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.
AmatuerSkyWatcher was the only one to admit he was wrong about it just being dust on the cam and i too respect him for that, and i too will admit
being wrong when it is 100% proven that NASA's explanation is correct.
My analysis this far is it is inconclusive. You have to ask yourself these questions:
1. Why have details been edited out of the original photo, although subtle it's not the same photo anymore.
2. Why did NASA release aerial details of the landing site a few days before coming to this conclusion, why did they go into such detail, it was
almost like we were looking at a crime seen with the pieces of evidence perfectly in place. A tad convenient don't you think.
3. How did the low resolution Haz Cam pickup the details of the dust plume 2kms away but manages to miss out the details of the mountain range to the
4. How did Curiosity happen to land in the exact line of site of the said dust plume, when you look at their evidence their are obvious hills in the
line of site and also the line of site is unconvincing.
5. How did Curiosity manage to take this photo at all?.. does is turn on and start taking photos as soon as it hits the martian surface...
And finally i would like to say something about the Haz Cam itself, yes it's a secondary camera just used to make sure Curiosity is safe and to send
images back to earth fast. You need to ask yourself the following question:
What if all the main cameras failed for some reason and they were left with the Haz Cams only, you need to ask yourself seriously...
I believe these Haz Cams are capable of a slightly higher resolution and color photos, not the same quality of the main cams of coarse because the
image still needs to get back to the earth fast but a certain acceptable quality none the less.
When any one can prove to me without a shadow of a doubt everything is legit then i'll say you know what, i was wrong until then i still think the
anomaly is either a object or structure.