It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
there was a massive amount of dust on the cover
it was logical to point out that it was dust on the cover
and indeed it was
and know it was dust on the cover
Originally posted by tracehd1
Here's a new anomoily from Curiosty people can debate and wonder...
Optiumus Prime S
Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
reply to post by TheStev
If you quote me in future, I'd appreciate if you quote me with the context I was using.
I used the word obfuscation in regard to the OP using low res images, when higher resolution shots of the same image were available, that he conveniently used, when discussion in another thread had already highlighted these shots.
In those shots, the two 'smoke stacks' were not visible, and it was clear that whatever was in frame was partially transparent (i.e not a structure, unless it was a green house).
Originally posted by TheStev
reply to post by AmatuerSkyWatcher
I didn't actually quote you directly, rather recalled a word that you used - but I apologise if I did this unfairly. As the only one to admit that the explanation suggested by early posters in this thread was just as incorrect as the suggestion by the OP, I have a lot of respect for you. It's hardly worth editing my post now, but I do appreciate what you're saying and will keep that in mind when quoting anyone in the future.
Originally posted by HIWATT
Originally posted by eriktheawful
It has 17 cameras, right now the main mast and high resolution cameras....
I'll stop you right there just to point out that this rover DOES NOT CARRY HIGH RES CAMERAS.
I am seeing this term slotched about all over the internet and it's BS.
No camera on Curiosity is capable of producing images over 2 Megapixels.
HARDLY "high resolution"
edit on 8-8-2012 by HIWATT because: fixed tree
Just admit it. Everyone in this thread claimed that the 'anomaly' was just something on the lens and/or lens cover
we can now deduce that these anomalies are not a solid structure and in fact in the air. And given the range in heights and color variations ( density ) the most logical explanation is dirt kicked up by the landing. Therefore, debunked.