Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Folks - I'm having a censorship problem all over the web regarding my high res Curiosity panorama

page: 10
125
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by impaired

Originally posted by Arikra
Wow, I've been coming to this thread periodically, haven't had a single problem with it, my computers preformance..nor my internet in general..I wonder whats going on with you guys..:/


It really can be just coincidence...

But I'm done speculating or trying to determine.

If I did something wrong and they want ME (
), then they know where to get me.

And then what?

Regardless - to them: "Come at me, bro".

There will be no fighting - none of that. But this hypothetical action itself would prove a lot. Obviously.
edit on 8/15/2012 by impaired because: (no reason given)



how were you able to get the high resolution images - but when I go on to SOL the images are really poor quality?




posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by impaired
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 


Sorry, dude. I missed the top part. I'll check it out...

But I really think those black dots are just artifacts.


hey not a problem. and just to let you know, after reading what you've been writing lately I am more willing to trust your judgment on this stuff. that being said what about these other folks who think they are ufos? I gotta find their thread and see what they're saying about them.

come on man, say they're ufos dammit!!!



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by youwillneverknow
 


Go here:

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Scroll down past the "thumbnails".

Once you see "subframe", you got them. Subframes are the high-rez ones.

A lot of the first 50 or so (I have the exact number in the third or fourth post of this OP) are thumbnails - which equals missing data. They are low resolution, so I can't stitch them together into the panoramic I already have.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by impaired
reply to post by youwillneverknow
 


Go here:

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Scroll down past the "thumbnails".

Once you see "subframe", you got them. Subframes are the high-rez ones.

A lot of the first 50 or so (I have the exact number in the third or fourth post of this OP) are thumbnails - which equals missing data. They are low resolution, so I can't stitch them together into the panoramic I already have.


thanks for that :-) - the stitching you did was perfect!!



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinny
I'll attempt to retrace that thread for you.


hey when you get a minute I'd appreciate that 'cause I want to hear what they are saying about the black dots. they don't look like artifacts to me.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Rubicant13
 


can you repost the link Rubicant13? (with a warning)

and i can try to traceroute where it came from....



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by Sinny
I'll attempt to retrace that thread for you.


hey when you get a minute I'd appreciate that 'cause I want to hear what they are saying about the black dots. they don't look like artifacts to me.


Did you see these 3?



Scroll to middle of image - there are 3 anomalies all roughly the same height and distance.
edit on 15-8-2012 by youwillneverknow because: Didnt indicate where "anomalies" were.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by drphilxr
 


I linked it in a post on the previous page.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by impaired

Originally posted by Arikra
First thing I learned, STAY AWAY FROM NORTON/SYMANTEC!
They're complete crapware..the u.s tried getting Kaspersky labs to give them backdoor access through their products firewalls and anti-virus checks, this being a Russian company. You really think that American anti-malware companies really wouldn't be giving the u.s government backdoors?

(last I hear Symantec used to be used by the u.s federal government, and that was years ago when you could easily find news and articles about breeches of government networks and computers.)


I like that theory (well, not like, but I agree) - but wouldn't WINDOWS or OSX or LINUX have backdoors already implemented? I can see Windows and OSX first. With Linux, being it's open source, maybe not, but since it IS open source, who knows.

But yeah - I've ALWAYS had that suspicion that backdoors are implemented in our operating systems. Why WOULDN'T they be?


Linux is actually the most secure OS (I've never used firewall/anti-virus, occasionally I would scan one but never ever found anything), from my research, the bit-size of encryption for information is unlimited, for each key of length n you can always add one bit to make it stronger. Also you can't do # unless you're a superuser that has root access. Which can't be taken away from the superuser, nor can it (root access) be added to another user, unless you're the superuser. I'd say that less than 1% of malware can infect and properly function in a linux environment..even then 1% seems way to high..lol.
Im not sure what you're getting at with Linux being 'Open source', that simply means that everyone can get access to the base code that makes up the Linux OS and freely change and modify it to create a new flavor. Doesn't mean that its an open transparent system. A Windows partition can't see a linux partition, the linux partition can see a windows partition (actually you could have complete access to every single little file on the windows partition because Linux just doesn't care about anything that is windows.)

Im far from a fanboy, I just like it, its aesthetically more pleasing..in fact Vista/7 were downright rip offs of Linux styling, vista and 7 especially looked very similar to the Ubuntu flavor with the KDE desktop environment.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Im happy to say that those three dots are dust. They aren't artifacts, however they are 'artifacted', as I would call it, meaning that they are some distance (or possibly right on the lens) from the camera's focal point in relation to where the camera is really looking. Im not sure the words to explain it but my experience with image enhancement,modification,editing tells me those aren't anything to bother paying attention to.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by D.Wolf
 


Not sure anyone has noticed what you were trying to highlight there, I'm not sure if you've even seen that yourself? If you scroll through your pan, around 2/5ths through, there seems to be a lot of image copies on the face of the crater edge. It's quite uniform.. I'm somewhat a noob and can't re embed the image or whatever, but have a look.. what does anyone think to it?

Original image by D.Wolf is half way down page 5. The image copies are set say south-east from the areas copied, about half way down the crater face. Could just be lame stitching from nasa.. anomaly none the less



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by impaired
reply to post by bottleslingguy
 


Sorry, dude. I missed the top part. I'll check it out...

But I really think those black dots are just artifacts.


hey not a problem. and just to let you know, after reading what you've been writing lately I am more willing to trust your judgment on this stuff. that being said what about these other folks who think they are ufos? I gotta find their thread and see what they're saying about them.

come on man, say they're ufos dammit!!!


Ahahah - yeah, I know that thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

They're not UFO's. They're artifacts.. Guhh...



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by youwillneverknow
 


EXACYTLY. Same height - same distance. Artifacts from where the images are being stitched together.

Wait - what???? Those images aren't from my pano.

That's one image...

But still just going for a .JPG artifact.

Hey - I want it to be aliens too! Man, do I! But that's not enough to call "UFO" yet...



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by woogleuk
 


Actually..below my pic in edit mode ....I stated that to the right of the fish I see an alien head..well, half his head! lol



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:44 PM
link   
It's neat with the mosiac images. Looks like they stumbled on two signs of water. Not a bad landing site at all. If there's any cover-up, I guess they don't want other parties getting the jump on them before they make their own official press-release.

First sign of water is what looks like standing water, which many posts have commented on.
The second one is that there is haze in the distant mountains. Usually dust spreads out from the ground when there's wind, but this haze looks pretty even across the whole horizon. Looks like atmospheric humidity to me, like what occurs here on Earth in the early morning before temps climb past the dew point.

Still even the presence of water in the atmosphere doesn't mean the atmosphere has to be very thick. Reading up on the triple point of water at Wikipedia (I know, but it's the quickest reference I could find) says that it occurs around 6 thousandths of an atmosphere. If it's cold enough, the water doesn't boil away so easy. Also going on that same article, the Curiosity rover must be pretty close if not on what the Mariner 9 mission defined as "Martian sea-level". Particularly when it looks like there's atmospheric water and some possible puddles on the ground.

What's neat is that it might change some of the thinking on how old some of the erosion features are. Maybe not exactly rain considering how thin the air is, but with right conditions water could collect on some surfaces and pudde up and gather more water and momentum as it goes downhill.

If any manned mission ever goes to Mars sometime in the future, it's likely not going to be bone dry. They'll find the water they need. If not using an atmospheric compressor to collect it, there's probably a lot that's simply locked into hydrates in the red clay soil that could be cooked out. Well bores might also be fairly sucessful too, if they bother to gather seizmic data to find veins of ice or compressed liquid water.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by impaired
reply to post by youwillneverknow
 


EXACYTLY. Same height - same distance. Artifacts from where the images are being stitched together.

Wait - what???? Those images aren't from my pano.

That's one image...

But still just going for a .JPG artifact.

Hey - I want it to be aliens too! Man, do I! But that's not enough to call "UFO" yet...



I already found 2 completely different images taken by left mast cam with the exact same anomalies - bummer!! :-( Dust or something after all lol



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by impaired
 


There is one thing I find to be interesting.. In the top right of your gigapan, in the distance on the mountains in the background, there is what seems to be a 'mountain road' snaking up.

Are we looking at Mars or... Earth?

Maybe, maybe not.


Regards, Skelllon.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skellon
reply to post by impaired
 


There is one thing I find to be interesting.. In the top right of your gigapan, in the distance on the mountains in the background, there is what seems to be a 'mountain road' snaking up.

Are we looking at Mars or... Earth?

Maybe, maybe not.


Regards, Skelllon.


Definitely not a road. Maybe this will help?



Or not? Check it out in Google Mars.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by youwillneverknow

Originally posted by bottleslingguy

Originally posted by Sinny
I'll attempt to retrace that thread for you.


hey when you get a minute I'd appreciate that 'cause I want to hear what they are saying about the black dots. they don't look like artifacts to me.


Did you see these 3?



Scroll to middle of image - there are 3 anomalies all roughly the same height and distance.
edit on 15-8-2012 by youwillneverknow because: Didnt indicate where "anomalies" were.


the first one to the left is hazier than the other two which tells me it is further back than the others. in the gigamap panoramic that the op did (kudos for that) starting at the left and following the line where the ground meets the haze the second one from the left is low to the ground and you might think it's a rock but it is as dark are the first one from the left but that one is higher up and can't be up the hillside because it is the same darkness as the lower one meaning they are the same distance away from the camera.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Whilst I am not saying it ISN'T Mars, my initial feelings on the pictures was something like ''looks like Arizona or some other desert place'' and ''how come there are so many flat plane angular rocks''

According to the Mars sites, erosion is from wind and the rocks are mostly basalt, as is the sand on Mars, which could erode in such a way possibly, but still figured it kind of didn't feel right, same for there being supposed clay minerals but a theory that the water was only subsurface due to the atmosphere being too thin.

There are also pyroxene outcrops, which on Earth are basically upper mantle minerals. Kind of makes the idea of Mars once being more Earth like more plausible, perhaps it got overheated somehow in it's evolution.

This site has some information on the geology
www.uahirise.org...

This site has a high res image which I altered the shadows and light on to show more detail
www.livescience.com...
those dusty areas look like indentations or maybe pyroxene outcrops, or maybe photoshop blurring, or camera blurring



the geology does look manufactured but I guess it could be in comparison to Earth known geology, though odd for all those angles in such juxtaposition to rounded rubble

I lightened this picture for more detail


ETA I didn't read all the thread so maybe somebody already mentioned this
edit on 15-8-2012 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)
edit on 15-8-2012 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)
edit on 15-8-2012 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
125
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join