Martian Artifacts went Missing from NASA Pics

Here is the side by side comparison vid www.youtube.com.../u/0/lQafPUL7DSw

and here are the actual pics from Mars according to Nasa . You be the skeptic , however it sold me and still keeps me boggled . Some of you may have already seen them on other sites and possibly here in another thread . They do leave a person with more questions than answers . Getting the answers , we have to go there .

2N289363474EFFB0A1P1985R0M1.JPG

2N289448978EFFB0AXP0675R0M1.JPG

2N289976994EFFB0EOP0675L0M1.JPG

2N289976994EFFB0EOP0675R0M1.JPG

Some have called them the smoking gun and yet they have been ignored as they will continue to be , we are fickle always wanting new things to explore .Just like kids that get bored with the new toys after awhile . The curiosity bug in us all keeps the itch for finding the unexplained going .

I would have paid to see the scientists faces when the images were seen for the first time and compared . Priceless . The whole series of images regarding this particular area is full of strange stuff . I hope some of you can appreciate them and wrap your heads around the possibilities .

Humanity does have it's pleasures when seeking knowledge and yet the horrors of humanity so set us back to the cave man days , UGH

I'll go on a rant here at Nasa again and say your cheating me out of my education for the unknown .

Peace peeps

reply to post by watchdog8110


It's been discussed in length 2 years ago in this thread www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's perspective.

Thanks for the heads up .

It was discussed 2 years ago. Ok, but many of us weren´t here to see it. Stop stoping other people´s posts, to many of us they are actually the first ones, because we haven´t search for the thousands of posts that have been, or are not in the forum all day long. Please,

reply to post by mastercanto

I don't see any stopping of a thread.
Are you saying the past discussion should be disregarded? Or should the whole thing be reposted?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by mastercanto

 

I don't see any stopping of a thread.
Are you saying the past discussion should be disregarded? Or should the whole thing be reposted?

edit on 8/15/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

I think you should stop being so mean to the boy!

Video is good, first time watching it. And yeah double post threads may get annoying but he has a point, we dont spend all day and night on this forum and some of us have only been here for days/weeks like myself sometimes its useful to double post so everybody has a chance to watch it!!!!

reply to post by fordizzl3


But if we already have come to a conclusion about particular pictures or videos in older threads or posts, shouldn't we share that too? It's fine if people want to continue this thread and discuss it, but what if some of us who know the existence of threads/posts that answer those questions wanted to link them?

Originally posted by mastercanto
It was discussed 2 years ago. Ok, but many of us weren´t here to see it. Stop stoping other people´s posts, to many of us they are actually the first ones, because we haven´t search for the thousands of posts that have been, or are not in the forum all day long. Please,

I don't think 'deaf alien' was stopping anyone's post. He was pointing out that this has been discussed at length before. That thread linked by 'deaf alien' is certainly relevant to any discussion we may have on this new thread...

...I mean, why not start from what we already know about this (i.e., the previous thread) and build on that previous discussion, rather than reinvent the wheel and start from scratch?

Let's say, for example, that I started a new thread on this exact topic three months from now. Should we just ignore whatever discussions we have on this particular thread that 'watchdog8110' made today in that new thread I start?

interesting post

Combine the two or three threads , or perhaps in the area of Aliens / Space Exploration since they are all pretty condensed as far as topics go . Speciifc planets may need their own section ? I have not been around as long as some of the guys and gals have been so that makes me a noob as it were .

If it comes across from my perspective that getting the words out with typed script leaves a lot to be desired , I apologize . I was so used to Ventrillo when communicating with others around the world . It is hard to take the steps back to just typed words on a screen with walls of text .

Anyways , in getting back to the images and our technology we have as far as we are let on to believe that is the best we can image . TPTB would be better off with the sending scanners for 3d imaging once on the surface of Mars , Moon etc now . Not to say that they haven't already done so . Still images are so ugh OLD school but if that is all we have to go with . The data stream can't be so corrupted can it seeing all the rest of the vids from space based satellites ?

Then the question I have regarding that is how could they buffer the data stream to compensate for any loss in transmission ? Are they really working to get the best images and vids from where they send the million/billion rovers ? It doesn't appear to be the case from what I perceive . Also isn't it the norm to make double or triple of a thing so you can adapt it to emerging technology ?

It would put an end to all of the speculation that is going on with planets and their surface features .

reply to post by watchdog8110

First of all, I don't know if data transmission loss would affect 3D mapping any more than it would affect any other data coming from Mars. I think the main problem would be bandwidth. Detailed 3D mapping would probably require a much wider data stream than the data transmission system between Mars and Earth is currently employing. It may take too long to download the 3D data.

Secondly, I'm not sure that 3D mapping will gain you THAT much more (if any) insight into Mars relative to visual images. Light carries a lot of information about an object, especially considering the methods NASA uses in viewing the light reflected from objects though several filters of various wavelengths. Viewing each image through the various filters and using spectrometers can tell scientists something about the make-up of the object.

Plus, the rovers have binocular vision, so some 3D data can already be ascertained through the images that are being returned by the "left and right" eyes of the rovers' cameras.

I suppose if they really needed a detailed topographical map of the local terrain (say to find a smooth boulder-free site for a future landing), then ultra hi-res detailed 3D mapping technology may be useful, but I don't really see its great usefulness in the general scientific understanding of Martian geology.

Were there any conclusions as to what was the ejected material and what was initial Martian material around the area in question ? Considering the amount of rubble and the structure of the pieces ( surface texture ) ? Some have what looks to be porous structure and others of a more solid denser inner .

Would it be to far fetched to assume that the smoother the surface is a result of wind erosion ? From the earlier thread .

I bring this up because some of the craters do not show any ejected material but rather collapsed Martian surface in other images of Mars . 1N138404679EFF2800P1986L0M1.JPG