Censored Mars Spirit Rover Image!

Meh, there's nothing around most of the surface now anyway. It's clearly obvious that the Rover needs to start checking the underground bases instead, that's when we'll get some serious censoring.

reply to post by Niccawhois


Not really sure there is much of a 'story' here.I was actually quite interested in the dark area onthe horizon! However it does seem odd to post a pic with a geat big band aid on it!

frankly, I'm surprised about something with all these "NASA censored/covered up photos"

doesn't anybody who is into the Occult on ATS visit these science/astronomy threads?

Astronomy and Space Travel were my 1st loves so I know that I do.

anyway:
It's quite easy for a true Clairvoyant or Astral Projector to use a photo as if it were a door, just go through the door and See whats being hidden.

I'd do it myself but am unable to do to the fact that I'm still recovering from a dark night of the soul at present and still cant AP like I used to.
.
please, no comments from Materialist paradigmers, as my intention isn't to disrupt or anything just throwing this out in case any Occultist on ATS sees this and just hasn't thought of this before.

now then [takes off frazzled and threadbare wizard's cap, and puts on science hat]

going on what I've seen on similar threads this could be, as it is in most cases, an artifact due to the way the cameras operate. I'm no expert on space photography so I can't rule out censorship angle as there are some photos and videos that do seem be cases of such.


stars for Golithion and Kadinsky, thanks for the stars

while yes there could be a part of the puzzle missing, but nasa photos are chopped in such a different way.
take a look at this photo and you will see what i mean

reply to post by Exuberant1


You never cease to amaze.

IN THESE CASES....people want real answers. NOT veiled references to start them chasing their tails....and thus, "amusing"others........

MISSING DATA is the obvious, first and best preliminary explanation.

I thought (but not likley, JUST one other prosaic idea) of a "text box" in the image....as in....the "text box" inserted, but the TEXT not yet....text to describe or point out something in the photo, for example.

There is no need to be rude with such a response.
Im sure nasa is capable or creating a much better more clear text boxs than the blurry one presented in the previous photo
Though it does give off a slightly retro text box feel...

I saved the picture and enlarged 1000%. It does not seem to look like it was edited. It looks to me that the picture was posted as received by NASA. What ever happened did so on Mars I think. Remember just how long that poor thing has been there and what it has been though. By the way back when I had dial-up INTERNET I would get pictures off the net that had all kinds of areas blacked out. I would hit REFRESH and the picture would load right. I think it may be nothing more than some missing data.

I haven't seen a blacked out part of a picture in this manner before, Weed's text box idea is just what you would think of except maybe the chamfers around the corners, they are puzzling.

Here is an version of that same image through a different filter (note the "time stamp is the same -- 317318414 -- on this and the OP's picture -- so they are different versions of the same image), but this one has the suffix "M3" and the OP's picture has the suffix "M1". M3 is the 673nm wavelength filter and M1 is the 739nm wavelength filter.

Image Here: marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...

The identical timestamps show these images are versions of the same image, but the light was split through different filters. This version of the photo shows nothing in the sky.

EDIT TO ADD:
As a clarification the time stamp of 317318414 is the amount of seconds since January 1, 2000. That's how the computer on the rovers tell time (many computers use a similar method of time-telling.)

Considering that the photo was taken at the same time as this one, and this one doesn't have anything blacked out, I think it was only a transmission error.

Most of the transmission errors I have see do not look like that, but as there are at least two different transmissions (from the rover to a satellite and then from that satellite back to Earth) I guess different transmission segments may create different looking faults, but that's just speculation from me.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

MISSING DATA is the obvious, first and best preliminary explanation.

I thought (but not likley, JUST one other prosaic idea) of a "text box" in the image....as in....the "text box" inserted, but the TEXT not yet....text to describe or point out something in the photo, for example.

Interesting idea brother. You never cease to amaze.

Though I must ask, is your Caps Lock key malfunctioning?

Or are you doing THIS for emphasis?

sigh - the fact that this image is a panorama - formed from data supplied by the pancam - the name is a clue

then the " missing data " theory is both blindingly obvious and highly probable

PS - will people at least be consistant and explain why the image was not " photoshoped " - they COULD have used skyscape from another dataset if " they " wanted to hide something

reply to post by tokzik


The cropped photo you linked to is due to the photo stitching process for panoramic images, nothing unusual there with the black jagged top and bottom.

What is unusual is the white boarder around the blacked out section for the photo in this post. If there where transmission errors then I would expect blacked, snowy or psychedelic lines as the packets where lost or corrupted during transmission. It does depend on the file format used as to how transmission errors will affect the image. While not certain, I would expect a raw type file format where all the pixels are sequentially sent, so lines of pixels would show the corrupted transmission, not a big black square with white edges. In my opinion, this has been photoshoped. As for why

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
sigh - the fact that this image is a panorama - formed from data supplied by the pancam - the name is a clue

The image from the OP is not a panorama, and NASA (or whatever organisation works with a specific data set) also makes panoramas with the other cameras.

The image posted by tokzik (this one) is a panorama made with photos from the navigation camera.

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
sigh - the fact that this image is a panorama - formed from data supplied by the pancam - the name is a clue

The image from the OP is not a panorama, and NASA (or whatever organisation works with a specific data set) also makes panoramas with the other cameras.

The image posted by tokzik (this one) is a panorama made with photos from the navigation camera.

You're right ArMaP -- that is a picture from the Pancam, but it is NOT a mosaic -- it is a single image.

So it isn't a case of a missing mosaic piece, but rather probably just a data transmission error. As you and I showed, there was another version of that exact same image taken through a different filter that does not have the same black rectangle.

If something was there, it would have shown up in the other version of the image. If something was there, and NASA "cleanly" erased it from the second version of image you and I posted, then why would they not have used the same "cleaning" technique on the OP's image?

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

why would they not have used the same "cleaning" technique on the OP's image?

Maybe someone in the censorship department was getting tired of covering up all the cool finds so they decided to let a clue slip through?

reply to post by kwakakev


Then it means that nobody checks the work of that hypothetical "censoring department".

Not very likely.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


Just a correction about the naming of the images: the M1 and M3 show that the image was processed by the Multi-mission Instrument Processing Laboratory (MIPL) in both cases, but one is version "1" of the processing while the other is version "3".

I didn't look at the rest of the name on my previous posts, but this is what the full name of the image (2P317318414EFFB2IOP2629L6M1) in the OP means:
2 - Rover ID = Spirit
P - Camera ID = Pancam
317318414 - Clock (seconds since January 1, 2000 at 11:58:55.816 UTC)
EFF - Product type = full frame EDR
B2 - Site number (when it changes it means the rover moved to a different site)
IO - Drive number (when it changes it means the rover moved to a different location in the same site)
P2629 - Command sequence number
L - Camera "eye" L = left
6 - Camera filter (pancam only) 6 (left) = 482nm
M - Product producer M = MIPL at JPL
1 - Product version

Considering that both images have the same name and only change the version, it means that's exactly the same image, only the one without the black square was processed twice after the one original processing that gave us the image in the OP.
(unless I am mixing up the file names )

Why would NASA blacken out (or smudge out) photos when they can simply destroy them? It's not like they're accountable to us for all their pictures on a roll of film!

reply to post by ArMaP


Thanks for the correction and the education!