It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Strange image of new lander photo

page: 10
10
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2008 @ 03:32 AM
link   
...wow, I have to give props to SoylentGreen. So they do use false color images? I don't feel so stupid now, sorry zorgon.

I'll just back away quietly, get back to the real world, and let everyone argue...




But for the record...

www.nasa.gov...

That seems a tad better than disposable cameras. There's no need to carry on childish about it, there's more things to worry about.

[edit on 29-5-2008 by mattguy404]




posted on May, 29 2008 @ 07:00 AM
link   
Some of you should try staying on topic instead of talking about stuff that happens outside ATS that has nothing to do with this thread and isn't any of our business and in all honesty could be lies. When you bring up stuff like that, it's a desperate attempt to discredit someone when you have nothing else in your arsenal IMHO.

I think it's hilarious that some of you took Zorgons comment about sending disposable cameras so seriously. You try coming off as experts in this area and you can't take a joke at all and sarcasm goes right over your heads.

You people are missing the point. If you spent mass amounts of money on something you were sending to another planet. Wouldn't you want the first images sent back to look great? They say these first images are used to check out the lander to make sure things are running alright, right? Why use low resolution cameras for that? I'd want those images in the best resolution I could get. Not in resolutions so low that they cause a lot of image artifacts.

[edit on 29-5-2008 by nightmare_david]



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by zorgon
Why the secret astronaut corps, naturally... you know those guys who repair the Rovers to 'keep em going" ?

Right…. The secret astronauts!
The ones that only exist in you and Johns imaginations.
So secret that even the government does not know about them…



Originally posted by zorgon
Don't know about Soylent, but you don'tYour supposedly a pilot, yet pass off as a space expert and now a photo expert?

So stick to what you claim to know best... flying

Most people who have an interest in Aviation, also have an interest in space. Maybe your not aware of this, but real astronauts are normally chosen from accomplished pilots.

I am not sure about the fantasy astronut core though….


Originally posted by zorgon
Poppy Cock!!! If we were under a purple star things would look purple but our eyes would see it as PURPLE not green

The scenery would look different but our eyes would still register the same wavelengths of light which we translate to color


Double poppy cock!!
Maybe this is the reason why you cannot figure out that the moon having an atmosphere is complete bunkiss, because you fail to understand that basics of how light and color work.

Maybe you should start off with the very basics:
5th Grade Science

I supposed that the sun looks red at sunset, because the sun physically changes color at that time of your local evening?

Maybe Weed is more aware of this issue then you, because he is a diver, and divers have to deal with color changes/loss at depth. Why do you think that diver safety gear is yellow? Because it retains its color the longest at the greatest depths. Why do you think that divers use red filters on their cameras? Because the colors shift as you proceed deeper, and the first wavelength that you lose is red, shifting all the other colors to different colors (some of my rig is red, and it turns gray at around 30 feet). You do of course realize that all colors are combinations of the primary colors and if you shift one of them it changes the other non-primary colors, right? Most children learn this by kindergarten when they learn to mix fingerpaint. You know like red paint and green paint make yellow paint.
Color Correction in Diving

This is similar to the way that astronomers can use stars occulting behind a astral body to tell if it has an atmosphere and what the atmosphere is made of. Hence the fact that we know for certain that there is ZERO atmosphere on the moon, despite what you and john claim.





posted on May, 29 2008 @ 09:54 AM
link   


[edit on 29-5-2008 by skekke]

[edit on 29-5-2008 by skekke]



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by nightmare_david
 


nightmare.....just guessing here, since I'm not a 'rocket scientist'....but if the first pics were to assess the condition of the Lander, they would want to see them as soon as possible. That we be 'low resolution' since it would transmit faster. Is the Lander on the lip of a crater? On the side of a hill?

Plus, if I were at JPL, I'd be like a kid in a candy store! "I wanna see now!"

The sweets will come, in time....we just want a first looky see.....



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
Right…. The secret astronauts!
The ones that only exist in you and Johns imaginations.
So secret that even the government does not know about them…


They don't?


Not according to THIS presentation
Secret Astronauts and NOVA "ASTROSPIES"
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.pbs.org...

But lets take that up in that thread




I supposed that the sun looks red at sunset, because the sun physically changes color at that time of your local evening?

Maybe Weed is more aware of this issue then you, because he is a diver, and divers have to deal with color changes/loss at depth. Why do you think that diver safety gear is yellow? Because it retains its color the longest at the greatest depths.


Well as usual your tactics of flying off the handle without reading what I say show your level of comprehension... you don't even realize that in this post your trying to 'educate' me on color you just proved my point...

Why is the safety gear YELLOW? because we still SEE YELLOW at that depth... The point is COLOR does not change the way our EYE sees it. The sunset is red because of the atmospheric conditions that filter certain wavelengths but we see RED because that is the part of the spectrum that gets through...

But it is obvious that you totally missed the point... no surprise there... you are to busy attacking


So he is a diver.. so am I since 14 don't see what that has to do with anything


Atmosphere on the Moon? Anyone who say it is ZERO is supporting ignorance... even NASA gives data on that, but I doubt you read the data sheet. The only point of contention between NASA and the University studies and John and me is HOW MUCH... Why not actually try looking up what real scientists have to say about it?

:shk:



Originally posted by mattguy404
That seems a tad better than disposable cameras. There's no need to carry on childish about it, there's more things to worry about.


Thanks for that link
by the look of the sundial on that, it seems a lot closer to reality... though the sky is a bit off


So ummm "more things to worry about" like what?



Originally posted by nightmare_david

I think it's hilarious that some of you took Zorgons comment about sending disposable cameras so seriously. You try coming off as experts in this area and you can't take a joke at all and sarcasm goes right over your heads.


Thanks for noticing David... but it seems some people have an 'agenda'


Perhaps some of the NASA suporters could write NASA a letter and get a straight answer on the anomaly and end the debate... and Phoenix its not a rover, it won't be long before this craft is forgotten much like the Chinese and Japanese probe


[edit on 29-5-2008 by zorgon]



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Z....chill out, man!!!

Oh, and while you're at it, show us an example of a purple star!!

I think any intelligent individual knows how light refracts, through various media....water, atmosphere. I made a point about the human eye (well, actually, most species' eyes, on our planet, under a G-type star) and how the spectrum might be perceived. Other creatures (bees come to mind) see differently than humans....or dogs....or deer....or cats.

Not necessary to be a scientist to know this....just a well-rounded, well-read person!!

Back to Mars....and the Phoenix lander photos. Can we focus on them, now??

As I've mentioned, Phoenix is NOT at the North Pole of Mars....it is at 68 degrees North latitude. Asd noted on Wikipedia, and in numerous textbooks, the atmospheric pressure on Mars is six tenths of one percent of Earth's. Even if the prevailing temperature were above zero celsius, liquid water cannot exist in that environment....not on the surface.

Frozen water (ice) would also not last long....it would sublimate away very quickly. Frozen CO2, however....that's another matter. It could exist, if sufficient quantity were there....yes, it would be sublimating as well....but we see the 'icecaps' of Mars fluctuate, with the 'seasons'. Mars has an axial tilt, much like Earth, therefore has 'seasons', much like Earth.

Funny, isn't it, that the orbital period of Mars is just about twice as long as Earth's? And, the planet rotates at nearly the same rate, as Earth? One Mars 'Sol' is just slightly different than Earth's 24 hours. One Martian 'year' is just about two Earth years. Hence, the 'seasons' on Mars would last twice as long....six 'months', in Earth terms, compared to the three months we experience.

This isn't rocket science....it is basic science, astrometrics, astrophysics...call it what you want, it is science.

But for the size of Mars, and its lower gravity, it would be a virtual twin of Earth...it cooled off, faster than Earth, billions of years ago. Mars doesn't seem to have a magnetic inner core, the dynamo to keep it hot, any more, as Earth does. Mars very likely supported life, early on....most likely, extremophile bacterial life exists today! But, there was not time for complex organisms to evolve....maybe that was a good thing, because given our propensity, we'd probably want to wage war on them!!!!

Kidding....(not really...)



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Atmosphere on the Moon? Anyone who say it is ZERO is supporting ignorance... even NASA gives data on that, but I doubt you read the data sheet. The only point of contention between NASA and the University studies and John and me is HOW MUCH... Why not actually try looking up what real scientists have to say about it?


Actually, I believe that it’s well known on this board that you and John support the idea of there being a breathable atmosphere on the moon. An atmosphere that was breathable would be visible to even amateur astronomers by observation of occulted stars. The actual definition of what scientists consider a lunar atmosphere is so thin that they only loosely classify it as such:


The Lunar Atmosphere
In decades past it was accepted that moons such as the Earth's moon or the moons of Jupiter were airless bodies with no atmosphere whatsoever. Now, however, measurements have shown that most of these moons are surrounded by a *very* thin region of molecules which might be loosely classified as an atmosphere. Such is the case with the Moon.


So an atmosphere that were thick enough to be breathable would cause a shift in the color of the stars that go behind it the same way that the sun turns red here on earth when it goes through a thicker portion of atmosphere.


Originally posted by zorgon
Well as usual your tactics of flying off the handle without reading what I say show your level of comprehension

The point is COLOR does not change the way our EYE sees it.


If I read correctly, your point was that Mars should look a certain way based on the way things look to you on this Earth “because it’s under the same sun”. Yet as I stated, here on the Earth, under the same sun, there is variance in the appearance of colors based on the medium light passes through and the density of that medium. Considering that Mars has neither the same atmospheric gases nor are they in the same densities, you cannot judge the proper colors based on Earthly experience. (Well at least not without a lot of data and experience with the way that light refracts in different combinations of gases at different densities, and most likely some software to make those conversions.)

I am not even going to get into the secret astronut core crap again.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Oh, and while you're at it, show us an example of a purple star!!


Compliments of Hubble and Bad Astronomy





Seems Hubble even found "The Eye of Sauron"




www.theregister.co.uk...

space.newscientist.com...

imgsrc.hubblesite.org...



As to Mars...

NASA has over the last few weeks made a habit of showing us images that have clear examples of things that can and will be pointed out to be 'artifacts' case in point the recent "Egyptian Statue" and the "Humanoid' that made the internet rounds like wild fire... these images are so clear that even skeptics have to admit it 'looks like'... even if it is just a wind carved rock...

So why does NASA even publish them? and in fact use them as front page news press release? Because they KNOW what the result will be... endless publicity over Mars anomalies that keeps us busy and happy so we keep sending them those tax dollars


If anyone truly believes that NASA is not aware of the effect that those images will have, they are truly playing ostrich



[edit on 29-5-2008 by zorgon]



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


LOL LOL LOL!!!!!!!!

OK....purple stars!!!

Not that there were any 'false colors' in those pics you uploaded?

Very pretty, nonetheless!!

Would make good 'wallpaper' for the next MS edition....of 'windows'....



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 05:11 PM
link   



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 10:37 PM
link   
I dont know what everyone is getting upset about when
the hires photos are released you will all see it is just

a weather ballon



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 11:09 PM
link   
I didnt see anything strange in any of the photographs I looked at. I think some people want to see things in these photos so badly they convince themselves there is something there when there isnt.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


www.esa.int...

www.esa.int...
19 August 2004
On Earth, the longitude of the Royal Observatory in Greenwich, England, is defined as the 'prime meridian,' or zero degrees longitude. Locations on Earth are measured in degrees east or west from this position, but where is the equivalent position on Mars?

Earth's prime meridian was defined by international agreement in 1884 as the position of the large 'transit circle', a telescope in the Royal Observatory's Meridian Building. The transit circle was built by Sir George Biddell Airy, the 7th Astronomer Royal, in 1850.

For Mars, the prime meridian was first defined by the German astronomers W. Beer and J. H. Mädler in 1830-32. They used a small circular feature on the surface, which they called 'A', as a reference point to determine the rotation period of the planet.


The Italian astronomer G. Schiaparelli used this feature as the zero point of longitude in his 1877 map of Mars. It was subsequently named Sinus Meridiani ('Middle Bay') by French astronomer Camille Flammarion.
A crater in the Sinus Meridiani was later called Airy, named to commemorate the builder of the Greenwich transit. When the US Mariner 9 spacecraft mapped the planet at about 1 kilometre resolution in 1972, a more precise definition was needed.
Merton Davies of the RAND Corporation was analysing surface features and designated a 0.5-kilometre-wide crater, subsequently named 'Airy-0' (within the larger crater Airy) as the zero point.
This crater was imaged once by Mariner 9 and once by the Viking 1 orbiter in 1978, and these two images were the basis of the Martian longitude system for the rest of the 20th century.
The US Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) attempted to take a picture of Airy-0 on every close overflight it made since the beginning of its mapping mission. This shows how difficult it is to hit such a small target: nine attempts were required, and the spacecraft did not pass directly over Airy-0 until almost the end of the MGS primary mission in January 2001.
Originally, a system with ‘planetographic' latitude and longitude increasing to the west was developed to be used with the Viking observations. The US Geological Survey and other organisations then adopted a system with ‘planetocentric' latitude and longitude increasing to the east for making future Mars maps and imagery. Both systems were approved for use on Mars by the International Astronomical Union in 2000.
(The ‘planetocentric' system uses co-ordinates derived from the angle measured from the equator to a point on the surface at the centre of the planet, whereas the ‘planetographic' system uses co-ordinates which are mapped on the surface.)
Most maps produced before 2002 use the earlier co-ordinates system, but now the majority of Mars missions and instrument teams have now adopted the latter system defined for Mars, namely the planetocentric latitude and east longitude system. These definitions have been widely adopted by NASA and ESA missions and other users of planetary data and are likely to remain in use for a decade or more.
The articles featuring the latest Mars images published on the ESA Mars Express web site quote positions given in this latest system, with longitude ranging from 0-360 degrees East. This is different to Earth, where we give longitudes as 0-180 degrees, East or West.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Zorgon.....the "Egyptian Statue" on Mars, the one that 'made the rounds' on the internets.....was an image, on the interior wall of a crater....and it was maybe, five or six inches high.

Shoot! People have sold pictures of Jesus on a tortilla on eBay!!!!!

Best line EVER from the Simpsons. Homer has an experience, where he is talking to G-d. G-d, of course has five fingers (if you know anything about cartoons, you'll know why that's funny)...but, he, g-d, has to go.....he cuts Homer short, in the middle of his sentence.....because he....g-d, has to go appear in a tortilla in Mexico!!!!

Funny as all get out!!!! Not the only funny part of the Simpsons, but ranks well up there!!!



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 05:10 AM
link   
Why do the cameras on board the Lander, built by UA and Max Planck Institute, have such lousy resolutions??? And the darn Lander and its equipment costs a whopping $420 million! My pinhole camera could do better! In this age is that all NASA could cobble up? Hope the next set of images are better.

OK, here's another whitish whatever-it-is I found in one of the images. The second one is a zoom the OP is referring to. And then there's Mikey's 'skull' which has been hauled through a few filters...







Now the first two could either be some alien artifacts or parts of the equipment used for the Lander's touch-down, which I think it most likely is.

Cheers!



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 05:28 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 
I'm sure Richard Hoagland would say they look at the high resolution pictures first b4 they show them to us. Just in case there really is a artifact from previous ruins or present. I tend to agree.

NASA will see first and get the laughs and we get the shaft.



[edit on 30-5-2008 by RUFFREADY]



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


Your right Mike it is pathetic the quality of the photos we are receiving from the Phoenix Lander. As you have stated NASA or I should say the American people have spent $420,000,000 to make it to the Northern Plains of Mars at a distance of of 422,000,000 miles. That is approx. $1.00 in U.S. money per mile so please NASA give us our dollars worth with some clear photos and not the 90% you have submitted that are out of focus. Thank You, Rik Riley



[edit on 30-5-2008 by rikriley]



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 08:30 AM
link   
disclose.tv...here is a video analysis of the anomalious object

Mars Phoenix Lander: Anomalous Object on Surface

still think its frozen gyeser reflection of ice. IMHO

source



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join