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.

 

Google Mars Anomaly Spotted

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by kimwarrior
 



I was looking at what is laying to the right side of the lit ridge.




Looks a heckuva lot like a smaller ridge...not quite as high, but just high enough so that the very tippy-top is catching the setting sunlight, based on the angle of the Sun when the pic was snapped.

Rest of the smaller ridge is masked in the shadow of its big brother to the west. (I'm assuming the conventional orientation is north up?)

Keep in mind, this is purely a chance occurence, because of the time of 'sol' when it was taken. Had the satellite passed over this same area at, say..."noon"...the image would look totally different.

Just as similar satellite photos of Earth do.

Compounding the illusion is the very low resolution, especially the section banded to the east, where the two images were merged. ALSO possible that the left/right images were taken at different local times (time at the surface, relative to "noon") --- in fact, due to the differences in resolution, I'd say that's most probably the reason for the resolution differences.

ArMaP???




posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by kimwarrior
 


Do you mean to the right of the area for which you posted the coordinates?



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


As far as I understand it, the difference in resolutions is the result of using two different sources for the photos.

As you know, the bigger the resolution the more photos you need to get full coverage of an area, so the only full coverage was made by the first Mars missions. I think the low resolution photos on Google Mars are Viking photos, but I'm not sure.

To make things worse, it looks like Google follows the strange idea that to get a better photo you should give it a bigger contrast (what that does, most of the times, is to destroy part of the original data), so the smaller details disappeared.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Looks like two different images against each other, might be from seperate dates/cameras. one looks more higher res aswell, maybe they only done certain parts with a new camera and they're still doing the rest.

Thats my guess upon first look.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


If one satellite was already on top of the area, why use another one to continue taking the pictures? Why not use the same one? That doesn't make sense to me.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by DragonFire1024
 


Because the first one was not working any more.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
As a rule, I stay away from google mars when looking for anomalies...or just visual/spatial masturbation....google moon too, for that matter...must be the contrast, but to me it's like listening to music drowning in reverb. Ouch.

ESA's Mars Express is a favorite site of mine

So is Skipper's site. Marsanomalyresearch.com

Kimwarrior, I posted links to both in your other thread...

CDS



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


No, the coordinated I got from Google Mars is right on top of the gray cylinder which appears to be lying to the right of that well lit ridge.



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Cole DeSteele
 


Thanks Cole. By the way, I took the better picture provided by ArMAP and copied it over to bitmap format so that I could attempt a zoom in. Interesting results but still not as good as I would like. I will remember this area on mars and in the future I will go back and look for it again. If it has moved then I will let you all know for sure. Keep looking. This is a great way to explore our solar system, send robotic eyes and then let us do the looking at the data coming back. We just need higher resolution (and in 3D).



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Cole DeSteele
 



So is Skipper's site. Marsanomalyresearch.com


KIM, be careful!!

CDS keeps trying to steer you to "Skipper's" site...be warned, it's full of mis- and disinformation.

Just one example of deception used is showing what are obvious to most as false-color images, and claiming they are "true" color...

There are many of those sorts of flim-flam peddlers on the Internet.

However, not to paint the entire site with the same brush; just take it with a grain of salt and take what you need, ignoring the ridiculous "speculations" and "revelations"....and his photo "manipulations".

(I say the same about the "livingmoon" site and "pegasus" as well. Lots of good, clear images...it is the "interpretations" that you must hold your nose and wade through, sometimes...)

~~~~~

BTW, if you want to see that "Skipper" is really off his rocker, look at this link below. (No, it's not about Mars, sorry...but it IS form his site, to indicate the sort of numbskull that runs "marsanomalyresearch"):

www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

See??? Even something as commonplace as a "GoogleEarth" photo --- HE can take it and turn it into some incredibly imaginary thing....it takes a dedicated sort of insane paranoia to accomplish that ....OR else, a man determined to attract as much traffic as possible by being INTENTIONALLY provocative and deceitful.

I usually call that sort of behavior "LYING". But, so is claiming that a "tonic" made from the oil of snakes can cure cancer...still, there are always enough gullible people somewhere who will fall for anything.....






[edit on 23 July 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Cole DeSteele
 



So is Skipper's site. Marsanomalyresearch.com


KIM, be careful!!

CDS keeps trying to steer you to "Skipper's" site...be warned, it's full of mis- and disinformation.

Just one example of deception used is showing what are obvious to most as false-color images, and claiming they are "true" color...

There are many of those sorts of flim-flam peddlers on the Internet.

However, not to paint the eintire site with the same brush; just take it with a grain of salt and take what you need, ignoring the ridiculous "speculations" and "revelations".

(I say the same about the "livingmoon" site and "pegasus" as well. Lots of good, clear images...it is the "interpretations" that you must hold your nose and wade through, sometimes...)


Dude,

Skipper's site is chock full of very good images he has collected from Mars Express. As I said in another thread (the post you commented on as well) his interpretations are difficult to explain.

But he will pick up the ball and run with it re: locating other images of this area if he doesn't already have them.

You can glean pertinent information from his site by simply not taking his difficult interpretations as gospel, and browsing the images, to which he ALWAYS provides a link to the raw data image. The images are what KW is after, and he can most likely provide them. Advising KW to ignore the whole because of a part is an ignorant statement. Glad to see you clarified your intention.

Besides, KW was warned from jump.

CDS

[edit on 23-7-2010 by Cole DeSteele]



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   
This was the best I could find.

Actually, it was not as big as this, I used super-resolution to make a bigger (200%) image from four images (from different channels) from a Themis image, photo I04741008EDR.



I hope it helps.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


That's good, ArMap...That clearly shows the anomaly in the OP is just a hill with bight patches and shadows (i.e., no cylindrical object).

************************

Also, I agree with weedwacker in as much as that "marsanomalyresearch.com" is full of mis-information and, IMHO, dis-information. There have been many instances where they have advertised so-called anomalies that have obvious mundane explanations, just to get more hits on their website (to make more web advertising money).

A case in point (one of many) is pictures of the round markings on rocks which they called "anomalies" that were simply made by the rover's grinding tool. If Skipper is a Mars researcher, then he knew very well what those round marks were. If he didn't know, then he shouldn't call himself a researcher. The same thing goes for the "straight lines" on some Moon pictures which he probably knew darn well were caused by the old Clementine image browser software, and were not real Moon features.

Skipper is just a shameless snake oil salesman. Just because he talks about "cool alternative issues" does not make him any better than other snake oil salesmen.



[edit on 7/25/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Ok so..you found a hill on another planet and it automatically becomes an anomaly? Some topics should be erased from existence, this is one of them.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ear-Responsible
Some topics should be erased from existence, this is one of them.

Why, don't you think that for some people this may have been an opportunity to learn something new?



posted on Jul, 26 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Thanks ArMaP for all the help. Your higher resolution pics seems to have solved the mystery. I hope others continue to search the Mars pictures and maybe one day we will find something really unknown.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by KillenfizzenHumboflorator
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Interesting how the resolution changes from clear to distorted right down the line where the anomaly appears in the photograph...

Hmmm....



Woooooooo. So every demarcation line on Google Earth means they're hiding something?. My God, there might be an alien ship crashed 60 miles from where I live!

Why are there so many people that believe this crap? Intelligence is not something we are good at in the 21st centry is it?




top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join