Mars rovers photographs apparent disk-shaped UFOs

page: 3
64
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Interesting for a few reasons.

Why do these pictures no matter by whom they are taken, or in this case, 'it', always seem to be at the 'UFO Distance', meaning too far away to discern complete identity, but near enough to discern an interesting shape?

In addition, why is this shape associated with 'UFOs'? UFOs as in Spaceships, which it what this is about presumably.

Has this shape ever been confirmed as a 'UFO' shape: A recognised shape of an Alien Space vehicle, or just a shape that has never been photographed clearly and has been assigned time and time again, to be a UFO/Spaceship' by non scientifically trained individuals? And we have then absorbed this into the public conscience.

This is simply a shape that we associate with a Spaceship referencing very old and repeated images purporting to be such. Its identified because its where we expect to see it; in the sky.

An image that is so poor as this, is not worthy of further scrutiny to be honest.




posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Not sure what your point is, Phage.
A spec of dust right in front of the lens on one camera wouldn't be captured by it's stereo companion.

I think we've have already established what they aren't... Do you know what causes the black and white thingies?



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 

I think it's noise.
The level of noise varies and the rear hazcams are more subject than the front set.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
A Dust Particle on a negative, or on the camera's lens results in.... A White Spot on the Print.
I had to fill in these white spots from dust particles in Photography class at college with paint.

A Dust Particle in the air would hardly be visible to the camera lens. The Dust particle idea is a not
a valid response.
edit on 25-8-2013 by frugal because: sp



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 

I think it's noise.
The level of noise varies and the rear hazcams are more subject than the front set.


noise is a possibility.. ufo-shaped noise that is..

but the rocket-like shot would have to be some kind of noise i do say.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Anyone saying it's dust or sand should stop posting on this site. The object is in focus and clear as day. Please refer to Phage's post in this thread as an example of how to properly be a skeptic.

Oh ATS how you have changed



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Jchristopher5
 


I haven't had a chance to go through the thread. Somebody may have pointed this out already. I believe this is noise. Look at the rover itself. It is covered in white noise and has a grouping of pixels that look like the same shape as the "object" in the sky. Please see the red circled pixels below

(original)

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...


(edited)





edit on 25-8-2013 by compressedFusion because: Attempt to fixe reference to edited image (uploaded to my ats images)
edit on 25-8-2013 by compressedFusion because: I can't seem to get this right so I just added a link.
edit on 25-8-2013 by compressedFusion because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-8-2013 by compressedFusion because: Ah you have to use pic instead of img
edit on 25-8-2013 by compressedFusion because: Added zoomed in pictures
edit on 25-8-2013 by compressedFusion because: Added rover noise pic



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 



I think it's noise.


Makes sense.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by spacedog1973
 


Very interesting May sand (A very small rock:lol
but I think you have something here and it is really a UFO or several, Lets see how long the rover works now and if it gets too close to something they do not want us to find.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Jchristopher5
 


Sometimes a potato really is a potato, My thought is, did NASA brush room really slip up and let this image out accidentally or was it intentional, a little teaser to keep us working on our theories and most of all to keep us busy while they flit about in the shadows without drawing our attention to something underhanded.....

so here we are with a new image of something no one can explain, and it was taken by a rc vehicle on a different planet, that doesn't appear to have swamp gas, flares, chinese lanterns or weather balloons... and still we can't be happy to say "this sure looks like the objects we see here on earth that we can't explain" nope now we are calling it dust particles. and if proven not to be dust particles someone will come up with some other theory, always the long way around. The real point I am making is "Do we really want to believe in UFO's or are we all very afraid that one day it will be confirmed" is that the day we are all actually dreading, if the truth were known...



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Great catch Op...



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Jchristopher5
 


It looks like Saturn. And if it is a craft, It looks to be from an early era. Like a picture from the 50's. Could be many things.

But to give to O.P. Credit, It does look like a U.F.O. But to much speculation to say what it is for sure.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by flipflop
 


You mean like this were someone accidentally on purpose forgot this was there while giving an interview (suggesting not all NASA employees like what is going on there),
www.ufosightingsdaily.com...



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 

I think it's noise.
The level of noise varies and the rear hazcams are more subject than the front set.


What exactly is noise when it comes to these cameras and this situation? Thanks.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 

I can only speculate based on the intermittent nature of it and because it is so pronounced (on occasion) on the rear hazcams that it may be hardware related.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Pictures of whatever up in the air are never going to lead to true Disclosure. It's too easy to fake or otherwise render useless as evidence, and the amount of information in a dot up in the sky is pretty limited.

There's a great line in one of the early Donald Keyhoe UFO books, a quote from a senior Air Force man, "Even if you prove it to me, I won't believe it."

Let's face it, until and unless the majority of us have seen all the redacted documents, met with the inhabitants personally and perhaps been given a tour of the starships, we won't believe it, nor will we have a slight clue about the entire reality and what it means to humans and Earth.

And meanwhile, there will still be a large contingency of humans clinging to their Bibles and Guns since faith and bullets gets you pretty far in life.

While the pictures from Mars are a novelty, they prove nothing and are merely meager entertainment. Kinda like Maury Povich without an audience.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Char-Lee
 

I can only speculate based on the intermittent nature of it and because it is so pronounced (on occasion) on the rear hazcams that it may be hardware related.


I get your point about the rear hazcams in particular, but could this not still be a manifestation of cosmic and solar radiation getting to the surface.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by LABTECH767
reply to post by flipflop
 


You mean like this were someone accidentally on purpose forgot this was there while giving an interview (suggesting not all NASA employees like what is going on there),
www.ufosightingsdaily.com...


Yes of course, I don't think all NASA workers are happy with some of the deceit they have to endure throughout their working carreer there. I understand NASA would want to keep their own developments securely locked up and zipped tight, to protect it from terrorist or enemy organizations, but the space exploration and some of the oddities seen and pictured, should be released and not hidden, and some explaination as to what they may or may not be, after all this planet belongs to all of us that are present at this current time on it..



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by smurfy

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Char-Lee
 

I can only speculate based on the intermittent nature of it and because it is so pronounced (on occasion) on the rear hazcams that it may be hardware related.


I get your point about the rear hazcams in particular, but could this not still be a manifestation of cosmic and solar radiation getting to the surface.


I would assume that would effect all cameras equally and some are more effected it seems then others they are saying.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by Phage
 


I think it's noise.

Makes sense.


I have a $79 Kodak digital camera which never produces noise like this. And the data, transmits via an ANSI protocol that makes sure all the pixels transmit to the PC correctly.

I will send both my camera and its pic manager download software to NASA for the next rover mission.

Good catch.





new topics

top topics



 
64
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join