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

page: 6
92
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Originally posted by ahybrid
I'm still curious as to why we can't get video.

Curiosity has at least one camera capable of making videos, the problem with videos is that, even for a choppy 10 frames per second video that would mean the equivalent of 10 images just for a second of video.

As they do not even have the enough bandwidth to send a full panorama in a day, sending video must be restricted to an occasion where it makes more sense (for the science team, not for us) than static images.


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




posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


My argument is that the technology employed in capturing video on Cursiosity and storing it in a data repository for local processing in preperation for transmission is well established. It is not a far leap to assume a government backed entity has more advanced processing and transmission technology to allow for delayed, but solid streams of clear imagery.

The transmission system would merely have to implement a larger buffer, and loop through the transmission of a given chunk of time T until the transmission system is signaled by the recieving system that loss is less than N% therefore append that to the stream and advance the buffer T.

My argument is that we can very well receive HD Video which only a select set of Scientists are allowed to analyze. -Why?

Do you truly believe NASA is running its systems, firmware et al, on consumer grade products, with consumer grade Operating & Support Systems? I don't think you do. ;-)
edit on 3-2-2013 by ahybrid because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:05 PM
link   
I will start by saying that I have NEVER seen any of the things people see in mars/moon pictures. I don't know how this can be a rock, the head would have to be balanced in such a way on a very small balance point, it wouldn't work. The head is very symmetrical and the is the one thing you never find in these pictures...
I'm not saying conclusively that this is an living creature....but the closest thing I have seen thus far.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:08 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Originally posted by ahybrid
My argument is that the technology employed in capturing video on Cursiosity and storing it in a data repository for local processing in preperation for transmission is well established.

It is, Curiosity has a 8GB memory storage for keeping the data before transmission.


The transmission system would merely have to implement a larger buffer, and loop through the transmission of a given chunk of time T until the transmission system is signaled by the recieving system that loss is less than N% therefore append that to the stream and advance the buffer T.

The problem is the speed at which all that data is transmited to Earth, a larger buffer would be irrelevant if they cannot take the data out fast enough.


Do you truly believe NASA is running its systems, firmware et al, on consumer grade products, with consumer grade Operating & Support Systems? I don't think you do. ;-)

I don't, but do you think that transmitting from Mars to an orbiter (there are no geostationary satellites on Mars) and from the orbiter to Earth is as fast as fibre optics, for example?

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



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:19 PM
link   
cool, looks like a lizard but it is just a few rocks, the photo lies



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:21 PM
link   
looks to be 2 or more rocks, the head bit could be a part of the rock in the distance



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Coming from a military family consisting of Electrooptics Engineers and SR-71 test pilots, I challenge the validity of the official public technical specifications of this project. I think Curiosity is smarter than NASA would have you believe. We, the public, are 20+ years behind the military industrial complex, which NACA was established.

"We have the ability to stream HD Video from Curiosity, why are a select few entitled to observe this?" That is my conjecture.

I'll clarify: "I am insisting there is greater technology at work in rendering and transmitting higher quality media. I don't claim the know the definitive physics or actual technology, but my experience leads me to believe we do not have all of the pieces. One of which is a more diverse typeOf as well as greater quality media. I can see how it would be difficult to land on that conclusion when attempting to abstract it from publicly accessible means of technology. I anticipate we will have to agree to disagree."
edit on 3-2-2013 by ahybrid because: (no reason given)


Had this even been simply a 10 frame/sec clip, we may have been able to establish the reality of the object. So why can't we at least get that? I have seen none.
edit on 3-2-2013 by ahybrid because: (no reason given)
edit on 3-2-2013 by ahybrid because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


You know after all the crazy looking animals and plants on Mars, this does look like something I would question, but the winds and sands of Mars can carve beautiful things into the landscape there. However to put a red gem on its eye like that is kinda weird. Very strange. I know there is life there, we have all seen the turkey things moving, the hamster, water flow, mud, etc. I want to go!



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:32 PM
link   
Awesome!
Anorher picture of of a rock on Mars.
Beauty.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
I have seen a number of So-called Mars anomalies that make you say, "whatever".

But, this one actually could be something. I am not 100 percent convinced, but it does appear to hold some promise.

Most will say the radiation and hostile environment would kill any living creature. But, life can adapt. Perhaps it "suns" when the temps are higher, and buries itself in the dirt the rest of the time? It's head even kind of reminds me of an ostrich, so perhaps that is how it could survive.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
All right, I think that I feel confident enough to say maybe about this being some kind of life form. Normally, the "life forms" really do look like rocks, but this one seems to have legs, a head and eyes.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:42 PM
link   
anyone worked out the dimesions of this object>
? maybe if it was the size of a football field id be interested



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by impaired
Arken. I have a bit of info that may be relevant to this thread and conspiracies. Or not...

I sent a U2U to Aleister explaining this, and he said I should tell you. I will copy and paste the message. It was about trying to find another location of this anomaly:


I have already checked. Nothing. The area is either obscured by a rock (which I will believe), but for that Sol 170 ML panorama? See that big black box towards the right?

i.imgbox.com...

Object of interest is supposed to be there. But here's the funny part:

When images come down, they're in a sequence. Images 1, 2, 3, etc. That panorama contains ALL images in an unbroken sequence, which means without equivocation that the area was PURPOSELY not imaged.

Purposely. Something to think about...


I'm not saying they didn't image that area because there is/was something there, but it just seems strange that in an unbroken sequence of images, that area was purposely not imaged. I do see that there may have been a camera exposure problem, but still - usually they image the entire area for a panorama like that, and they go through the thumbails and choose which ones they want.

But there were no thumbnails of that area, which means they purposely didn't image the area.

Now, whatever that means... But I thought I should tell you and the community.


that area was purposely not imaged???.
What the hell is happen on NASA/JPL official web site?




The "things" become really suspicious....

Thanks for your quest and search.

A BIG APPLAUSE for you.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ahybrid
 



The ability to stream HD?

I'd really like to see that!..

Personally, I don't know why they would have a problem with allowing us to have a look at it. After-all, it's not like we would be viewing 'real-time' feed of the video as it streams in, would we?

I thought there was a decent amount of lag between the broadcast signal and the received signal, resulting from the distance the signal must travel before reaching Earth. It could allow the streaming feed to be cut before anyone would have a chance to see anything too obvious.

I just realized that this may be the reason they do not let us see it, even though there is a lag. If there is a 10 minute lag (probably not, I'm using 10mins because it's a round #) there would need to be a large staff scouring the feed for any anomalies that need to remain a hidden secret.

This sizeable staff of feed technicians would have to be informed of the concerted effort to hide images and scenes where signs of life or other information deemed a pinnacle sensitivity area. Employing a large number of techs would increase the difficulty in keeping their secret and that's information they will never be willing to risk.

Instead of risking a leak by a tech, they simply make streaming unavailable to the public, as-well-as any other 'uninformed' individual or agency.

If this is true, it would mean they know there are things on Mars that have to be hidden. The irony of this is; their choice to deny authorized public viewing could reveal they have knowledge about life or other incredible facts we are told do not exist.

Maybe they know their is life on Mars, either on the surface or beneath it. Maybe they know of intelligent life on Mars. Maybe they know Mars is an artificial planet
.

or...

Maybe they are not on Mars at all...



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 03:03 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Originally posted by ahybrid
Coming from a military family consisting of Electrooptics Engineers and SR-71 test pilots, I challenge the validity of the official public technical specifications of this project. I think Curiosity is smarter than NASA would have you believe. We, the public, are 20+ years behind the military industrial complex, which NACA was established.

In projects like this, the most important thing is reliability, that's why they don't use bleeding edge technology but technology that they know works well for the purpose and in which they trust. That means using older technology than what was available at the time the project was started (Curiosity's project started in late 2004).


"I am insisting there is greater technology at work in rendering and transmitting higher quality media. I don't claim the know the definitive physics or actual technology, but my experience leads me to believe we do not have all of the pieces.

It's possible, but the communications from the rover to the orbiters is limited to 8 minutes per day. According to official data, the uplink from Curiosity to Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (the newer orbiter and the one with the biggest available bandwidth) is limited to a speed of 2 Mbit/s so, during those 8 minutes it can only transmit 250MByte of data to MRO.


I anticipate we will have to agree to disagree."

That's good enough for me.



Had this even been simply a 10 frame/sec clip, we may have been able to establish the reality of the object.

How?

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



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Originally posted by talesone
anyone worked out the dimesions of this object

Not yet.



maybe if it was the size of a football field id be interested

It's not, it's close to the rover, so it has, at most, 50 cm (value based on nothing concrete
).


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



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Perhaps it is not a "creature" but the object differentiates from the surrounding rock and has a smooth reflective surface, it almost resembles a statue or an ornament. It definitely looks out of place and different from any of the "rocks" I've seen in other pictures.

Brings to mind something like the gold and bronze reptilian statues the ancients were so fond of making.



Perhaps the former rulers of Mars looked something like this...


edit on 3-2-2013 by Konduit because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Curiosity is equipped with a laser. Shoot it and see what happens.

Science!



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I'm amazed at how many people think it's a rock. You could comb the earth for years and years and never, ever find a rock with shapes like that unless deliberately fashioned that way with some cutting tools and sandpaper. A rover we send out finds one in a matter of weeks? Come on. I'm not saying it's alive, but a rock? Really? Look at the "nose". It's shaped nearly identical to that of an alligator or something. I know, I know. People see things they want to see. The thing is, I really don't care either way. But... a rock? Nah.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
didn't read all the post. a rock should be in same place. if it was alive i'm sure it moved .anyone have new picture same location





top topics
 
92
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join