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.

 

Magnificent Mars Photos Shows Anomolies What Are They?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   
I have just found this from the Huffington Post, The tall upright things look like trees, obviously they can't be trees but what do you think they could be?

The photo in question is titled Falling Material Kicks Up a Cloud of Dust on Dunes

The link can be found here www.huffingtonpost.com...

If anyone can upload the photo for me that would be great I am not offay with adding photos to threads.



[edit on 21-1-2010 by franspeakfree]




posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:48 PM
link   
There's already a thread on this. It's an optical illusion. Once you see a higher definition version, and once it's rotated 180 degrees, the "trees" become obvious dark debris falls. Interesting, but not trees.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by 2000 Yards
 


Optical illusion ? if thats true then this title is a little misleading on the page?


NASA's HiRISE camera, the most powerful camera ever sent into space, has snapped breathtaking portraits of Mars.

are all the photos on that page optical illusions or is it just that one?


[edit on 21-1-2010 by franspeakfree]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by franspeakfree
 


Seriously mate, they're not trees.

I'd be the first one to be jumping up and down if they were, believe me!

They are reportedly a liquid run-off, from thawing CO2, trickling down a hill or slope.

Could be CO2..could also be H2O. Could even be trillions and trillions of barrels of crude oil too.

Not trees though. Well...not in this particular image of Mars anyway.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by franspeakfree
reply to post by 2000 Yards
 


Optical illusion ? if thats true then this title is a little misleading on the page?


NASA's HiRISE camera, the most powerful camera ever sent into space, has snapped breathtaking portraits of Mars.

are all the photos on that page optical illusions or is it just that one?


[edit on 21-1-2010 by franspeakfree]


Just because they used a really nice camera to do it, does not mean you are not seeing it wrong. These "trees" are laying down across the ground. The optical illusion is that it appears to be a long shot of a desert full of trees when it is a TOP DOWN shot of nothing close to trees. Get it?



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:29 PM
link   
This is being discussed in this thread.......Click Here

Here is a link to the image.........



Hope that helps.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   
There are "trees" on Mars, but that is not the image I have seen before. the one I saw was without doubt of huge tree like structures with limbs and branches. NASA is hiding all the good stuff.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by expat2368
There are "trees" on Mars, but that is not the image I have seen before. the one I saw was without doubt of huge tree like structures with limbs and branches. NASA is hiding all the good stuff.



I do not suppose there is a chance you could find out where you saw that pic, is there?



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   
i tend to think that is not the real color of that photo either, it just looks off especially in the "trees" where branches spout out, its like a blurred redish, doesnt look right

cool photo



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by MurderCityDevil
 


If you look at the hi-res closeups, you can see why there is that red fade out. This picture is taken from a great height. These trails begin to crumble into fallen pieces of debris. Toward the ends, the chunks get smaller and smaller and from this height look like thin light sand.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
I always found this one interesting



Now those look like trees



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by sunspot0
 

....again, until you look at the hi-res closeups. They looked a lot like tress all over ATS until someone finally showed the hi-res closeups. People seem to keep forgetting the scale of what they are looking at and it's relation to the camera and the ground.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Yes i know they have to be massive but what are they...they are up from the ground,they cast a shadow on the ground.
I know that doent prove anything but still find em fascinating.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by sunspot0
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Yes i know they have to be massive but what are they...they are up from the ground,they cast a shadow on the ground.
I know that doent prove anything but still find em fascinating.


I know that you will not believe anything I say anyway. I am looking for the pics. Remember how the "face" on mars turned out to look NOTHING like a face when properly lit and photographed with a hi-res camera? Same thing with your trees. I am not trying to argue with you but there were several threads on them a while back and the close ups appeared and pretty much put it all to bed for anyone not claiming the closeups were NASA fakes - that looked amazingly like close ups of the "trees" but still. They are a type of crystaline structure. I am still looking.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


No no I believe you, can you show me how to view the picture I linked to so I can see the optical illusion I am just not getting it. Also isn't it a bit sneaky to show that photo upside down? it kind of creates something its not.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Isn't it frozen C02?
I'm sure there is already a thread on this

Edit:
Found it.

The images appear to show rows of dark "conifers" sprouting from dunes and hills on the planet surface. But the scene is actually an optical illusion. The photographs actually show sand dunes coated with a thin layer of frozen carbon dioxide, or dry ice, less than 240 miles from the planet's north pole.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 22/1/2010 by wycky]



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 08:21 AM
link   
reply to post by MurderCityDevil
 



i was thinking that myself, why this color photo and crap for others?

why this release of photo? why the bunk of trees? anybody ask?

any of that make sense? co2 melting? isn't it h2o that they say is now?



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by expat2368
There are "trees" on Mars, but that is not the image I have seen before. the one I saw was without doubt of huge tree like structures with limbs and branches. NASA is hiding all the good stuff.


Do you mean this?:
(which, it turns out, are geological features when seen at a higher resolution)





posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 08:35 AM
link   
reply to post by sunspot0
 


Yes, that's one of the 'tree' pictures of Mars.

Even Arthur C. Clarke remarked that they appear to be trees, as well as other fairly famous 'scientists' in the public eye.

They look like ground hugging, vary large outward growth type trees or bushes.





[edit on 22/1/2010 by spikey]



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join