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: 8
33
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Havick007
 


What are you implying?




posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
There is a good chance that the images that needed to be censored would be selected by computer and then further censored using computers and algorithms designed to detect non-fractal geometry and then smooth it out (censor it).

I don't think so, although software to find specific patterns is becoming common (my camera can recognise some faces, although I haven't tried that system), replacing part of the image with something else is something that I believe is still some years from happening.

It would be easier (and more likely, in my point of view) to have an automated system feeding a manual system, and this manual system would override the automated system's decisions.

If it was something important enough to be deleted, it should not be trusted to automated systems.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


I think that was clear in my last post, do i need to repeat myself?



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Exactly and any such automated system as i said would not be and could not be relied upon 100%



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


That is what I said.

It must have been a language thing that resulted in you not understanding.

Because I didn't say that the computers would operate independently or that any system works 100 percent. Read the post again, you'll see.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 

Yes, knowing that what you wanted to say I now understand it that way, I think it was the "using computers and algorithms designed to detect non-fractal geometry and then smooth it out (censor it)" that made me think that the "smooth it out" part would be made by computes.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by S3ns1bl3
 


THANK YOU!!! For injecting another great note of sanity into an ATS thread...

And, welcome to ATS!
You get a star! ( I would applaud, if I could...)




posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Havick007
I dont igore them, i'm just not 100% sure about them. I swear black and blue that i looked long and hard to find Hirise images of the area before my post which i have already mentioned, i also looked again this time in memory of your post on my last related thread and again they were no where to be seen and still not available on Google Earth.

I have been looking at my files (I download all the pages they publish and I have some 200 DVDs with the original images
) and I don't see when that image was published.

As the page doesn't have any accompanying text I suppose it was during one of the PDS releases, but I cannot find it.


I'm just not 100% is all and it wasnt anything personal as you obtained the images from a third party or the source in this case, it's the images i'm not sure about not your opinion or input

No problem, but I'm sure you agree that it's not nice to have the work to find a better photo and be greeted with "I don't trust it".


Edit: after posting this I found that photo, it was published on the PDS release from May 2009.

[edit on 18/8/2010 by ArMaP]



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Havick007
 


Not this again learn about digital images!!!!

This is what you are doing look at this picture



Now that looks like a circle fairly smooth edges once in your photo program zoom in and what happens you see its not and is made up of squares. (press Ctrl and + to zoom in)

Pictures have a resolution limit once you go beyond that you DONT get anymore detail. ITS THAT SIMPLE.

To many of you guys on here continue to do this with pictures most of which are not that good to start with and only get worse with constant zooming.

some links to look at

en.wikipedia.org...

www.bestprintingonline.com...

Look at the example on this page

www.microscope-microscope.org...

LOOK at spider pic on right those small boxes when on Mars or Moon images become walls and buildings on sites like Pegasus Research and the Mars Anomolies sites

But all they are are jpeg and compression artifacts

Armap gave you higher res shots the last time WHY a new thread its just the same BS sorry!



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


That is about 5% relevant, were not looking at black circle with a white background here.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 06:52 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


I don't think this is a resolution problem, Havick007 doesn't based his (?) interpretation on things that can be seen only in zoomed in images, and GIF and IMG files do not suffer from compression artefacts.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Havick007



can someone please put some scale/size for comparison to this image please?

I've always thought scale should be included in anomaly images (mine too).. but sometimes its hard to find scale from the source release image!

Thats why scale was great for Zeeman crater on those images...



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
 


On the image you posted, if you goto Google Mars and use the ruler it will give a fairly close approx.

On the image, from the very top point of the shape to the bottom of the frame it is about 2 kms or 1990 metres. This is relative to your post and the image



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 08:03 AM
link   
The area for the anomoly is about 100-150 mts. It can actually be seen on the Google Mars image but is very very lo res and looks like a blob, but the area in question is there



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
 


In the following image (converted from the original IMQ file), each pixel corresponds to 2.91 metres, so that white line is 1 km long.



Unless I got my measurements wrong.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Yeah simpler to do in Google Earth.....



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Havick007
 


I don't trust Google Earth (or anything "Google").



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Thanks mate!

It puts things into a nicer perspective to understand *if* these are buildings (or whatever) - how large/small they are. But then again, I guess off world buildings could be HUGE or tiny - depending on who builds them, and for what reason.




posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 03:54 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Yeah good point



posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 04:33 AM
link   
Apophenia and paradoila at their finest! All I see is a photo of erosion and natural landscapes.

Nothin!




top topics



 
33
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join