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.

 

Monolith on Mars? Interesting image

page: 11
84
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Two Eight Seven Four
 


University of Arizona is where the best Lunar Orbiter photos are (well up for grabs anyway)... I wonder if they could click my link and explain a few things I found from their very own catalog




posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Two Eight Seven Four
 

The incompetence of the media is amazing!

They mixed the two photos, the one found by Super70 and the other one (the one posted by jkrog80), from a different photo, the one posted on the Lunar Explorer Italia site.

The photo from the OP (PSP_009342_1725) was taken on 24 July 2008, at 7.2° S, 267.4° E.
The other photo (PSP_006737_1265) was taken on 3 January 2008, at 53.1° S 125.4° E, a completely different place.

The result is that we are left without knowing what photo was considered explained by the "breaking away from the bedrock" explanation. I suppose that they were talking about the photo from the OP because that is also what I consider the most probable explanation, while the second photo (the square looking object) appears in a flat area without anything in sight from which it could have broke.

The Daily Mail article goes further into "confusion mode" by showing the two photos as if they are the same. Apparently they do not look at what they publish.

It looks like someone from the media is looking at ATS threads and not reading beyond the OP...



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   
I don't see it. Looks like the "monolith" resolution exceeds that of the actual photo... nothing is that sharp.

It would help if you could narrow down the search area [smaller circle]. I cropped out that area and there's nothing like that visible.



Edit: After downloading a huge raw file [JP2] and loading the viewer software, I now see it. My mistake was that I was looking at the .jpg files which didn't have the full resolution.

[edit on 17-8-2009 by draknoir2]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Wow!

THE SUN magazine didn't even give me a shout out!

The SUN: Monument on Mars Proof of Life



[edit on 2-9-2009 by super70]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Oh, and let's not forget the UK Daily mail!

DAILYMAIL UK: Mars Monolith




posted on Sep, 3 2009 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by super70
 

But you can see on the comments that someone from Portugal had something to say about it.



posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Revived, this thread is awesome.



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
I have seen this picture as well...and it DOES resemble the one that is apparently also on Phobos II...I must agree with a previous poster (FIFIGI I think) the shadow is quite large...implying that it may not be as natural as we may think or want to believe...



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


It looks as if there are two monoliths in the picture. The other one is down to the bottom of the more protruding one. It almost looks like the obelisks that might have stood in front of a pyramid at one time.



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Wow! this is BACK in the news.

MSNBC

ABC news

International Business times

SPACE.com

SWEET!



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Cool boulder.



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   
I'm not sure if I trust the "zoomed" in version. For all we know it could be a picture of the sahara desert in black and white.



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   
If you read my first post from July 2009, it shows all the data where I found the image from NASA's photographs.



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by super70
 


Time to give this a bump (I read about it on your recent thread). Never saw this thread before, and it's nice to see the OP and ATS being given wider distribution and eyes-on the findings generated here.

Can you write up a short summary of the thread, and if there are any updates? Thanks. Nice work.
edit on 21-1-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   

The HiRISE camera that photographed it has a resolution of approximately 1 foot (30 centimeters) per pixel — impressive considering the 180-mile (300-kilometer) altitude from which it photographs the Martian surface, but not quite sharp enough to capture the cragginess of a mid-size boulder. "When your resolution is too low to fully resolve an object, it tends to look rectangular because the pixels in the image are squares. Any curve will look like a series of straight lines if you reduce your resolution enough,"



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


Thanks Aleister





posted on Sep, 7 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Now I know of the monolith that has been sighted on Phobos, but I was not aware of another one sighted on Mars, as I found out with the latest episode of Nasa's Unexplained Files episode #2
The segment about the Mars monolith is at about the 38 minute mark of the video. This is very interesting. 2 alleged monoliths now total, one on Phobos and one on Mars. Very interesting.



new topics

top topics



 
84
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join