Blue Mars, how Mars may have looked when it had an atmosphere!

I saw this earlier and thought it was pretty cool, even though it's just speculation and an artist's rendering.



It does look a lot like Earth though doesn't it?

We’re used to Mars being the red planet, but it probably looked much different in the distant past. What might have a younger, wetter Mars looked like? Software engineer Kevin Gill decided to find out by creating a virtual model of the Mars that was.
The image above could be called an “artists conception” of ancient Mars. Gill had worked with similar renders of Earth, so he felt comfortable taking a swing at Mars using images and elevation data collected by the NASA Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. The image incorporates the real features of Mars, along with some guess work guided by recent discoveries.

Geek.com

And here is a link to a much larger version of the image for your viewing pleasure.
Image
Enjoy.

So... It was a desert planet?

mars isnt all red and has a blue sky even nasa admit they alter colours www.artsnova.com...

Very cool!!

S&F!

Originally posted by haven123
mars isnt all red and has a blue sky even nasa admit they alter colours www.artsnova.com...

Most of martian surface is covered by reddish (or light-brown) dust. There is also a lot of dust suspended in the atmosphere, making the sky the kind of colour described as butterscotch. NASA's colour cameras usually deliver raw images, without any white-balancing. This makes the photos look unusually orange, whereas the human eye would have adapted to the scene. However, the MAHLI camera on Curiosity delivers white-balanced images, which is the closest to what the human eye would see there. Curiosity's famous self-portrait is a good example of that, as it was taken by the MAHLI:



White-balanced image from MAHLI, showing the light-brown surface layer, and darker soil underneath (scooped out by Curiosity):



en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by haven123


From the site you posted:

In closing, the claim that NASA, and the rest of the planetary science community, are lying about the true color of Mars and that the Photoshop Auto Levels command provides supporting evidence is baseless and without merit.

Yes NASA admits to messing about, and with good reason, all of which have been discussed on here before and fully understandable.

Not meaning to offend you marra, just pointing that out.

See the pic in the OP before, it is quite fascinating, although I don't believe Mars ever hosted complex life before something happened to the environment.

Originally posted by wildespace

Originally posted by haven123
mars isnt all red and has a blue sky even nasa admit they alter colours www.artsnova.com...

Most of martian surface is covered by reddish (or light-brown) dust. There is also a lot of dust suspended in the atmosphere, making the sky the kind of colour described as butterscotch. NASA's colour cameras usually deliver raw images, without any white-balancing. This makes the photos look unusually orange, whereas the human eye would have adapted to the scene. However, the MAHLI camera on Curiosity delivers white-balanced images, which is the closest to what the human eye would see there. Curiosity's famous self-portrait is a good example of that, as it was taken by the MAHLI:

White-balanced image from MAHLI, showing the light-brown surface layer, and darker soil underneath (scooped out by Curiosity):

en.wikipedia.org...

Very sharp pic!

I wonder why they aren't more realistic in their color renditions from the black and white photo's? Although the sky isn't a perfect blue, it's much different than what the pics generally depict.

reply to post by woogleuk


i wasnt meaning there was life i could find links to Never A Straight Answer *cough* i mean NASA even admitting that they use colour manipulation but being a lazy jam eater i grabbed first link that i could find im not getting paid to do research for folk on here how was w/ton over crimbo new year?

ppl must wonder why we call each other marra

ps all life no matter what form has to be complex maby not to humans but to some bactiria must think # that bacteria is complex(if they can think )which no one can prove or disprove

reply to post by haven123


LMAO, first time I've heard a W/haven marra call himself a jameater! W/ton was same old, lots of drunk idiots trying to spoil the fun, not that they ever could mind, have a blast through there?

But yeah (cough) subject at hand.

False colour can be for a few reasons, one of which is making certain things sharper, stand out more.

There are other reasons, but there are also as true to true colour images that they can possibly get floating around, for example........

reply to post by watchitburn


So if Mars used to look like that then why cant it be possible humans originated from Mars. Some great catastrophe caused Mars to die and humans built spacecraft and managed to make it to earth.

reply to post by woogleuk


I'm just thinking that if they used the proper coloring, we wouldn't have people swearing that rocks are hamsters and things like that. It would definitely take some of the crazy stuff out of the mix

reply to post by woogleuk


it was same though here just i never seen any bother.

and if wants to know what the marra crak is www.urbandictionary.com...

reply to post by woogleuk


not trying to be a phallus but if that was true colour why is curiosity red aswell?

reply to post by haven123


I dunno, dust maybe? lol. Looks like it. Afraid someone else is going to have to give you a better answer on that one.

reply to post by woogleuk


lot's of dust to completely cover the entire image/rover

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
reply to post by watchitburn

 

So if Mars used to look like that then why cant it be possible humans originated from Mars. Some great catastrophe caused Mars to die and humans built spacecraft and managed to make it to earth.

Pure speculation on your part without a shred of data. Mars never looked like that. The artist himself says so. he was just messing around and wondered what Mars would look like if it had Earthly attributes. It's not the least bit scientific, and admittedly so.

And it's unlikely to impossible that humans originated there. We have the fossil evidence and we also have DNA evidence linking us to the rest of Earth's creatures. So unless you buy off on Noah's ark as a spaceship, no deal.

where's Phage when we need him

reply to post by haven123


On his way to Mars with a duster and a hoover and a copy of Queens I want to break free.

reply to post by AthlonSavage


While I think anything is possible, it seems extremely unlikely that humans originated on Mars.

With all the probes orbiting that planet and the rovers on the surface for years now, we would have seen some type of evidence to support that theory.

We have not.

And as Schuyler pointed out, there is gratuitous evidence linking humans to our own planet.

Originally posted by watchitburn
I saw this earlier and thought it was pretty cool, even though it's just speculation and an artist's rendering.

It does look a lot like Earth though doesn't it?

We’re used to Mars being the red planet, but it probably looked much different in the distant past. What might have a younger, wetter Mars looked like? Software engineer Kevin Gill decided to find out by creating a virtual model of the Mars that was.
The image above could be called an “artists conception” of ancient Mars. Gill had worked with similar renders of Earth, so he felt comfortable taking a swing at Mars using images and elevation data collected by the NASA Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. The image incorporates the real features of Mars, along with some guess work guided by recent discoveries.

Geek.com

And here is a link to a much larger version of the image for your viewing pleasure.
Image
Enjoy.