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.
In this photo released by NASA/JPL-Caltech/Univ. of Arizona, NASA's Curiosity rover and its parachute, left, descend to the Martian surface on Sunday, Aug. 5, 2012. The high-resolution Imaging Science Experiment (HiRISE) camera captured this image of Curiosity while the orbiter was listening to transmissions from the rover. (AP Photo/NASA/JPL-Caltech/Univ. of Arizona)
Originally posted by LiberalSceptic
I have been trying to find proper specifications for the cameras onboard Curiosity, but I am not sure I have been that successful so far.
Anyone knows more about it?
Pixels, optics, sensors?
The info I have seen so far seems to be somewhat "bad", compared to cameras that can easily be bought in any store. But something is telling me that I am missing details. Surely NASA/JPL would have crammed in the top of the line products?edit on 7-8-2012 by LiberalSceptic because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by LiberalSceptic
I have been trying to find proper specifications for the cameras onboard Curiosity, but I am not sure I have been that successful so far.
Anyone knows more about it?
Pixels, optics, sensors?
The info I have seen so far seems to be somewhat "bad", compared to cameras that can easily be bought in any store. But something is telling me that I am missing details. Surely NASA/JPL would have crammed in the top of the line products?
For example, the Mastcam / 2-megapixel.
I am aware that the optics make a hugh difference, but still, the pixels are important to.
To me, a 2-megapixel camera sounds insane when you can go out and buy a mobile-phone which has 41MP.
edit on 7-8-2012 by LiberalSceptic because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Hawkmoon1972
By your incredibly weak logic anything you did not witness or experience yourself could be false or a lie.
Why do you think NASA would lie to you over this. Do they have something to gain?
How easy do you think a secret would be to keep if thousands of people were in on it?
You aren't being asked to buy anything.
You aren't actually doing anything except sitting in front of your computer pontificating on things you know nothing about.
So why would they lie. For funding? That doesn't make sense. The people who give them funding would know they were lying. For prestige? Doubtful. None of the scientists on this project are rich or famous. So why? Why would they lie?
I'm all for a good conspiracy but it has to have a least a kernel of believability. NASA hoaxing a Mars landing just doesn't. Sorry.
Originally posted by mainidh
OP DID NOT POST ON ATS.
What verifiable evidence is there.. And don't go an show me thread links and screenshots. I know you can fake them.
OP is a cia front.
And if you disagree, then you are a co-op shill. Rite?
edit on 7-8-2012 by mainidh because: (no reason given)