Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Amazing "like living crature" anomaly on martian surface in Curiosity sol 173?

page: 19
92
<< 16  17  18   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 01:46 AM
link   
hey look I found hugos house, theres a rock at the top of the pic with a little door in it. not sure how I made the quality of the pic so bad





posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 05:34 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


ArMaP, I thought the same thing. Curiosity has the MAHLI on board and considering 'Hugo' is such an unusual object I would have thought that the science team would have shown more interest in it.

There has to be something going on at the 'Hugo' site. The images below have been darkened to simulate a night time scenario. Notice the high degree of luminosity showing on the upper part of the nearer object and also the object behind, that is if they are two seperate objects.

Have any members any theories or ideas as to what could be producing this amount of brightness on the object?








posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 


here's a post that had info you require... lots of people think its a metallic form or rock, hence the shiny-ness, that has been exposed as the other rock around it has weathered away... NASA have mentioned it.
I think they are probably right though I do think there is life on Mars.


Originally posted by wildespace
Here's the official release about this by JPL:
www.nasa.gov...
www.jpl.nasa.gov...

Basically, they say it's a hard and fine-grained rock that got exposed by wind erosion. Also note that only the top part of it is shiny, the lower part is similar to the base rock.
edit on 12-2-2013 by wildespace because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-2-2013 by manmental because: shiny



posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by arianna
reply to post by ArMaP
 


ArMaP, I thought the same thing. Curiosity has the MAHLI on board and considering 'Hugo' is such an unusual object I would have thought that the science team would have shown more interest in it.

There has to be something going on at the 'Hugo' site. The images below have been darkened to simulate a night time scenario. Notice the high degree of luminosity showing on the upper part of the nearer object and also the object behind, that is if they are two seperate objects.

Have any members any theories or ideas as to what could be producing this amount of brightness on the object?












The only thing I can think of is something like stone rapidly heated like lava stone, It would explain the organic shape to. Lava stone has almost the same refraction of glass thus higher Reflection.



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Personally, I do think it is a geological formation.

The near object appears to have a tower-like construction with light being emitted from the top of it. Notice that the tower object appears to be connected to a high wall which encloses a structural complex (as can be seen in the image below).

The object behind the tower is also emitting light that is much greater in intensity than the light being emitted from the tower object. Therefore, if the bright parts of the objects is light radiation coupled with the fact that there are definite structures on the surface means that a very tiny species is resident on the planet. I am aware that most people will not agree with me and would like to hear the same from NASA as a confirmation of my findings but I'm afraid that will not happen, not in the near future at least.

Study the image below and see if you can recognize any of the structural objects.





Direct view:

i985.photobucket.com...



posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Originally posted by arianna
There has to be something going on at the 'Hugo' site. The images below have been darkened to simulate a night time scenario.

To simulate a night scenario? You can't do that just by making the photo darker, specially in the way you did it, that doesn't affect pure white.


Notice the high degree of luminosity showing on the upper part of the nearer object and also the object behind, that is if they are two seperate objects.

Have any members any theories or ideas as to what could be producing this amount of brightness on the object?
It could be a specular reflection or just a non-specular reflection that had enough albedo to saturate the image on that point.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 



Yes ArMaP, it's only a simulation and nothing more.

The idea was to show how intense the brighter areas of the object really are but personally, I do not think it's anything to do with albedo. It's more likely some form of artificial light radiation that is being emitted. Notice how bright the flaring is on the far object. I do not see how nature can produce such an effect.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   
I don't know why when they think they've found something interesting they don't just wait a day and see if it's still there tomorrow. Maybe even a good picture of the landscape and the same picture a day or so later to see if any of the "rocks" moved.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Originally posted by arianna
I do not see how nature can produce such an effect.

Well, I'm sorry to say that this means that you don't understand a thing about photography.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
edit on 20/2/2013 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


ArMaP, I would like to ask, what photographic qualifications do you have to make the judgment that I do not know anything about photography. Do you consider yourself to be a photographic expert? I thought you were a computer programmer, not a professional photographer.

I can appreciate why you made such a comment but in this particular circumstance reducing the brightness level allows the viewer to experience the high luminosity content of the objects under investigation.

What we are seeing at the 'Hugo' site is something very unusual and unique. Due to the very bright areas showing in the images I would have thought the NASA/JPL science team would have wanted to take a much closer look to observe whether the very bright areas were a natural phenomenon or were being powered by some form of artificial energy force.



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by arianna
...Due to the very bright areas showing in the images I would have thought the NASA/JPL science team would have wanted to take a much closer look to observe whether the very bright areas were a natural phenomenon or were being powered by some form of artificial energy force.


The bright areas look like the sun reflecting off of something. Possibly something polished by wind erosion




edit on 2/20/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2013 @ 04:02 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Originally posted by arianna
ArMaP, I would like to ask, what photographic qualifications do you have to make the judgment that I do not know anything about photography.

I have several years as an amateur photographer, I learned all the photography theory from my sister, who is a professional photographer, and from some books, and I based my opinion on your post, as what you wrote there shows that you don't understand (or, even worse, don't want to understand) why things appear white on a photo.


Do you consider yourself to be a photographic expert?

No.


I thought you were a computer programmer, not a professional photographer.

I am a computer programmer that likes photography and is interested in photography. I also have been doing work for several years with digital images, photos included.


I can appreciate why you made such a comment but in this particular circumstance reducing the brightness level allows the viewer to experience the high luminosity content of the objects under investigation.

Reducing the brightness levels doesn't change areas that are all black or all white, those cannot be blacker or whiter.

Areas completely black can appear like that on a photo because they are really completely black not reflective or because they are in the shadow. They can appear black if they are below the light sensitivity limit for the camera when the photo was taken. By using the right parameters you can make everything look black in a photo.

Areas completely white can appear like that on a photo because they are really completely white, because they are reflecting light or because they are emitting light. They can appear white if they are above the light sensitivity limit for the camera when the photo was taken. By using the right parameters you can make everything look white in a photo.


What we are seeing at the 'Hugo' site is something very unusual and unique.

I agree.


Due to the very bright areas showing in the images I would have thought the NASA/JPL science team would have wanted to take a much closer look to observe whether the very bright areas were a natural phenomenon or were being powered by some form of artificial energy force.

Those areas are not really very bright, as you can see when comparing it with other photos. Sure, it's brighter than the rocks and dust around it, but it doesn't look like a specular reflection or a light emission, at least to me.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Mar, 23 2013 @ 12:29 AM
link   
That looks like an awfully weird way for a rock to erode, but then again I am no geologist. First thing that came to mind was the robotic skull picture that Nasa had, now that one was definately creepy, and I still as of yet have no idea about it or if its been debunked. Personally I 100% see it as a skull as posted, and you can tell by the shadow that it is exactly what it looks like which is even creepier. Then again depending on how you look at it , and on what side of the fence you are on it could be something of ours, something alien, or another easter egg from Nasa,military, high level people in preperation for the fake alien invasion
. Like I said depends on which side of the fence you are on, probably even more angles. Personally though I figure its just a rock, maybe some kind of crystal idk. Good find though thanks!



posted on Mar, 23 2013 @ 05:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by arianna
Personally, I do think it is a geological formation.

The near object appears to have a tower-like construction with light being emitted from the top of it. Notice that the tower object appears to be connected to a high wall which encloses a structural complex (as can be seen in the image below).

The object behind the tower is also emitting light that is much greater in intensity than the light being emitted from the tower object. Therefore, if the bright parts of the objects is light radiation coupled with the fact that there are definite structures on the surface means that a very tiny species is resident on the planet. I am aware that most people will not agree with me and would like to hear the same from NASA as a confirmation of my findings but I'm afraid that will not happen, not in the near future at least.

Study the image below and see if you can recognize any of the structural objects.





Direct view:

i985.photobucket.com...


I'm really baffled at how you can see all that in the image. I look at the unmodified image and all I see is something sticking out of plain rock. d1jqu7g1y74ds1.cloudfront.net...

Scientists say the thing sticking out is a harder and smoother rock exposed by erosion, and I don't see any reason to doubt them.

A tiny civilisation would have left much more regular, and much more apparent, traces of its existence.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Since this thread was new, and then got older, and faded away (no, no, not you Al Gore), I thought I'd bring it back to ask if anyone has any further ideas about what Hugo can be. Has Curiosity circled around near it again so more pics have been taken? And I wanted to bump it, of course, to honor Hugo, who I was talking about on another thread. Hugo should still be either on an ATS tee-shirt (maybe he has been! I don't look at the store) or even full-size statues could be cast - true to color and shape - and his legacy shared that way.

Hugo may still be the most interesting object found on Mars (outside of the science experiments and discoveries) except, imnho, Arken's spine find. Is anything else occurring with the spine in terms of "experts" looking at it and giving their opinions?



posted on Jun, 15 2013 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aleister

Originally posted by Watcher26
reply to post by Aleister
 


Huh! The rock looks like a sqished bug as much as I look like Elvis!


Good to meet you Elvis. Liked some of the music, disliked the movies (stupid career move). I called it a bug because the guy posting did, I don't know what it looks like. The point of the post was to direct him to start his own thread, and how to go about doing so.

ADDED: Oh, you are the guy posting. You called it a bug, and I played on that and said "squished bug". Now you say its a rock and looks like a bug as much as you look like Elvis. Are you one of those Siamese twins who can't see the other one typing?
edit on 6-2-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)
edit on 6-2-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)


I must've been pissed when I made the Elvis remark, because I said the exact opposite of what I meant. To correct myself, the squished bug looks like a rock as much as I look like Elvis...



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 11:22 AM
link   
No matter what type of crature it is, no need for toilet training since it never leaves the litter box...






top topics



 
92
<< 16  17  18   >>

log in

join