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.
originally posted by: wildespace
originally posted by: LookingAtMars
a reply to: wildespace
Doesn't look like ice to me at all, these are just lighter-coloured rocks and sediments.
Glad to see you are so informed and because it doesn't look like ice to you it must not be. Mars has dust that covers almost everything. Glad you know for a fact it is "just lighter-coloured rocks and sediments". It seems you don't even know what NASA says it is.
It's a case of pot calling kettle black here, since all you're saying is "it looks like ice to me, because that area looks brighter than the rest."
Mars has plenty of frozen CO2 in the polar regions, and it's not covered in dust. Why would the Gale crater "glacier" be? With CO2 ice, there are seasonal changes and sublimation events that produce dark spikes and other features. We don't see anything like that on Mt Sharp.
Mars has plenty of frozen CO2 in the polar regions, and it's not covered in dust. Why would the Gale crater "glacier" be? With CO2 ice, there are seasonal changes and sublimation events that produce dark spikes and other features. We don't see anything like that on Mt Sharp.
originally posted by: LookingAtMars
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo
The point is that is not impossible for people to do it - the data are there and people can access them. The tools to process the data are freely available. Difficult is not impossible.
I didn't say it was impossible! I said they make it HARD!
originally posted by: LookingAtMars
Have you ever tried to download a MEX (for example) EDR and open it? I have, and can. First you have to download ISIS and set it up (used to be had to use LINUX). The ISIS download with data is like 100 gigs. Believe me the average person can not open an EDR.
originally posted by: LookingAtMars
Why is that image so much brighter than the rest of the image. I am putting forth that is because it is ice. Not saying without a doubt, just it could be. Why do you think it is so much brighter?
I have been working with Mars images before the turn of the century. I know for a fact NASA holds back info.
originally posted by: wylekat
There's genuine, red, dusty images of Mars, and then, there's the for some obscure reason, the faked, red images of Mars. I can figure out which is which by pulling on 2 sliders in temperature and tint- then watching what besides the sky turns weird colors- like the dirt or various rocks. I start getting greenish Martian fields, it's naturally reddish skies. I get the slightly off red, more dirt colors, and some multicolored rocks in the mix, it's been tinted. Plus- just by looking at it, and the whole thing is this uniform *red* color is a strong indicator...
originally posted by: LookingAtMars
ESA, LOL, NASA is much more open with their data than ESA. ESA can take years before they release their raw data.
originally posted by: wylekat
What I'm barking about is when the sky is clear, about as blue as you can end up with, everything looks *great*- and the thing's been color corrected into the reds so far, it looks like it's been filmed thru a red filter!
Edited to add that IMG files are also opened by NASAview, much easier to use
originally posted by: wylekat
a reply to: ArMaP
Exactly what I'm saying. A *naturally* occurring reddish image is going to look funky when color corrected.
What I'm barking about is when the sky is clear, about as blue as you can end up with, everything looks *great*- and the thing's been color corrected into the reds so far, it looks like it's been filmed thru a red filter!
Exactly, but that was not what we were talking about, was it?
originally posted by: LookingAtMars
a reply to: wildespace
This is the last question I answer because no one has answered my question and you are not looking for answers.
recent direct observations made by the SHARAD radar instrument on the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter satellite have confirmed that at least some features are relatively pure ice, and thus, true glaciers.
ESA published information about the existence of water ice deposits and water vapour clouds on Mars years ago, so it's no secret.
Seems like your argument has fallen into dust.
originally posted by: LookingAtMars
a reply to: ArMaP
And what the brighter different looking material in this image is. Since we know Mars has ice, I said it could be a glacier. What do you think it is? Why does it look different, brighter and somewhat out of place?
originally posted by: LookingAtMars
a reply to: wildespace
Seems like your argument has fallen into dust.
It was not an argument. I think I covered the point I was trying to make above.
You're presenting two arguments in this thread: #1 that there is a glacier on Mt Sharp, and #2 that NASA are trying to hide that information from the public. I refuted both of those arguments, with links and images. I'd like to see some research from you now: why do hold to those two arguments? Saying "that area looks out of place or too bright" or "NASA is afraid other countries will claim those resources" doesn't quite cut it, sorry.
Looking at images of Mount Sharp on Mars, I get the impression it has remains of a Glacier and maybe is covered with ice.
The US does not want to let others know an easy source of clean water is available. NASA spent a lot of time and money to gain it's info and will not just give it away, so that China, Russia, India and others can start making plans to set up a base on Mars. If the fact that Mars is more Earth like than we are told got out, a lot of countries would make plans to go there.