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.

 

Some interesting pictures from Mars

page: 4
20
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Wow!

Like the animation - certainly shows a bit more detail to the object in question, and shows for sure the curve isnt a part of it - I was always uncertain about this, which was why I did the edge detect originally (which didn't resolve the issue!). Neat trick and I one I would like to learn

I think when I found it what struck me about it more than anything, is the splitting of the 'rock' i.e. into three or four linear pieces, whilst at the same time it appears to be eroded out of a sedimentary plane in the other direction.

Truth to tell, I still can't imagine how wind, sand, water and freezing could have created such a bizarre, fragile looking shape, but in light of your work, ArMap I'm happy to accept that it may, nevertheless, be the case.

Now.
Can you do something similar with the pipe?




posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Icerider
 


That looks a lot like a "man-made" artifact.
Maybe has inteligent life going on in there?
yes? no?
still my mind wonders.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Icerider
Now.
Can you do something similar with the pipe?
No, the "pipe" is too far away, and I think that it is really just one piece, like the rest of the "cap" on that small hill.



I don't know if you ever did this, but when I was a kid one of the things I liked to on the beach was to dig under the thin layer of sand that got some water but that dries almost instantly. That creates a very thin layer of very fragile material but that it's strong enough not to break when we remove the sand from below it.

Those formations (the hill "cap" and the "pipe", that I think is just the edge of one of those formations) remind me of that, a layer that for some reason was turned into a slightly more resistant material than the rest, so it takes longer to erode.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 



I know what you mean, I think, but thats not what I feel I'm seeing here, and the more I look the more convinced I'm becoming.





I STILL see a rounded conduit, dead straight, shaded perfectly. Perhaps time will prove me wrong, or right - maybe they will get spirit moving and get some closer pictures.
But as I said, I have found several where this item has been smudged or airbrushed (I'll try to find a couple), so Im not the only one with suspicions, otherwise why bother?

If its self deception I'm happy to wallow in it on this one!



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Icerider
I STILL see a rounded conduit, dead straight, shaded perfectly.

The "rounded" may be true or not, there's not enough definition to judge that, but it's not perfectly straight, it follows the hill's curvature.




Perhaps time will prove me wrong, or right - maybe they will get spirit moving and get some closer pictures.
Unfortunately, the odds are getting more and more against it moving again.



But as I said, I have found several where this item has been smudged or airbrushed (I'll try to find a couple), so Im not the only one with suspicions, otherwise why bother?
It would be great if you could find them, as I have never seen anything "smudged" or "airbrushed" on Mars photos.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Well I have these two among lots of others on my hard drive.






Afraid you'll have to take my word for it that I haven't doctored them myself, as I'm not sure where I got them, though I think the 1st may have come from space dot com.

No saying who messed with them or when, of course, but they don't look like the proper pictures to me.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Icerider
 


It's hard to say if it's even the same place or not, it would be better with the source.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


WTF! All of a sudden I can't log in to my pictures, or upload anything.

I hope this is just a glitch, can't understand being able to log into the site but not to my pictures - any ideas anyone?

ArMap

Hmm, your a hard sell, thats for sure

First picture came from the jpl mission site, but I cant remember which camera and sol. However you can find one example here.....

www.space.com...

Well, three examples actually, but none looking like the original high resolution material.

Second example came from here....

www.nasa.gov...

I don't know if these are 'low res' or tampered with, but they certainly don't show the information I posted in the thread origin.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Icerider
 


OK, that's much better, it was much easier for you to re-find them then would have been for me, without any way of knowing what you had seen or not.

Now, as they say on that Space.com page, those photos were taken from a different place, although near the same Von Braun hill, some 550 Sols earlier.

Those photos were also taken with the navigation camera, not the panoramic camera, the one used to make that large panorama from the Opening Post.

This traverse map will show you the difference between the two locations.



Knowing that, it's natural that something that is almost on the edge of the hill in one photo does not appear (at least in the same place) in the other photo.

More after my dinner.


Edited to add the link to the map, I guess I was hungrier than I thought.


[edit on 12/12/2009 by ArMaP]



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Continuing, here is a photo of the "pipe" taken on Sol 1349, from more or less the same position as the other photos that do not show it but from the Panoramic camera instead of the Navigation camera.



I guess it was just because it was from a different camera, right?

It's even a little better because Spirit was closer at that time (from some quick and not really accurate measurements, at this time it was some 115 metres away from "von Braun", in the photo from the OP it's some 25 metres more).

Your second source, that NASA page, it says that that photo was taken with the Navigation camera once more, so I guess that's the problem, the lower resolution of the Navigation camera, that was made with a larger field of view (45º instead of 16.8) and obviously a lower "magnification", since both sensors have the same size (1024x1024 pixels).



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


ArMap

As I pointed out in my last post, for some reason i can no longer access my pictures and media account, except as a visitor to the site. This means I can'y post any further evidence, actually, PROOF, that the pictures we are discussing have been doctored.

However, I have no idea why my access has become restricted, though I have my suspicions, so in the spirit of the thread I will make this point in answer to your last post.

I looked at the picture you posted from the mars rover site from sol 1439 - marsrovers.nasa.gov...

And yes, I can see a perspective change. I can also see that it was, possibly, taken from a VERY SLIGHTLY closer position. What I don't understand is the differences I see in the foreground/middle distance.

Further, and more damning, I have created two copies, of the 'pipe' and the Goddard ridge behind it - one of my original and one of your nasa link.

Even with perspective changes there is no way to explain the DOUBLING of the area behind the 'pipe', except by doctoring. It is easy to see the distance between the large rock at the top of the Goddard ridge, and the rock group at the right end of the pipe, couldnt change that much for such a small change in camera position.
I suggest people should try it for themselves and see, the material is all here - unfortunately, as I have said, I upload anything at the moment, which is, to say the least, inconvenient.

Furthermore, ArMap, Would you mind telling me what qualifies you as a subject matter expert on this forum? Do YOU have an interest in 'debunking' any important discoveries?

I'm sorry if this sounds rude, I do not mean to be, but I have a dirty, suspicious nature, and I am sure you will admit that there are agents of disinformation operating on ATS, so it is at least possible that you could be one of them. Should your signature really be 'I like to deny truth'?

My apologies if this isn't the case.
Maybe you can prove me wrong by helping me re-instate my permission to upload media, or suggesting what I might be able to do to overcome the problem?

Then at least I may be able to show graphically what I am stating!


[edit on 13-12-2009 by Icerider]



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join