Curiosity: "Thought-Experiment", Image Compilation PLUS a few Perhaps 'Disturbing' Questions

amazing
They should be taking many close ups of any anomalous rock or geological formation. I realize that they are on a time frame and these aren't part of the mission, so to speak, but you never know when there is going to be a catastrophic failure. The rover is there, it's good science to investigate all of this stuff when you see it, because you may not be operational the next day. Do they even have a geologist on the team or someone interested in rocks? I wonder. lol I'm being a little harsh there, but you know. Certainly they don't have any biologists or archeologists...

Are you a geologist yourself, to have confidence to anounce a rock or formation anomalous? If so, feel free to contact Curiosity team with your findings / ideas / concerns. But if you're just a random person on the Internet thinking that something "looks out of place" then I'm afraid your arguments don't have any weight. Whether something looks anomalous is a very subjective matter.

They do have geologists on the team, and if the see something anomalous I'm sure they would investigate.

Besides, Curiosity has already taken hundreds of pics of interesting rocks. mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

I realise this is ATS, the place for conspiracy theories, but thankfully science (including robotic missions in space) is done by those who know what they're doing, and not by random guys crying "anomaly!" or "coverup!" every five minutes, or by the "YouTube intellectuals".

honested3

 

Thank you for this thread, I think you really have me interested in these pics, I have seen a few of them already but they were ambiguous, these really do look like something from another planet - literally.

Thanks for your detailed opinion on this. All these images were exciting enough to make me (and some others on here) look into similar kinds of 'bizarre' rock formations that we can find here on Earth and how they may possibly have formed. By doing so, I indeed learned a lot about ventifacts, salt weathering, vitrification, basalt erosion, volcanic activity, the rock cycle in general and lots of other geological processes. Of course, that won't replace a master in geology but it was a pretty good lesson after all.

Yet, IMO, some of these rocks still display a variety of shapes & features that would have justified some more investigation in order to be sure nothing significant has been overlooked. This is not to say the guys over at JPL (and their international contributors) are not highly qualified for what they're doing. They certainly 'are' among the best professionals you can select for such a team. But does that prevent them from having both a public as well as a non-public agenda for this mission? I wouldn't want to exclude such a scenario. Another possibility would be that they are just being very careful while not making any public statement until they're 100% sure what they're commenting on.

In the end, everyone will have to judge for themselves. You know my opinion on this by now. But that's really just my very personal take on the situation, the view of a random guy on the internet!

Im sure this has been already said (as i just raced to type without reading) but image 3 is undeniably a vertebral column (thoracic spine spinous processes, lamina both visible and duplicated over many segments).

Of a large vertebrate mammal or reptile.

(Im a neuroradiologist MD with a B.S. in biology)

drphilxr
Im sure this has been already said (as i just raced to type without reading) but image 3 is undeniably a vertebral column (thoracic spine spinous processes, lamina both visible and duplicated over many segments).

Of a large vertebrate mammal or reptile.

(Im a neuroradiologist MD with a B.S. in biology)

Really are you used to looking at LOW RES images doing your job ?

They look like ventifacts and lots of links have been given to show examples here on Earth as well.

Or is this part of a skull?

Ventifact Skull/Face

Try it under Google image search and see what weird & wonderful shapes NATURE can make!

drphilxr
Im sure this has been already said (as i just raced to type without reading) but image 3 is undeniably a vertebral column (thoracic spine spinous processes, lamina both visible and duplicated over many segments).

Of a large vertebrate mammal or reptile.

(Im a neuroradiologist MD with a B.S. in biology)

Hi. I asked on another thread if you can define each of those terms for a layman like myself. I could look them up but would rather read it firsthand from someone who knows whereof they speak. Thanks!

And to the other examples of earth rocks that had some of these details, how about three in a row almost exactly the same?

jeep3r
Most of you probably know by now just how much I'm fascinated by Curiosity's imagery of Gale Crater (especially that of Rocknest) and I thought I'd give it another try to fight for your attention on this!

Actually, I'd like to propose a quick "thought-experiment" regarding some of the more compelling pics in that area.

THE EXPERIMENT

Below you will find a selection of images that apparently show rocks or rock formations that are (in some way) quite different from their surroundings. They have been debated in several posts and threads, because of their distinct nature. Now, imagine you were in command of Curiosity's every move, as part of the science team at JPL. Please look closely at those images again and ask yourself: would you decide to make Curiosity investigate one or more of these 'rocks' more in detail? Would you want to acquire close-up MAHLI images (or much better MastCam-views) of any of those features? If yes, which ones would justify a closer look and why? If no, what's the reason for not checking them in detail?

BACKGROUND:
I don't want to spoil the fun but guess what?! The public image archives of NASA/JPL (that allegedly contain all images) DON'T PROVIDE A SINGLE CLOSE-UP OF ANY OF THE IMAGES BELOW ... and I (personally) don't believe this is so because all these 'rocks' are so boring (geologically speaking) or have - accidentally - been 'overseen'.

The lack of close-up views is even more incredible when looking at the very first image. In a previous post of mine, I came to the conclusion that this particular 'rock formation' is located slightly to the east of what NASA calls 'Point Lake' (see here for an overview-map). And what's even more disturbing: Curiosity's traverse-path led directly through the area of this (at least to me) very, very interesting 'rock'. Curiosity was literally standing right next to it (as revealed by the rover-tracks imaged on Sol 157. Yet, for some reason, there's no close-up view available.

Obviously, nobody at NASA/JPL came up with the idea to use the MastCam or MAHLI instrument for closer inspection! Or they did. But in that case, NASA's so-called 'public archive' wouldn't be so transparent after all and rather serve as a platform for very selective publishing of acquired imagery. It's just a thought, but judge for yourself! I, for one, find this whole situation quite telling (and annoying)!

Apologies for the rant!

But again: please let me know what you would do if you could determine where Curiosity went and which close-ups were to be acquired. And in case these 'rocks' are not of any interest to you, please also let me/us know why?

Thanks!

------------

And here go the IMAGES (NOTE: Some pics have been contrast-enhanced and slightly sharpened. The original NASA/JPL images, however, are also linked below in case you prefer a direct comparison):

Image 1 ('The Boat')

Same 'rock' in a larger context:

Click here for the original NASA/JPL Image

------------

Image 2 ('The Shovel')

Click here for the original NASA/JPL Image

------------

Image 3 ('The Fossil') -> discovered by ATS-Member Arken

Same 'formation' in a larger context:

Click here for the original NASA/JPL Image (Part A)
Click here for the original NASA/JPL Image (Part B)

------------

Image 4 ('The Scrap Plates')

Click here for the original NASA/JPL Image

------------

Image 5 ('The Cross-Section')
Formation in context:

Rocks on left side in close-up view:

Rocks on right side in close-up view:

Click here for the original NASA/JPL Image (Part A)
Click here for the original NASA/JPL Image (Part B)

------------

Image 6 'The Triangle' -> first spotted by ATS-Member Nerbot

Same 'rock' in a larger context:

Click here for the original NASA/JPL Image

------------

Image 7 'The Cauldron'

Close-Up View:

Click here for the original NASA/JPL Image

------------

Image 8 'The Pipeline'

Close-Up View:

Click here for the original NASA/JPL Image

------------

Image 9 'The Ornament' -> spotted by ATS-Member Bilk22

Close-Up View:

Click here for the original NASA/JPL Image

------------


And, finally, here go my previous threads/posts which are more or less 'related' to the subject discussed above (just FYI):

- Potential 'Artifacts' discussed in a Video
- Discussion of the Rocknest Panorama
- Strange Shipwreck-Like Feature
- Strange Rocks Post 1
- Strange Rocks Post 2
- Strange Rocks Post 3

(Note: when clicking on 'posts', please wait until page has fully loaded and scrolled to post)

edit on 4-3-2013 by jeep3r because: removed color-tags

edit on 4-3-2013 by jeep3r because: text

edit on 4-3-2013 by jeep3r because: text

reply to post by Aleister


i finally read my mail and replied to yours

drphilxr
reply to post by Aleister

 

i finally read my mail and replied to yours

Thanks. I was wondering if you'd post (or let me post) your response to this thread.

And here's another maybe-kindof-nahnotevenclose single "vertebrae" potential (on the left, don't even look to the far right). This is one I found while dwelling on the anomalies thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Source (GigaPan)

Here's the "vertebrae" rotated so we can see it as our brain is used to seeing vertebrae:

There are plenty of strange rock shapes here on earth - fingals cave, giants causeway to name but 2 just do an image search and you get 1000's why should it be any different on any other planet with a rocky landscape.

Go to any geological site and look at the huge variety of natural occurring rocks, stones and crystals.

Most of the pics I have seen look like completely normal rock formations that you could see by taking a walk through any similar area.

Do you really think they'd release a pic showing actual proof?