whatever it is dust or orbs there are more than the four shown on the video. The gigapan image shows something like 27 in groups of three starting
from the left of the panoramic, zoomed all the way in, showing up at the line where the haze from the distance meets the ground. Then you can move to
the right past the white blocks of missing data and they appear again in the air to the edge of the picture. the appear in groups of three with the
first two close to each other and the third one further to the right and lower. if they are dust they should be in more pictures no?
Originally posted by bilb_o
The three static dots may be dead pixels in the camera but what about the dot moving on the horizon shots?
if you mean this video...
...the you are are talking about a video that must be a fake, because the image of mars in that "video" showing a moving dot is a
single still image (by the way -- the camera used is a still image camera, not a video camera)
I know it's a single still image because it is the image taken four seconds after Curiosity landed of the dust cloud that was kicked up by the
crashing sky-crane. Here is an explanation of that still image that shows the cloud of dust made by the crashing sky-crane:
So, if that video was supposed to be a video showing movement of a UFO, then we should have seen movement of the dust cloud, but we did
not. That's because it is a still image that someone repeated over and over to make a video, then added the white dot in each frame as a fake
The bottom line is this: If that is a video of an object moving through the sky, then why isn't the dust plume kicked up by the crashing sky-crane
Image artifacts, orbiting satellites who knows. Keep in mind the atmosphere of Mars may mean greater transparency. With that said, there is a lot of
dust always being circulated so the raw image is kind of like a Goldilock scenario except in this case it may not be a bowl of yummy porridge aka the
perfect photo, but a rat trap using relative cheese.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.