It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The NASA/ESA Cover-Up

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 08:42 AM
link   
Acording to NASA:

The average solar intensity at the orbit of Mars is 590 W/m2, compared with 1370 W/m2 in Earth orbit


So, for the pictures to show anything worth viewing, they must show more light than we see, that is allways used in photography but people do not notice it.

On Pluto, the light is 1/1000 of what we have here on Earth.

Thanks for the info. So Mars has a bit less than 1/2 of Earths Solar intensity.

How greatly is Earth's Solar intensity reduced on an overcast day, do you know? It is still quite bright, isn't it? We are talking about surface intensity.
Wouldn't the lack of a substantial atmosphere on Mars allow more solar radiation to reach the surface?

I do not believe it is as dark and gloomy on Mars as you contend...but that is really not the issue here, is it?




posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2ndSEED

Originally posted by moxyone

But then, a funny thing happened. ESA put a clamp on the release of images, and NASA seemingly ignored the more interesting objects that the rovers encountered.




MOXYONE are u postive these pictures are legit because if so look what I found?

Can it be a new finding, we all have over looked?


2nd Seed, the images are direct from ESA. All I did was adjust the gamma, as the original pic seemed a bit underexposed.

I noticed the object/structure/venting? that you posted. Keep looking...there are a number of quite extraordinary things in this valley.

Especially over to the far eastern side of the image. Let me know what you find, as it is more valuable for you to discover things on your own, isnt't it?

regards.



[edit on 20-11-2004 by 2ndSEED]


[edit on 20-11-2004 by moxyone]



posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 10:05 AM
link   
can't oxidation still take place in low oxygen environments, like here on Earth in the deeper oceans (where oxygen content is lower), sunken ships still corrode, just very much more slowly than if in open air or shallow water.



posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Notme
can't oxidation still take place in low oxygen environments, like here on Earth in the deeper oceans (where oxygen content is lower), sunken ships still corrode, just very much more slowly than if in open air or shallow water.


Oxidation can occur as long as oxygen is present, be it in the gas form, water, or in another chemical composition. It just depends on what the material reacts with.



posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Those pictures are something else. I still cant believe Im lookin at green surfaces on mars. Thanks for the pics everybody.




posted on Nov, 20 2004 @ 12:49 PM
link   
MOXYONE<

Just wanted to know if you can possibly e-mail other images that may be an intrest?



posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Will send a few when I get a chance.

Are there no Europeans who are bothered by the fact that the ESA has all but put a moratorium on image release?

One or two pictures every few weeks just doesn't cut it, in my book.

Also, I get a kick out of posters who go to great lengths to attempt to explain certain aspects of images as being formed/created by strictly chemical/geological means, even when those explanations fall way short.

Occams Razor, my friends, Occams razor.



posted on Nov, 22 2004 @ 04:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by moxyone
yes, these images are authentic. As I previously stated, all I adjusted was the gamma.

Here is a BW crop of the Louros Valley area...it is ANYTHING but "normal", as a previous poster so casually stated.




I still dont see anything.....



posted on Nov, 22 2004 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by moxyone
Thanks for the info. So Mars has a bit less than 1/2 of Earths Solar intensity.

How greatly is Earth's Solar intensity reduced on an overcast day, do you know? It is still quite bright, isn't it? We are talking about surface intensity.
Wouldn't the lack of a substantial atmosphere on Mars allow more solar radiation to reach the surface?

I do not believe it is as dark and gloomy on Mars as you contend...but that is really not the issue here, is it?


My intention was not to say that Mars is dark and gloomy, only to point out that the conditions on Mars are different from the conditions on Earth, and that can not be shown in a photograph.

In this site they make a comparison between the Earth's and Mars' solar intensity.

As for clouds, I found a site that said that in Thailand the solar radiation is almost reduced to 50% in the rain season, bringing the value close to the Mars solar radiation.

And yes, it's a shame that ESA does not publish more photos, and if you look on their site, the credits for the photos appears as "ESA/DLR/FU Berlin", not only ESA.

And they have a picture that I haven't seen yet.

And remember that if you want to see detail in the picture, use the blank and white ones, the colour pictures are composed of various images and so they do not have the same quality.



posted on Nov, 22 2004 @ 07:12 PM
link   


If NASA wanted people to think of Mars is more hostile they only had to show the pictures without light amplification, so people could see how little Sun light there is at that distance from the Sun.


I see we are backing off of your original statement. The fact that conditions are quite different on Mars than Earth has never been contested. So, are you conceding that NASA is not utilizing any light amplification?

As far as B/W versus color...I am sick and tired of the obfuscation.

ESA shows GREEN. Period.

Along with a heckof a lot more, that is, before the embargo took hold.

To call said embargo simply a "shame" is not only suspect, its pathetic, and without logic.



posted on Nov, 22 2004 @ 07:38 PM
link   



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Never did understand NASA's problem w/ sky color...I mean big deal, the sky is blue.

One thing I have noticed, though, they go to great lengths to debunk any earthlike qualities that Mars might exhibit...and if images depict as such, its quickly dismissed as "false color".

I had high hopes that the ESA would provide a competitive stimulus for NASA and the result would have been complete transparency on what we really know about the "red" planet.

But alas, it appears they are in league together, suppressing the most tantalizing information and conforming to the same agenda.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 10:49 AM
link   
... to EVER WANT to go there.

... For instance, if Mars is presented as being hostile to life,

... Then nobody's gonna sign up to go there, when the time comes.

... If the sunshine there is about the level of Cambodia-during-monsoon;

... and there is water near the poles that is not frozen, but in streams and lakes;

... and if eco-domes with pyramid greenhouse, sealed in glass and having underground passageway could be built to withstand the Martian cold.

... Such buildings would be much more hospitable than the Casey Station in Antarctica that I see from time to time--

... THEN maybe Mars is truly a sanctuary from the political chaos and predation we experience as a result of competition between predatory leaders, here on Earth.

... The political scene and its perfidy and deceit make me want to get the hell out of here. NASA may realize this and want to stem the tide.

... After all, Mars is NOW not merely an abandoned planet; it is a frontier.




posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Emily, some excellent points you make.

deep in thought.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 10:59 AM
link   
So, I guess this can be summed up as:

1) Cover up

2) Incompetency

3) Wide technology gap (understanding) between the "reporters"(NASA etc..) and the "listeners" (the public)



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by moxyone
I see we are backing off of your original statement. The fact that conditions are quite different on Mars than Earth has never been contested. So, are you conceding that NASA is not utilizing any light amplification?


I am not backing off (if by that you mean I am denying what I said) of my original statement, maybe I was not clear enough, I have some dificulties with the English language.
The fact that the diference in conditions was never contested does not mean that they do not exist, and if they exist people should have that difference in their minds when they speak of what they see in the photos from Mars.
And its obvious that they amplify the light in the same way my cammera amplifys light if I take a picture in low light conditions.



As far as B/W versus color...I am sick and tired of the obfuscation.
ESA shows GREEN. Period.


Yes, they show green, but they also show, in the color photos, patches of colors that do not appear in the black and white photos because of the way the photos are composed of different parts.


To call said embargo simply a "shame" is not only suspect, its pathetic, and without logic.


To me, its a shame, maybe its the way I was raised, I usually do not call lier to someone I do not know.
If you think that my opinion is "suspect", "pathetic" and "without logic", then what are you suspecting of, that I work for ESA?



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 08:40 PM
link   
i never called you a liar.

brother, i apologize if you took insult.

as confused as you.

moxy.



posted on Nov, 23 2004 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by bordnlazy
Hey you know how they sell property on the moon. is there a place to by mars property and how legal is that anyway?


going way back but

you cannot sell anything in space legaly. there was a space act put into effect internationally that stated space is an international zone and some othe rstuff, so the whole deal with people selling stars is a big lie. they really dont sell you the star they jsut make you pay 19.99 for a perty lil certificate. if someone is tryign o sell you land on teh moon they are lieing and punch them in the face.



posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 01:36 PM
link   
moxyone

I was not saying that you caled me a lier, I was trying to say is that if people say that the pictures from Mars are fakes, then they are saying that the who published the pictures is a lier, and I am not the kind of person to call the publishers of the photos liers, because I do no know them.

Again, this serves to proove that my knowledge of the English language is not good enoug to keep a conversation with someone and keeps geting me misunderstandings. This shows that I should have learned English in school and not by myself.

From now on I will try to speak less.



posted on Nov, 24 2004 @ 07:49 PM
link   
... It looks to me as if you haven't just taught yourself English.

... You have taught yourself good manners.

... Good going!! I mean, excellent work!! Yeah, I know

... English is FULL if idioms. Sorry.




new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join