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.

 

Endeavour Crater MOC Images revisited and reposted - I know in my gut this is a structure!!

page: 6
33
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:45 PM
link   
Nice find although the quality is quite low.


Not to be off topic but i would like to have your advice on some stuff i find odd in some mars pictures.
i think some of them are well known because pointed out by famous people, but i found them myself.
Here we go












posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


It's one thing to use the "pareidolia" blanket statement and quite another to keep arguing about it. If you think it is nothing more than rocks, then fine. The OP does not. It's not like in your pictures where it was a tree that looked like a woman and a cloud that looked like a pig. One would not question if it were a tree or a cloud. One could easily question if those pictures show a building or rocks because all we have is a fuzzy photo to make the determination.

So why keep arguing about it?



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   
How about you check out this thread OP:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Like you, someone was certain there was a structure on Mars. A base. It was even much MORE clear than yours, when colored in like you did.

However, once they found a picture of the same "base" from another angle, it was clearly just a regular terrain structure. Quite often nature mimics manmade structures. That "base" is proof of this.

And your pictures show actually much less "proof" of a structure. So.. I wouldn't base too much on these single-perspective photos. Perhaps find the same "structures" from another angle - if they retain their shape, then you might be on to something.


jra

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Havick007
I am still at a miss to understand how you came across these images after i tries for hours and hours via JPL / NASA, Google and other search engines.


Hours and hours?! It took me literally two seconds to find the image on the HiRISE site. Just type "endeavour" into the search on the HiRISE site itself, that's it. And it gives you two images to pick from, not 900+.


To be blunt i dont trust the validity of the images you posted, and to be honest the images dont even bare a resemblence to the ones i posted, higher res or not. All i see on urs is more blur than detail


What exactly do you mean you don't trust the validity of the images? In what way? And the geological features between the MOC and HiRISE images look identical to me.

And in case it wasn't mentioned already in this thread. Endeavour crater is the current destination for the Mars Rover Opportunity.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by spikey

P. Lowell (canals on Mars), happened to have a rare and intriguingly intermittent brain disorder, that caused his vision to be impaired by creating projections of lines onto his retina, that he mistook for canals when looking at Mars...while he was most certainly seeing something that wasn't actually there, it was not due to the usual debunking stalwart fallback of pareidolia.


It was a bit of a fiasco iirc

The canals were first mapped out by the eminent astronomer G Shiaparelli. Though many astronomers could not see his canals , another eminent astronomer, using his own independent observations, produced a map that was virtually identical to Shiaparellis.

This created a problem for the majority of astronomers who couldn't see the canals, because the close similarity of the independent observations meant either the canals were real, or that at least one of the eminent gentlemen was lying.

The controversy rested awhile till it was taken up by Percival Lowell who was really a businessman and diplomat rather than an astronomer. He was very wealthy and personally financed the construction of the Lowell Observatory, as well as a staff of professional astronomers to carry out the observations.

He was really a typical 19th century 'showman' type entrepreneur and earned worldwide fame, or notoriety, with his fantastic story of a drying Martian world, and the desperate attempts of the Martians to irrigate their world with a global system of canals.

Doubts about whether the canals existed or not lingered till the 1960’s when they where finally put to rest with the Mariner fly-bys.

So the way the story is told nowadays Lowell, the amateur ‘takes the flak’ for the imaginary canals that were discovered and confirmed by professional astronomers.

Like I said, a bit of a fiasco



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 05:01 AM
link   
So many times I have seen natural structures looking like various animals in my wood pile. I think it is all a play of light and shadows.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 06:32 AM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 


yes there's a good chance the massive dust storms have covered alot up, or depending on the age some may have just been weathered away.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 06:33 AM
link   
reply to post by hawaiinguy12
 


I think it's actually very important, something to change humanity if there was such building's there.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 06:35 AM
link   
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


That's not true at all, just because i posted some guide lines of what i was seeing doesnt mean it's creating any type of illusion at all. I also posted images with no interpretation on them. I think the members here are smart enough to see the difference and decide for themselves



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 06:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Kenan2
 


That's nice and good for you... although doest really relate to this thread.. I could show mant blurry images of earth bound objects and structures and i'm sure you would say the same thing
some people know how to look at images and some dont. I dont just look for some bluury object and make random claims, why dont you look at the shapes within the image the shadows and put the various parts of the structure together by analysing each part individually.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 06:49 AM
link   
reply to post by jra
 


Thats not true at all, ok you show me then?? i went to the hirise site searched and i got 900+ pages of image results.

On the main site home, went image keyword search and typed endeavour, then endeavour crater and got nothing...

edit: you know i wish i had of got some screen shots yesterday, im gonn have to check my history because yes amazingly today the 2 images appear.... well well well, interesting that as i would not blatantly lie as i know any member could have done exactly that yesterday when i first posted it. All i have to say is WTF


Ahh but wait Edit again:

I have my search results from yesterday using the exact same keyword, i will post the screenshots below, so how then did the Hirise site change it's result reporting from yesterday??



then suddenly today these are the search results for the same keyword search : endeavour



Totally snapped...WTF who is able to change stuff like that?? I can see it for myself, all i did was load the history page from yesterday. Look in the address bar, its the same search and keyword but completly different results....

[edit on 17-8-2010 by Havick007]

[edit on 17-8-2010 by Havick007]



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 07:05 AM
link   
In regard to the above post, here are the hosted images which should have a higher res and the address bar readable.

Day 1: 16/08/10 Search Endeavour -

lh3.ggpht.com...



Day 2: 17/08/2010 Search Endeavour -

lh3.ggpht.com...

So what has happened since my first post? How has the Hirise site suddenly changed in 24hrs??

this is the link from yesterday's search :

hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...

The link from today's search, nothing different done, all i did was input endeavour into the image keyword search on the main page

hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...

Yet for some reason the url is slightly different after same search and process and of course the main result of this is different search results


[edit on 17-8-2010 by Havick007]



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 07:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Havick007
 


To me nothing has changed since April, but I notice that there's something different in you result pages.

When I do a search it shows a longer URL, with the other options that I didn't use, like latitude and longitude.

There's something strange about it, that's sure, but only on your side, I have never had problems using the search feature on that site.

PS: did you saw the video I posted yesterday showing how I did my search?



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Havick007
this is the link from yesterday's search :

hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...

The link from today's search, nothing different done, all i did was input endeavour into the image keyword search on the main page

hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...

I think I understand, your first search probably had a space at the end (the + gives that clue).

Did you searched first for "endeavour crater" and then deleted the word "crater"?



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


yes but i am goinf by my history from yesterday, the same search term exact same way as yesterday but yet different results, yes the url is longer in yesterday's search but how??

On the main page of the site there is only one way to search, if you look in the url i posted for each search you will see the keyword has not changed, and more interestingly the source code for each page is the same - except of course for the code containing the search results...



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


ok fair assumption, and yes i just checked putting a space at the end of the word distorts the results but do it yourself, the results are not the same as yesterday, not even close. Also yesterday i typed from scratch, i did typr in endeavour crater first which created too many results but then starting again i typed endeavour from scratch, not deleting the crater part ( which understandably may have crated a space ) but i know how i searched yesterday, that url i posted show's it and i cant as yet duplicate that search and result. Somehow now, doing a search for endeacour gives you 2 images and as you can see yesterday i got many more.

As for the longer url, i am not sure but doing a search on the home page doesnt gove you much option and i did not do anything different yesterday. As i said i would not lie and discredit myself knowing that any member could do the same search, including yourself.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


here you go, check the url now :

hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...

It has the same extended part on it...

Also why has this image not been updated on Google Earht as yet, the area itslf still shows the MOC image only, which is interesting considering that Endeavour crater will be the next Milestone for the rover after Victoria Crater.

you would think this area would have been images extensivly by now and published. Especially on Google Earth.. it's not like this image is supposed to be new??



[edit on 17-8-2010 by Havick007]



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 08:06 AM
link   
I never do the searches from the home page, I always click the "search" button and do not even look at the bottom of the page.


And don't worry about the search, if you ever get strange results you can always ask other people if the results are the same.

I don't know if it's the case, but I have seen that Google searches give different results according to the browser we use, so I wouldn't be surprised if something like that was behind the problem, as I do not use Internet Explorer with the HiRISE site.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


hmm i'm not sure * sounding ever so paranoid
*



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Havick007
 

Man, are you people even listeneing to the posts about attitudes on here?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Your pictures are ok and likewise the explanation of paradolia is ok... Debate like sensible humans. Leave the attitude at home... Why is the explanation 'crap'?

From a neutral viewpoint the explanation is sufficient.





[edit on 17-8-2010 by and14263]



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join