Huge Tower (5 Km high) in Hellas Planitia Region on Mars!

page: 4
42
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Starrunner
 


That's a silly comparison Olympus Mons is 600 km wide, with an average slope of 5º. I don't believe the ESA data has the resolution to detail a spike like this if it was there.




posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Go to Esa.int in the Mars Express images and search for it.

Ctrl + to increase images
Ctrl - to decrease images



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by abeverage
Ok I finally found an reference image that is 100% at the area and does show the formation. It is not in a very high resolution but of course I will keep digging. I have a caveat however when you go to find the object you probably won’t see it. But I found it in MOLA data and in THEMIS. I will put together something soon that will prove this is the correct location and the object in question but I want to find some more images first...


viewer.mars.asu.edu...

I can say it is shaping up to be at least interesting!


Here is at least one object in your image you linked that seems to be near the coordinates given by the OP. I'm not saying this is definitely the object in question, but it is in the general area:



and a bit closer:



Like I said, this may or may not be the object in question. Even if it is, it's hard to tell if that could be 5 km tall, but it seems unlikely from this image. It's shadow is shorter than the shadows cast by the walls of the craters, and those craters are not 5 km deep. I didn't see anything in the image linked by 'abeverage' that cast a long shadow.

The object in the OP could be a mound or hill or boulder that is higher than the land around it but NOT 5 km tall. What I mean is that the OP's object may be something that is higher that the surrounding terrain, but the 3D software responsible for reading elevations and extruding the landscape may be misreading the height of that object.

By the way, I "fine-tuned" the coordinates a little better than what the OP said. The "tower" or "glitch" is at:
31 04' 18.75" S
74 16' 57.51" E

edit on 10/19/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


It's actually above that I will build some more context images after I go get my teeth drilled lol...


That was a good marker though those 4 craters helped me find it!
edit on 19-10-2011 by abeverage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by abeverage
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


It's actually above that I will build some more context images after I go get my teeth drilled lol...


That was a good marker though those 4 craters helped me find it!
edit on 19-10-2011 by abeverage because: (no reason given)


I was actually revising the images in my post above as you were writing your reply. I noticed those 4 craters also on the Google Mars website that also marked the coordinates the OP gave, but I think I was looking at the wrong 4 craters.

The upper left crater should be a "double crater". I revised my images based on that.

Have fun with the teeth



edit on 10/19/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 04:42 PM
link   
it looks like a pretty typical glitch.. I've had weird glitches like this happen to me when I loaded up geographical data into terragen to render out terrains..



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   
ok i,m not going on this image but they say mars in some point could have had life,surely even after millions of years there is some sort of evidence still noticable with the naked eye,to me there probably is and the last thing they want to do is show it,they don,t want us knowing that its true,they do that then they have to admit that life does exist else where which would turn everything we know and believe on its head.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
(at distance)









I looked at it on my Google mars/earth download, and can be seen above street level. There is no particular reason to think of 'stitching' it is continuous with distance, and remains visible. It does however drop height and shape dramatically with distance, but so do other elements like crater rims but it is elevated terrain. The 'street' level image may be exaggerated, I don't know.
edit on 19-10-2011 by smurfy because: Add links.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   
There was a thread about this some time ago,and it was discovered that those "towers"
were actually dust devils.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


Prob. bad vert data. That's prob. why the textures on the side look so bad/overstretched.

Although the smooth/rounded nature of the base actually would suggest otherwise.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   
it is a glitch... the average elevation in Hellas Planitia is aprox .5 km so it is a simple decimal error on the 3D. www.google.com...
edit on 19-10-2011 by CaDreamer because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 07:32 PM
link   
That photo used by Google has some "grooves" on it, and, if I'm not mistake, the photos with those marks are from Viking , so they are low resolution.

I usually use the same source that abeverage used, so I guess all the good photos were already found, but I will take a look.


Edit: I think this is the Viking photo that shows that area.
Photo 550A30
edit on 19/10/2011 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)


Edit 2: another Viking image, with a higher resolution (but only 78 metres per pixel).
Photo 478A31

The white circle (only visible if we click on the thumbnail) marks the area where the "tower" should be.
edit on 19/10/2011 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   
First thing I think of looking at this thread, 'what did you pull this picture out of a video game'

hahaha its obviously some glitch, if there was that much erosion to make a skinny column (and you know its not a volcano) then there would be canyons everywhere around it you'd assume, until we have ppl who are credible documenting what they literally see on mars who the hell can believe some stupid computer program for all its worth.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   
While a basaltic or rhyolitic extrusion may be a possibility, even in the lessened gravity of mars a geologic feature of this proportion is extremely unlikely. And I for one seriously doubt that a previous Martian race built this structure.
Patching anomaly caused by image stitching is really the only possible explanation simply because a radar or photo image simply does not exist.
A 4k foot tall edifice of that size would be big news regardless of its origin. It would be blatantly obvious simply because its shadow could be as long 10 km or more across the surface.
edit on 19-10-2011 by unsteadystate because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-10-2011 by unsteadystate because: Spelling + Additional Comment



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Phobos obelisk. This is the very real mystery.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 08:11 PM
link   
To me, an elevation glitch would be concentrated on a group of pixels that would pull up like a column. This looks like you pinched your skin , pulled it up, and the surrounding tissue elevated in gradation. How could a computer glitch be responsible for doing this kind of render? Does it assume that the surrounding area needs to be pulled up in proportion to make it look mountainous?

I think that careful scrutiny of the rendering software needs to be done to see if elevations are averaged on an area of high elevation.
edit on 19-10-2011 by charlyv because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Mars began it's cooling much too long ago for any intelligent life to have ever evolved there. The idea that intelligent life ever existed on Mars is simply astronomically stupid. Recent archaeologic discoveries have suggested life on earth may have begun as long ago as 4.2 billion years ago and some estimates are even longer ago and the common earthworm-like multicellular life on earth was the top of the food chain less than one billion years ago. This whole intelligent life on Mars theory doesn't make sense and is an abomination of astrophysics and evolutionary science. Give it up! Nothing exists that resembles life there, its too cold, tectonically inactive, and has a poisonous atmosphere 100 times thiner than here on earth and no magnetosphere to protect it from cosmic radiation, it's a dead lifeless rock and probably always was but dream on if you wish. It took at least 3 billion years for a single cell life-form on earth to evolve into a simple worm, and conditions here were always much more favorable for life than it ever was on that tiny sulfur iron dead cold rock called Mars. Mercury and Venus and even some moons have a magnetosphere but Mars doesn't because it is dead. End of story.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
I haunt the 4 corners region of the wild west, and have seen so many natural towers such as this, that seeing it doesnt scream "OMG MAN MADE: to me



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Illustronic
 


Well, you are looking at a snapshot view.
Take a trek back in time to what we suspect, but certainly do not know...
The Sun may have been a lot hotter years ago.

Mars shows signs of having liquid water flowing on it's surface. This would not be possible if there was not an atmosphere at one time present to allow water to be in a liquid state, let alone the temperature.

It shows signs that one complete hemisphere was completely obliterated by some kind of catastrophic calamity.

It may have had a magnetosphere like earth, but lost it over time due to cooling of it's one time liquid iron center, and it had one once, because we can see evidence of volcanic action.

We know nothing of where the earth or mars once was in relation to orbital distances from the sun back when the earth was only a few billion years old.

Some day, the Sun may claim all of the inner planets. We are not spiraling outward, but rather inward.

Venus itself, may have been very earth like a few billion years ago.

Humans have only been able to contemplate this solar system for .000000000001% of it's existence, so I will bet that so much has transpired in this evolution, that the best science fiction has not even touched on what really transpired here.



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arken
reply to post by roughycannon
 


Shadows! Night/Day... confirm....


CG lighting on a CG landscape confirms nothing.






top topics
 
42
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join