Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Egyptian statue on mars?

page: 36
191
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by ziggystar60
 


Thank you Ziggystar! 20 feet high is not really big then comparing the scale of the structure so called statue cannot be more than 1 or 1.5 feet. Chances are very slim for artificial object of that small dimension on a remote cliff. But what if the martians are lilliputs???
...


Cheers!




posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by the_sparkChances are very slim for artificial object of that small dimension on a remote cliff. But what if the martians are lilliputs???


A comedian in every crowd


This is the "Santa Claus" petroglyph in 9 mile canyon in Utah



There is also this cool serpent coming out of a stargate




The POINT however for this thread is the location of these 1000 year old carvings...




I am glad we were able to amuse you...


But everything is not always as it seems



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

A comedian in every crowd




Very funny! May be you should start a thread on this.





This is the "Santa Claus" petroglyph in 9 mile canyon in Utah



There is also this cool serpent coming out of a stargate




The POINT however for this thread is the location of these 1000 year old carvings...




I am glad we were able to amuse you...


But everything is not always as it seems


Point taken and thanks a ton for enlightning me.



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Btw other pics from that site are really amazing.


Cheers!



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 06:07 PM
link   
NASA lie, thats the first important point here. They lie, then they change the lie and then they lie some more. Need Another Space Agency shouldnt be trusted to tell anyone anything.

People talk of the old "sphinx on Mars" case where they returned later with better techniques and showed just a rock.
Say NASA, bear that in mind. Maybe they returned later with better imaging techniques now they knew people were interested and made sure it looked like just a rock.

Same with these pics, looks like NASA has already touched away anything they didnt want seen, but sure as mud if we are smart enough to pick up and believe the things they could explain away...another "better technology" image will probably make it vanish as usual, thats NASA for you.

They probably touch out anything trully exciting but dont want to over tamper, and can probably explain away most things. If it gets too popualr though im sure they will correct it with a new photo where everything turns into rock again.

NASA could have shown all its pictures in real time, we could have seen alot of the feeds and images as they came in, thats something NASA stopped doing a long time ago. Bottom line is they dont want people to see first hand because they know damn fine and well there are somethings which they find too sensitive and too clandestine to be broadcasting to all of us.

When NASA stops being such a secretive bunch of data hording muppets, maybe ill start trusting them , for now if NASA says something, its pretty certain to be a lie.



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by iammonkey
 


i don't know if anyone has noticed but there seems to be like a ramp leading down to the statue/figure and what could possibly be a door like shadow at the top of the ramp..... or it just could be rock,.??



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by silver6ix
NASA could have shown all its pictures in real time, we could have seen alot of the feeds and images as they came in, thats something NASA stopped doing a long time ago.
How can they show the photos in real time, this is not a video feed, these are photos taken by the rovers that not even NASA sees in real time, they are transmitted to Earth when the satellite that makes the communications link passes over the rovers.



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 07:11 PM
link   
stichin will be pleased by your observation- just wish more people would listen to posts like yours:



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by the_spark
Btw other pics from that site are really amazing.



Thanks we try hard



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2012 real or not
stichin will be pleased by your observation- just wish more people would listen to posts like yours:


What has Sitchin got to do with this?


Oh yeah I forgot he is 'branching out' now to Mars anomalies


I love the way he changed the date for Nibiru to 2900 AD
Pretty safe with that prediction


As far as your nic name.... NOT


[edit on 24-10-2008 by zorgon]



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by silver6ix
NASA could have shown all its pictures in real time, we could have seen alot of the feeds and images as they came in, thats something NASA stopped doing a long time ago.
How can they show the photos in real time, this is not a video feed, these are photos taken by the rovers that not even NASA sees in real time, they are transmitted to Earth when the satellite that makes the communications link passes over the rovers.


First of all the rover does have a camera which records a feed and although it might have windows of sending them, NASA has far more than the images you have seen.

Second of all there are still sats orbiting Mars and sending images and feed back to Earth and have been for quite sometime.

In fact NASA most likely have more footage of Mars than you could ever imagine. In the early days NASA did make this information available and they did do live feeds, only after a UFO scandal they stopped doing it.

With the sat and camera tech they have now you could probably watch mars spin for a month in between the close in surface shots.

If you genuinely believe the handful of pictures you get are it, you are [mistaken]. There were more pictures available and more video available 20 years ago than there are now.

[edit on 25-10-2008 by silver6ix]

Mod Edit: Figure of speech, but let's keep the epithets under control


[edit on 11/9/2008 by Badge01]



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by silver6ix

If you genuinely believe the handful of pictures you get are it, you are [mistaken]. There were more pictures available and more video available 20 years ago than there are now.

[edit on 25-10-2008 by silver6ix]


Quite a handful:
More than 200,000 images here
www.msss.com...

Probably 1,000's here
marsrovers.nasa.gov...

A "few" more here
www.esa.int...

Oh, and then there are these ones
hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...

There may be a few duplicates, sorry about that.

(thanks ArMap)

[edit on 11/9/2008 by Badge01]



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 01:06 AM
link   
Don't forget these

Phoenix Mars Mission

Mars Odessey THEMIS Mission

This one for fun...
www.nmnaturalhistory.org...


[edit on 25-10-2008 by zorgon]



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by silver6ix
 


I am not sure of what you mean, do you mean that the rovers have video cameras?

Do you know the huge amount of bandwidth needed for transmitting video when compared with still images? It would be a waste of resources, video does not add much information (that is why MPEG compression removes areas that are the same in the previous frame, or something like that), specially on a subject with very little movement like the one we see on Mars' photos.

About the number of photos, according to AtlasII Product Search, these are the numbers (for both) at this time.

Descent cameras: 18
Hazard cameras: 391,690
Microscopic imagers: 4,435,670
Navigation cameras: 984,274
Panoramic cameras: 2,899,335

This gives a total of 8,710,987 photos, more than a handful.


PS: I did not include the data gathered by the other instruments, the Miniature Thermal Emission Spectrometer (Mini-TES), the Mössbauer Spectrometer (MB), the Alpha Particle X-Ray Spectrometer (APXS) and the Rock Abrasion Tool (RAT) because those instruments do not take photos, but the data gathered must be sent back to Earth like the photos and is available for anyone interested in it.



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Now sequence them and tell me how much time is covered



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by silver6ix
 


There is no need of making a sequence, the time covered is between the time of the first and the time of the last.

The first photo was taken (by Opportunity's descent camera) at 2004-01-25, the last photo is from 2008-02-11 (as far as I could see, and the PDS site is not updated with the same frequency as the missions pages), so the time covered is 1478 days.

To video all that time (only half of the time, if the hypothetical video camera would stop for the night, at the beginning the rovers also took photos at night) it would mean, at 25 frames per second, something like 3,192,480,000 frames (if I got my calculations right).

And you did not answered my question, are you saying that the rovers have video cameras?



posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


bandwidth? 32 frames are just 32 picture!
hemo



posted on Nov, 9 2008 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


Yes, but a video with just 32 frames, at the common frame rate of 25 images per second would last just 32/25=1.28 seconds.

So, if you are thinking about short bursts of video, that could be done, but I don't see what could be gained by that, while what I understood of silver6ix posts, what was being discussed was a live video feed from Mars, and that would be, in my understanding, a real time video video feed at 25 frames per second.



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   
What do you think of this? At 1:50 in this movie, between a pic of moon and a photoshopped mirror face, is a view from above where two almost identical rows of structures is visible. Do you know if this is real and where to find the original at NASA?
www.youtube.com...



posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   
this is even spookier than tha mermaid statue they found





new topics

top topics



 
191
<< 33  34  35    37  38  39 >>

log in

join