Could this show a simple plant leaf like a moss?

It's too bad that all the images listed are in jpg format.

It would really help to have like some raw TIFF images.

reply to post by qmantoo


The reason I said that is there is NO EXTRA DETAIL when zooming in on that image if anything it softens it and makes the jpeg artifacts more visible which doesn't help your cause.

You don't have a great track record with your assumption of what you see on pictures remember your comments of "looks like a net over the image" and "the shadows picture" if you also look at your fungus on MARS thread I gave you some information on the images/camera you asked for.

Do you want some help or not, if I want to get pedantic show me an image of a fossil of the size of those claimed by you in that image which is not in a piece of stone like this.

S and f op, life on mars would imo be slow growing and well camoufaged. Remember the bit of plastic stroke cocoon? Well in this pic i think i found the momma and 2 babies, see if you can spot them. Also theres shell/bone like structures laying around.mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

wmd_2008

You don't have a great track record with your assumption of what you see on pictures remember your comments of "looks like a net over the image" and "the shadows picture" if you also look at your fungus on MARS thread I gave you some information on the images/camera you asked for.
Do you want some help or not, if I want to get pedantic show me an image of a fossil of the size of those claimed by you in that image which is not in a piece of stone like this.

Strange, in my eyes you also do not have a very good track record either. It depends on your point of view. I admitted I made a mistake on the shadows image. What more do you want, blood?
You are putting the conventional view point all the time, which is fine. However, conventional science does not always get it right, and sometimes even alters data to try to prove they have it right according to their beliefs.

Possibly in this case they and you are wrong to assume everything is just a rock or not alive.

Conventional science has a large following and some of those followers like you dont always get it right too. Just like we dont, but it is not necessary to rub anyone's nose in the dirt. So, lay off the snide little remarks please. This forum is all about bringing our collective skills together to find the truth about the topic.

You are not doing this for me personally, you choose to add something to the discussion, just like I do. Although I do appreciate the time and effort involved by everyone who posts on ATS and on the threads which I start, we can never know what any one person's motivation is, can we?

I am fully aware that there are some on here who probably get paid by the government to put their agenda and so these people will not have the same motivation to find out the truth as we might. You can take offence at this or not, thats up to you. Your emotions are your own business and not something I can influence, they are yours to manage.

It is highly unlikely that such a plant will leave a fossil due to its size and composition which is more like algae or seedlings that anything else perhaps. It is even more unlikely that we will be allowed to see any such fossil (reference the "fossil" which NASA ground away before it could be investigated and in fact was specifically targeted AND destroyed completely.) So, you know in your heart that your requrement for me to show you a fossil is probably never going to happen, but if I find one, you can be sure I will post it on ATS for you to comment on.

reply to post by qmantoo


That the government (which one?) would have paid agents on ATS is one of the most bizarre ideas I have come across. I think conspiracy theorists give themselves too much credit in that respect. The governments and the mainstream scientific community aren't that bothered with a few cranks, although some of the more widespread ideas (Nibiru, doomsdays, etc) are addressed by NASA, simply because people keep sending them those questions.

Get real. As an example, the Japanese government has openly advertised for people to monitor the internet and to stop negative rumours about Fukushima which hurts the nuclear industry and the image of the country. It is only a small step of belief from passively monitoring the internet to taking an active role like the Japanese have done.

eriktheawful -

It's too bad that all the images listed are in jpg format.
It would really help to have like some raw TIFF images.

The images should be in the PDS I think. I cannot get to them since a traceroute always gets blocked by servers in Canada for some reason. Maybe they just dont like inquiries to the PDS from where I am.

We may find thet they are something totally different like mineral deposits as has been suggested, but in my mind, it is more likely they are not that much better detail that the jpeg images but without the jpg compression artifacts.

Originally posted by qmantoo
Get real. As an example, the Japanese government has openly advertised for people to monitor the internet and to stop negative rumours about Fukushima which hurts the nuclear industry and the image of the country. It is only a small step of belief from passively monitoring the internet to taking an active role like the Japanese have done.

But that's a more immediate matter, closer to home (or rather _at_ home) and having real and immediate effects. That a government would have Internet agents dispelling theories of alien structures on the Moon or Mars, the comming of Nibiru or doomsday, etc. is a whole lot more fancy. I'm not saying they don't have any Internet agents of any kind, but to think that they would devote time, money and resources to countering a few crank/alternative theories on such a level is unreasonable.

reply to post by qmantoo


TIFF is a fully open file format, PSD is not.

TIFF can be opened up by a very large of applications where PSD tends to be limited to Adobe products (not always, but much less available than the TIFF format.).

Originally posted by wildespace

Originally posted by qmantoo
Get real. As an example, the Japanese government has openly advertised for people to monitor the internet and to stop negative rumours about Fukushima which hurts the nuclear industry and the image of the country. It is only a small step of belief from passively monitoring the internet to taking an active role like the Japanese have done.

But that's a more immediate matter, closer to home (or rather _at_ home) and having real and immediate effects. That a government would have Internet agents dispelling theories of alien structures on the Moon or Mars, the comming of Nibiru or doomsday, etc. is a whole lot more fancy. I'm not saying they don't have any Internet agents of any kind, but to think that they would devote time, money and resources to countering a few crank/alternative theories on such a level is unreasonable.

When TPTB get wind that a member(s) of a forum presents or finds something in any of the Mars or lunar images which they would rather be kept from 'public' eyes it's a sure bet that they would be concerned, especially if it runs contrary to their current scientific thinking.

Originally posted by arianna

Originally posted by wildespace

Originally posted by qmantoo
Get real. As an example, the Japanese government has openly advertised for people to monitor the internet and to stop negative rumours about Fukushima which hurts the nuclear industry and the image of the country. It is only a small step of belief from passively monitoring the internet to taking an active role like the Japanese have done.

But that's a more immediate matter, closer to home (or rather _at_ home) and having real and immediate effects. That a government would have Internet agents dispelling theories of alien structures on the Moon or Mars, the comming of Nibiru or doomsday, etc. is a whole lot more fancy. I'm not saying they don't have any Internet agents of any kind, but to think that they would devote time, money and resources to countering a few crank/alternative theories on such a level is unreasonable.

When TPTB get wind that a member(s) of a forum presents or finds something in any of the Mars or lunar images which they would rather be kept from 'public' eyes it's a sure bet that they would be concerned, especially if it runs contrary to their current scientific thinking.

Much easier to simply hire the same people and have them go over the images before they are made public and simply NOT post any that might have something in it that looks suspicious or presents something they don't want talked about.

You don't put out secret information and then try to do damage control. That runs completely contrary to OPSEC. You instead, simply make sure that people that are not suppose to see it, do not ever see it. Ever.

TIFF is a fully open file format, PSD is not.
TIFF can be opened up by a very large of applications where PSD tends to be limited to Adobe products (not always, but much less available than the TIFF format.).

Sorry, I meant the PDS which I think stands for Planetry Data System where the data for all the NASA space missions is cleaned, peer reviewed, sanitised, and eventually released. Ready for science to run with it so the scientists can do their research and write their papers.

So I guess no-one has anything to say really apart from we all wish that there were better images. If there WERE better images, what would it show us? Would it make the evidence stronger?

I have posted quite a few examples of these 'leaf-like' or 'simple plant' structures, so what would it need for you guys to think there was some substance to the argument that life exists on Mars as shown in the various images I have posted.

I mean, these are official images. They are from an official source. They show what appears to be simple plant life in at least 3 instances and from different viewpoints. Thats pretty good, considering we can never have data which backs it up unless we have access to the rovers - which we dont.

Most of the folk who are so keen to downplay the other life on Mars threads are very quiet here.

reply to post by qmantoo


Better images, or more images from different angles, etc. aren't going to solve the problem. What's needed is a chemical analysis, and other studies. Like I said, morphological evidence is subjective, just because A looks like B doesn't necessarily mean A is B. What we need is the upcoming rover which will look for signs of past life, and hopefully a future rover that will look for signs of present life.

By the way, have you tried approaching a professional geologist with these images? Perhaps they can identify geological processes that can create these plant-like structures.

reply to post by qmantoo


Here is a link to the original image from the PSD site:

1m16546818eff5208p< br />
Like how you decided to add some words in your description of the site like "sanitize"........

Single images won't cut the mustard. Multiple images from different angles taken over time would help (to see if there is "growth")

Chem analysis would help. Stimuli response would help too.

Single images only help with something that everyone is familiar with. I take a picture of an elephant. No doubt there. An image of a leaf, again no doubt there since we can see the biological structure.

An image like this, we have something that looks like it may or may not be a root or feeler of some sort. Or it may or may not be mineral accretion.

Saying it's 100% proof is just wrong, because it's not. Saying that it COULD be something is okay. Calling those of us that want more proof and are not ready to accept a single photo as that proof does not make us "deniers", it makes us logical thinkers that do not want to be taken in by false evidence.

I could just as easily say that people that think this photo by itself is 100% proof of life on Mars are people with over active imaginations that are blinded by a desperate need in their belief.

Single images only help with something that everyone is familiar with. I take a picture of an elephant. No doubt there. An image of a leaf, again no doubt there since we can see the biological structure.

An image like this, we have something that looks like it may or may not be a root or feeler of some sort. Or it may or may not be mineral accretion.

Saying it's 100% proof is just wrong, because it's not. Saying that it COULD be something is okay. Calling those of us that want more proof and are not ready to accept a single photo as that proof does not make us "deniers", it makes us logical thinkers that do not want to be taken in by false evidence.

I never said that one image makes it 100% proof. I know it does not.
However, I have provided at least 3 different images of the same and similar structures, which add more weight to the argument since they are taken at different times, angles and of different items too.

I agree with wildespace, it looks like the accumulated dust between the (relatively) larger rocks.

There are other photos in which we can see that the dust acts almost as if it was wet, with a great tendency to aggregate.

Too bad we don't have colour.

Too bad we don't have colour

I think you are saying that if the plank-like thing was green, it would add weight to the argument and if it was red it would add weight to the aggregated dust hypothesis?

What happened to the sci-fi War of the Worlds red weed then, and why does plant life on a foreign planet have to be photosythetically chlorophyl green? How would you tell anything more if this image was in colour? You cannot make assumptions that life there would be similar to life here, since you all have already argued for an non Earth-like environment. Remember?

Originally posted by qmantoo

Too bad we don't have colour

I think you are saying that if the plank-like thing was green, it would add weight to the argument and if it was red it would add weight to the aggregated dust hypothesis?

What happened to the sci-fi War of the Worlds red weed then, and why does plant life on a foreign planet have to be photosythetically chlorophyl green? How would you tell anything more if this image was in colour? You cannot make assumptions that life there would be similar to life here, since you all have already argued for an non Earth-like environment. Remember?

Because certain minerals have certain colors. Doesn't mater what planet they are on.

A true color photo might allow us to either point out it's a mineral accretion of some sort, or possibly dust.

Or, it could help further your evidence that it is neither and might indeed be some form of life.

Don't knock the colors. They can help in many ways.

A true color photo might allow us to either point out it's a mineral accretion of some sort, or possibly dust.
Or, it could help further your evidence that it is neither and might indeed be some form of life.
Don't knock the colors. They can help in many ways.

No, I am certainly not knocking the role colour can play in helping us to determine more information about the images sent back by the spacecraft. As I think you realised, I was saying that plants could also be red or any other colour too. The assumption that plants on another planet contain chlorophyl and are green is totally unscientific and something which we cannot assume.

Colours are determined by light, so even though light from the same source is shining on Mars as it is on Earth, the atmospheres are different and the light which filters through to the surface might be different too. We dont even know if the colour references on the 'joystick' have remained the same after being exposed to martian atmospheric conditions.

qmantoo

Too bad we don't have colour

I think you are saying that if the plank-like thing was green, it would add weight to the argument and if it was red it would add weight to the aggregated dust hypothesis?

No, just that it would help to distinguish different materials.

qmantoo
Colours are determined by light, so even though light from the same source is shining on Mars as it is on Earth, the atmospheres are different and the light which filters through to the surface might be different too.

From the photos we have seen, the dust acts like a filter (exactly in the same way as on Earth) and the light becomes that reddish brown.