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.

 

Russia to send probe to Phobos (okay BUT look at this picture of it!!!)

page: 1
32
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   
Okay, I know the topic of Phobos has been beaten to death a few times over but now I see this article today about Russian intenting to head to the thing. Same as the US. WHY? people ask.

Russia to send probe to Phobos


The launch of an unmanned lander to one of the Martian moons has been slated for November 2011. The Phobos-Grunt probe will be sent to the surface of Phobos, and then return to Earth with soil samples.
Source: english.ruvr.ru...

Here is a sample of the photos I have typically seen related to Phobos:


The Phobos monolith (right of center) as taken by the Mars Global Surveyor (MOC Image 55103) in 1998.


Viking 1 image of Phobos, with Stickney Crater to the right


Some of the named craters of Phobos. C = Clustril; D = Drunlo; F = Flimnap; L = Limtoc; R = Reldresal; S = Stickney; Sk = Skyresh. Grildrig is on the horizon below Skyresh and Flimnap.
Source for these 3 photos: en.wikipedia.org...(moon)

But, when I saw the associate picture with the Russian story, I thought who in there right mind WOULDN'T want us to get there ASAP.

Phobos. © NASA/JPL/University of Arizona/ru.wikipedia.org: Enhanced-color view of Stickney Crater by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter.


Now look at those dents and other marks. The Rust color added for effect? Or is a true representation of what it really looks like. Look at the photos credits. NASA is stamped right there. So it must be a true reflection of what it looks like. How can anyone not be curious to see if it is some type of craft or artificial object. Seems to me, from this photo, its more like than not that this particular moon is odd-at the least.

And, if so, we must get to it. Them dam craters need some investigating-and the monolith. And the straffing marks. lol.

It NASA is standing by this color-enhanced verison of the photo and willing to put it out to the public. Then I say that is sufficient proof to justify the cost of landing on that puppy and investigating it.
edit on 12/8/2010 by anon72 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12/8/2010 by anon72 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


Good news anon.

S&F
Maybe Russians can give also an answer at this www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


I remember that thread. A good one for sure.

Good thinking liking it. It is worth the effort to go back to that one for anyone who is new to this topic or needs a refresher.

I just wish we could zip ourselves right there-like Stak Trek and check it out. I'll be long dead before they do get there...
( It's on my list of things to do after I am dead.... lol



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
Aliens and UFOs forum ??
Is this a mistake ?? did you trick me ?



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Vandalour
 


If I did, that was not my intention. I edited my OP a little to reflect the idea that it is a artificial moon-made by something etc. hence the Dents in the metal shell......

My bad for not elaborating. I don't consider going there space exploration, not now with Russia wanting to get there ASAP too. No, something is amiss there-even Obama thinks so...



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 
Don't you need Oxygen to create rust??????????????????



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by alchemist2012
 


The Rust color. Color....

I think you will have to ask NASA why (or rather how they choose that color) the photos looks like it did. It says Color Enhanced. Not Artist rendition or something like that.

And, we didn't even discuss the metalic silvery color for the other haul. Not rock colored-as one my corelate to other moons etc.
edit on 12/8/2010 by anon72 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Okay, now I'm a lot more interested in Phobos. Thanks Anon, now I'm off to check out the post Arken linked.



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   
The general shape of the 2nd pic, with the big crater reminded me of the Death Star from Star Wars.




edit on 8-12-2010 by Skid Mark because: Added pic for comparison



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   
What is it about the color picture that makes you think it is artificial?



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   
That looks completely artificial. Let's not forget that the Russian Phobos II was mysteriously destroyed back in 1989. Someone or something doesn't want us poking our noses around their neighborhood.



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


It's nice to hear that a probe, especially a "land and return with sample" mission is going.

But....let's get a grip on reality, OK?:


The Rust color added for effect? Or is a true representation of what it really looks like. Look at the photos credits. NASA is stamped right there.


Yes....NASA is "stamped" there....where it clearly states "color enhanced." That can mean a lot of things....

(...and, the color? I seriously, seriously doubt it has anything at ALL to do with your later comments, regarding the possibility of Phobos being an "artificial construct". Especially...rust?? Nope. Now, consider this-----the soil of Mars, and its sometimes dominant hue?? Think about that. Also, the crater? Not a "dent", in that sense....it is a depression, most likely from an impact at some long time in the past...an impact AFTER Phobos accreted, but not strong enough to break it apart...for, it is likely VERY fragile, with very light gravity, and is a fairly loose configuration of matter, held together despite the paucity of gravity....because, well, that's how matter tends to clump, in a zero-G environment...)

People keep thinking (it seems) that the photo imaging equipment is similar to your Nikon (or whatever company) digital camera! It is not. There are great threads, already, on ATS about the details....and there are resources online to search out, better than trying to write it up here.

Suffice to say, it's a whole heckuva lot more complicated....these probes are making images that have to be be transmitted, via radio signals....yeah, you'd think it's like a TV camera or something, but they just don't have the broadband, nor the transmitter power required, to do the job the same way. It is the scarcity of budgets, and what an agency like NASA must deal with....big compromises, at every turn...and they get quite ingenious and creative, to solve the technical hurdles, given their limitations. Oh, and weight is an issue, too!! Payload, mass, etc.

Anyway, if I can find online sources, will link them. I find this interesting too --- and frankly, a lot of the specifics are so complex, they require a full career of study to comprehend. We have a few ATS members (and Mods) who are able to explain/describe a lot of this, in lay person's language style.....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here, may wish to read this, regarding other "enhanced color" photos, by HiRISE...of Deimos, but they mention Phobos too. AND, has hints about the process, and the reason for "color enhancing".

hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...

I believe this to be similar to, but not exactly the same as, "false color" imaging. These are methods to enhance, and define features....they certainly should not be meant to exactly represent what the Human eye would perceive, on a direct viewing (when a Human is able to actually go there, and look without instrumentation getting in the way.....).

Keep in mind, too...the Sun's distance, depending on which planet you visit, in our Solar System. And, its variable intensity, as a result of distance. (Emitted light spectrum will, of course, remain the same).

Imagine you were looking at Jupiter....and how dim it would really be, that far away from the Sun. Hence, colors/contrast/brightness are enhanced, to make them "prettier" for one, and for the science as well...depends on what they wish to emphasize, chemicals, features, etc....







edit on 8 December 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   
"Color Enhanced"

Basically,
Means that those are the colors you would see,
if you were close enough to Phobos.

All of those colors are really there,
they have just been adjusted so that we can see them better in the image.

It does not look, or feel "un-natural" to me in any way. lol

Why would the colors make anyone think it's artificial?

You do realize...
that moons and other planetary bodies are not actually all grey, right? lol

What, or who? lol
is on Phobos,
who knows...

But I can't hop on your "Phobos is a spacecraft" train. lol

and people wonder why the masses laugh at ATS and those associated with it. lol



I am into some pretty "far-out" there stuff...
But as far-out there as I can get...
it doesnt come close to some of the people here. lol

Some of you make me look completely "sane".



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


That's no moon, its a space station. I love the Phobos story can't wait to take it out with my X-wing.



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Skid Mark
 


I guess we can't have a Phobos thread without a Deathstar comparison in it..



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 07:24 PM
link   
looks like a deathstar that has been hit by asteroids lol



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   


People think it looks like the Deathstar I think it looks more like some kind of space cow or something.. Here is what i discovered on Phobos after messing around in photoshop for awhile..

All joking aside Phobos is facinating and if the OP is interrested in the colors of the photo you may want to see this image below. It is 13mb so be warned if you have a slow computer.




posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


What always gets me about the monolith pictures and other such anomalies is that we are told they are merely rocks. Yet we are also shown pictures of what look exactly like rocks on the moon and we are told these are images of the Apollo lunar modules that were left behind.



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 09:56 PM
link   
I was doing some reading on the wikipedia article for Phobos and there is something puzzling me!

The Russian Space Agency wants to send Phobos-Grunt....that's fine.

The China National Space Administration wants to send a satellite surveyor Yinhuo-1 to Phobos........okay china and russia its just a weird shaped moon....

Then I find out that in 2007, the European Space Agency already started on the Aurora Program in 2007 (hopefully completed by 2016) to test a sample-return missions on Phobos for Mars........now this sh!t doesn't make sense.

China, Russia, the ESA, and NASA are all interested in this freaking moon.

This wouldn't be as surprising to me if I had not learned about Soviet Russia's initial attempts at reaching Phobos with Phobos 1 and Phobos 2 back in July 1988.

Phobos 1 was lost on the way towards Mars.

Phobos 2 reached Phobos, but we lost its signal right before it landed. Apparently there was a "last photo" taken from Phobos 2 right before we lost it depicting interference from an unknown origin.

CONCLUSION! This whole shared idea and concept about exploring Phobos seems to be stimulated by "awkward" interests to say the least, and deserves much more research.
edit on 8-12-2010 by Pepeluacho because: fixed error with inappropriate use of language



posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


Those lines look like grooves which may have been caused by the moon passing too close to the upper atmosphere of some planet. In this scenario the surface might have heated to the plastic state wherein a few bits (rocks) may have been dragged along by the resistance to the contact causing "scratch" marks. Then, because it was a tangential intercept, the heating effect may have stopped at that point showing us now the effects of the close call. As for the colors. All I can say is that a wild assortment of colors like that is common in the ejecta from composite volcanoes here on earth.
edit on 8-12-2010 by trailertrash because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
32
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join