyes, lips, nostrils, eyebrows) is astronomical...oh wait...that IS a natural formation?

Your assuming that’s a natural formation, how do you know for a fact that it wasn’t carved out or made by some ancient civilisation here on earth thousands of years ago... you know, like all those animals made from rocks in South American that can be seen from space, they aint a Natural Formation.

You don’t know that that’s a natural formation.

Also, that one is a side profile, which the Mars one is not, the Mars one has 2 eyes, 2 eyebrows, full nose, full mouth etc all in proportion to each other.

Mikey


[edit on 12/2/2008 by Mikey84]

I liked the glass tube idea because it might provide an idea to how underground civilizations get around, if they in fact do exist.
kinda like the tubes in futurama or something!



I do have a question though.

when i originally saw the pics, i too thought they were concave...
but what is that bump in the middle of it?
the shadow of it makes it seem that the tubes are infact #dimentionat.

Now I must try this! (switching images to switch concave/convex appearances in stereo images)


I am not really trying to prove that his assumptions are correct, just that ... the ability to extrapolate 3D from stereo 2D is done today, and has been for decades.


I sort of see a shadow there. As if it is a much shorter uprising than the cliff beside it.


You know, we use tunnels too. Through mountains, under water. It has also been around a while


I would have to say, if those are dried river beds, they would have been river rapids with water flowing with all the 'humps'. To me, the humps look like they would be so tall, they would block flow. I think I am starting to convince myself they are tunnels

Maybe time for some rest

I am more interested in the Mars face and that NASA faked what they put out, any more info on that?

not sure, ill check it out.
what im interested in as well is the fact that when pressured, NASA realeased 6,000+ pics from Mars!

Originally posted by Shinji
I am more interested in the Mars face and that NASA faked what they put out, any more info on that?

perhaps that deserves a different thread, or to be asked in one of the dozen or so already existing about the mars "face". But, I'm curious, why you think that nasa faked anything regarding it? U2U me if you wish to avoid derailing this thread.

Thanks.

no, its not derailing the thread, because that was included in the video.
if you watch the video, about halfway through, they talk about the face.
They said when NASA released the first high res image, they warped it to have it not look like a face, but if you unwarp it, then you can see it looks even more like a face!
Then, after more pressure, NASA release over 6000 new high res images of mars that they were keeping private.

Originally posted by Odessy
no, its not derailing the thread, because that was included in the video.
if you watch the video, about halfway through, they talk about the face.
They said when NASA released the first high res image, they warped it to have it not look like a face, but if you unwarp it, then you can see it looks even more like a face!
Then, after more pressure, NASA release over 6000 new high res images of mars that they were keeping private.

Could you please point me in the direction of these "unwarped" pictures, and explain what you mean by warping and unwarping?

Thanks.

Refer to 0:45 - 1:15 in the video of the OP.
As far as finding that info online... well, thats another story.
Im just going by the video, as the Dr. is a credible source (more so than just pics on the internet) and that the show was aired on some public television station. unfortunately, I cant make out what the mark is in the lower right corner to identify it to what TV station its playing through.
Take it for what it is i suppose