Why did NASA blot out this anomaly?

reply to post by ArMaP


ArMaP, dont worry about it mate. It seems like you are being ignored most of the time because you proved some valid points that contradicted the ops thread. Keep up the good work

Deny ignorance indeed

Originally posted by TheDucksterWhat still has me concerned, is the fact that these photos were 'doctored' as well.

You still aren't getting it.

The picture this doofus in the video is "examining" is NOT NOT NOT an image of Mars. It is a computer-generated landscape. The image used to skin the landscape is NOT NOT NOT the original Mars Express image of the area. This image is USELESS for finding "anomalies".

The greyscale image in Internos' first post is a portion of the actual image taken of the area. ArMaP also, kindly, gave the links to the original images. If you take the time to look at them you will see.... nothing special. Just miles and miles of dunes.

The only 'doctoring' happening is happening on this video.

Originally posted by TheDuckster
reply to post by internos

 

Internos...I'm truely sorry for the lateness of my reply.

You are correct in saying that this is not a Nasa photo, but rather from the 'European ones'. Apologies all around. I am sorry that I didn't acknowledge you post.

What still has me concerned, is the fact that these photos were 'doctored' as well.

The video that I have provided clearly shows evidence of this. The fact that an individual (online) has come forward, to unveil the 'phoney photoshopping doctoring speaks volumns.

~Ducky~

The video that you provided clearly shows an image from ESA, but the problem here is that the image in question is NOT a photo but a CGI made by ESA/DLR/FU Berlin (G. Neukum).
Basically, it's like to analyze a drawing, perhaps something less.

The image in question has been discussed before: it has been pointed out several times, but i'll try again:

Alien City On Mars? Check This Out!
it's like to post Ufo haiti from disclose.tv instead of from YouTube.

Since the relevant thread covers ALL the facets of this image, i don't see why i have to sing again the the same song.
That's the thread: check it out.

Originally posted by internos

The video that you provided clearly shows an image from ESA, but the problem here is that the image in question is NOT a photo but a CGI made by ESA/DLR/FU Berlin (G. Neukum).
Basically, it's like to analyze a drawing, perhaps something less.

Do you think this point is sinking in yet?


Mod Note: One Line or Short Post – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 14-3-2008 by DontTreadOnMe]

reply to post by internos


Ok...I'm getting your drift. That last thing I wanted to do was pull the wool over anyone's eyes. That was never EVER my intention.

I've seen MikeSingh's thread and he's posted the same pics. I tried to do a 'search' on this and didn't come up with anything that would construe relevence to what had 'been already discussed'?

I can't hold a candle to Mike.

Thankyou for the links everyone, and thankyou for your patience, in helping me to see the pic differeences.

Don't be too harsh with me please.

I was more than happy to share this with you, albeit it was discussed before.

I will continue to research more carefully, and promise to try to provide you with other pics and sources, that we can all scrutinize over, later.

Thankyou kindly,

~Ducky~

Originally posted by TheDuckster
reply to post by internos

 

Ok...I'm getting your drift. That last thing I wanted to do was pull the wool over anyone's eyes. That was never EVER my intention.

I've seen MikeSingh's thread and he's posted the same pics. I tried to do a 'search' on this and didn't come up with anything that would construe relevence to what had 'been already discussed'?

I can't hold a candle to Mike.

Thankyou for the links everyone, and thankyou for your patience, in helping me to see the pic differeences.

Don't be too harsh with me please.

I was more than happy to share this with you, albeit it was discussed before.

I will continue to research more carefully, and promise to try to provide you with other pics and sources, that we can all scrutinize over, later.

Thankyou kindly,

~Ducky~

~Ducky~, just take a look at my first post, and you'll read:

TheDuckster, thanks for sharing this one.

Please, keep in mind that my purpose is NEVER to be rude, and i encourage you to share with us all that you find, no matter if it turns out to be already duscussed here, or a natural formation on Mars: we're here just in order to share opinions, experiences and findings: here there are no Gods: i make mistakes every single day MANY ones, because i'm human: so, once again, thank you for sharing this one: looking forward to another thread from you.

reply to post by internos


I thankyou ever so much for your kind words Internos, I really do!

~Ducky~

Originally posted by ArMaP
That is the result of not adjusting your subtlety level to the comprehension level of the target audience.

If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, understanding is on the brain of the (in this case) reader.

Cut it out you two. Keep acting like this and I'll have to click an ALERT button.

A sarcastic comment is obvious enough to most of us. There's no reason to poke eachother in the ribs and make offtopic snickers... and to speak as if you are above the heads of the rest of us is just plain arrogant and rude....

[edit on 14-3-2008 by NewWorldOver]

I'm glad this photo already "re-proves" to those believers that"something" is on mars.

Personally, what a waste of my precious bandwidth and time.

I've seen similar artifacts from my own photography when I zoom in close enough.

But hey, if it gets your rocks off--cheers! I'll just keep shaking my head and at least know that I'm objective enough not to believe what I want to believe (that there actually is something on mars.)

I want to believe, but this...this almost makes me feel sad for the UFO/conspiracy community. It's videos and pictures like this that make any logic-deducing individual see no separation between the UFO people and the bible-thumpers.

But hey, if faith is what you thrive on and not logic...and if pixelated JPG 3-D "representations" further your own belief....who am I to pee on your parade?

I'll just continue to do my own seemingly pointless studies of topics and subjects no one else finds value in...cause I certainly see no value in perusing this.

Originally posted by IAttackPeople
The picture this doofus in the video is "examining" is NOT NOT NOT an image of Mars. It is a computer-generated landscape. The image used to skin the landscape is NOT NOT NOT the original Mars Express image of the area. This image is USELESS for finding "anomalies".

Chill out. This is NOT NOT NOT the end of the world.

I wasn't impressed by the youtube video either, but you people are behaving like this is some sort of elitist gathering. We are discussing the conjecture of OTHER people... such as the original youtube video. You should direct your hysterics at those people, not the OP or anyone else.

I did every thing the guy asked me to do and whatever there is in that photo is not on the surface of Mars.

I see artifacts like this all the time in photographs that haven't even been beamed from Mars.



[edit on 2008/3/14 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
but you people are behaving like this is some sort of elitist gathering.

It's late and I'd like to refer to this post;

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
Sheesh. We are not here to cater to you pseudo-skeptics. In fact, we could care less what proof you demand. We aren't here to dig up research material for you Linky

Can't have it both ways man.....pick a stance and stick with it. And who is this "we" you mention? Got a mouse in your pocket?

Thank you and have a lovely weekend.

[edit on 14-3-2008 by MrPenny]

Originally posted by TheDuckster
reply to post by Shere Khaan

 

Your 'inserting an earthly' pic was non-productive. It wasn't conducive to the previously pic's explanation, and you didn't lend ANY credence or supplied info to prop your stance NOR backup your claims in a grammatical sense.

Providing 'earth-bound' pics doesn't lead credence.

Providing thoughts regarding and pertaining to the OP et al, I'll acknowledge.

Thankyou kindly.

~Ducky~

Wow charming post. Not sure how backing up my claims in a grammatical sense would help things as my grammar seems all right.

There's not much I can post on the house other than it's a rocky slope. It is consistant with shadows on the rest of the terrain, and quite simply doesn't look like a house to me. Strangely enough this is opinion, and without going down there and taking a photo from ground level I am not going to please you in any grammatical sense.

The reason I posted the earth pick was as a comparison to the famous picture of the hole in Mars that you can see here. I didn't post it as I thought anyone reading this topic has seen it a thousand times.




So was it relevant posting an earthly picture of a hole? I think so as the similarity seems eerie in the shape and even the rough side to the both holes. This pointless earthly hole, which I consider to look quite similar, was created by an underground river; it needed a medium in which to transport the ground away. Even if this hole is not artificial, the prospect of some medium to transport the ground away is almost as exciting (even if it is just lava).

Thankyou kindly.

[edit on 14-3-2008 by Shere Khaan]

[edit on 14-3-2008 by Shere Khaan]

Here's a though, what if what we see on Mars is only runes of a civilization that destroyed itself through nuclear wars and all thats left is remains of foundations of huge cities destroyed.

Maybe that we are those that came and forgotten the traumatic events on Mars, the survivors.

Now we are coming to the end of the Earth level, who will survive to enter the next level?

It's like we are being refined over and over. Each time removing the impurities to become highly refined JD

[edit on 14-3-2008 by ANTHONY33]

I'm really really really sorry to say this to you all, those are indeed jpeg video compression artifacts. I will state my training at DINFOS on it.

Look closely at the WHOLE image and you will see these patterns on everything, over the hills and into other valley's and craters.

next.....

The only thing really peculiar with the vid is that the man is using Kubuntu(yay more linux users!!!).

He speaks of NASA using software. I wonder if it is just photoshop or some commercial software, or if it is something NASA developed on their own.

reply to post by chromatico

A lot of it wasn't "blocked out" it was rather glitched out by poor data transmissions.

I think this is more likely.

I must have Alzheimer's, because every time I see a thread in the UFO forum that claims some fantastic photo or video, I bite. And every time I end up think, "Whaaaaaaaaaaa?" I do not know what the standard of of quality for great evidence is in the UFO world, but I'm consistently disappointed.

reply to post by TheDuckster


Lol, this guy is looking at JPEG artifacts and calls them buildings and signs of advanced civilization, how stupid do we allow ourself to be?

[edit on 2008/3/15 by TrappedSoul]

reply to post by TheDuckster


I am glad that you understood what Internos was saying.

One of the reasons I never give up in cases like this is because I don't like to see someone wasting time and resources looking in the wrong direction.

I may have been a bit harsh in my posts, and for that I am sorry.

Also, if you read some of the last posts from Mikesingh's thread you will notice that I have not been able (yet ) to prove my point about those artifacts being the result of stretching an image with too few colours over the 3D model.

But I will keep on looking.

reply to post by NewWorldOver


I am sorry for the off-topic post, apparently I was in a not so nice a mood yesterday night. I will blame it on a hard working week.

But I will stand for what I said (and it was not meant to be rude or arrogant), if we want to be understood we must "adjust" the way we say/write to the target audience.

That is why I sometimes have problems understanding some posts, they are probably written by people and for people that use English as their main or only language, while I only write in English here on ATS.

It was also because of this (probably) that I got I little upset with the way the thread was going; Internos had posted just before me (our posts even have the same time stamp) a clearly written explanation and I had also posted more or less the same explanation and both looked like they were ignored.

But apparently everything is fine now.

Edited for spelling, as usual.

[edit on 15/3/2008 by ArMaP]