CURIOSITY mars rover and you

ever wonder why it is taking so long for NASA to release the ground photos. You would expect that the cameras would be the very first instrument to be online. Nothing so far. What they are doing is something called sanitization. they are Photoshopping all of the cute little alien bugs and houses out of the picture. They did it in the Apollo missions nothing different today. At least that's the rumor going on at JPL. I heard that the actual data transfer goes through military encrypted channels and gets decrypted in a small room with only only three people who are cleared to interface with this data. That data is then passed to mission control.

Would be nice to actually recieve real colour photos this time.

My bet is this whole missions purpose it to reveal the fact that microbes do live on Mars, and life was once on Mars.

The Medias poor attempt at reverse phsycology dont work on me

Or the Media puppet masters, I should say...

reply to post by pellian




What they are doing is making sure 2.5b doesn't break as soon as it hits the ground - and you're saying they're sanitising it? !!!

Imagine you just woke up with someone screaming at you "WHERES MY COPY NOW? YOU IDIOT, GET MY COPY!!!" -- You're not going to be worth the $450 a fortnight your paid.

Sanitising..

It's not there for your pleasure.

I love this photo:


You get what you get for free here.. and you want it now!! it's FREE.. Or should we all obey the rule and stop space exploration, unless instantly you get to see a space man???

Rofl

Where are all the unbelievers in "It was filmed on a movie set! We never sent Curiosity to Mars. Impossible! We couldnt go to the Moon so of course we didnt get to Mars"?.

Pretty stupid statement right? Im waiting for the naysayers to pop-up and (of course we got to Mars)

reply to post by Sinny


I rekon life has been there numerous times! The poles are ice. They posit that every 5 million years or so, the axis tilts so that the poles face the sun. Which means they can melt, and if this is the case, every 5 million years or so, Mars is capable of sustaining life - at least vegetative. Perhaps not even that, but 5 million years is enough to have life.

And then it slowly retreats back to it's frozen tilt. For all we know life has come and gone from mars thousands of times.

And even this is still something to explore, if you ask me. And we won't find doodads left over from the last time martians tried to send a craft to earth..

Unless they made it.. saying "Cooor, it's bloody cold here, lets go to earth, looks warm there.. Mind you, they've got those bloody big lizards on that thing.. We'll have to sort those things out first. Whose got the meteor device?!"

oO

reply to post by mainidh

You get what you get for free here.. and you want it now!! it's FREE..

Raises hand...
Actually sir I live in the US, not only do I pay to murder brown children but I also paid for this rover.
I may have not picked up the full bill but given the chance to opt out of their tax system, there would be companies doing this decades ago, and I would have more fiats for my own.
Then I would gladly pay per view at someone elses work.

The only way we get to see actual unaltered pictures(aliens, build or not) is by either China or India. Well hoping they will not hide as well.

I guess we can't help because of too many loose heads running around causing havoc and destruction because they found aliens.

Is the mars landing a hoax or not?
Some say the moon landing was.
HOWEVER, and note the date of the story...just in time to reinforce their story, July 29 2012
The media gives us "proof" that we indeed land on the moon.
Man how weird, we can see a dime on the streets of new york in 1970, yet we cannot get a clear pic of the flags on an environment free rock from one of our modern sattelites.
But like I said, notice the story came out just in time to remove doubts of the mars mission.
I am not saying it happened or not, I'm just asking you to think about the angles.

reply to post by g146541


Not that I don't believe you (I gave you a star) but do you have a link about the dime being spotted in 1970? I had a look around google but couldn't find anything about it.
Thanks =)

Originally posted by Deedsy1
reply to post by g146541

 

Not that I don't believe you (I gave you a star) but do you have a link about the dime being spotted in 1970? I had a look around google but couldn't find anything about it.
Thanks =)

edit on 7-8-2012 by Deedsy1 because: ?

Oddly enough I too could find NOTHING on this dime that I recall seeing in my youth.
I will retract that part of my story and just use a common for instance.
Google world maps, the free version gives you a pretty detailed look, the paid version is clearer, do you think that is the best out there?
I think it would be safe to assume a good telescope/satellite could get a pretty good pic.

About that coin pic taken on a city street, does anyone remember that pic?

reply to post by g146541

About that coin pic taken on a city street, does anyone remember that pic?

Yes I do. I once asked someone who should have known, why pictures from the moon were crappy, but pictures of a dime from a satellite were possible. I was met with darting eyes, and silence. That answered my question.

And also, I'm no physicist or anything but I fail to imagine how a parachute can slow an object from 2000km/h that weighs 1 ton (at least) on a planet were the atmosphere is extremely thin. Can someone debunk this for me?

reply to post by mainidh


yaya.

For some reason its not common knowledge that there are actually HUGE aqufiers starting at 1km below.

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by g146541

 

About that coin pic taken on a city street, does anyone remember that pic?

Yes I do. I once asked someone who should have known, why pictures from the moon were crappy, but pictures of a dime from a satellite were possible. I was met with darting eyes, and silence. That answered my question.

You Sir or Ma'am ROCK!!
I was hoping that it was not one of those things that was just implanted in my head!
Good someone else remembers, thank you.

Originally posted by Deedsy1
And also, I'm no physicist or anything but I fail to imagine how a parachute can slow an object from 2000km/h that weighs 1 ton (at least) on a planet were the atmosphere is extremely thin. Can someone debunk this for me?

They thought about this one, apparently they had a tether and retro rockets to slow the descent.
Pretty tricky stuff I guess, I'm still not buying it.

reply to post by g146541


That is true, but surely the rockets would render a parachute completely obsolete?

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by g146541

 

About that coin pic taken on a city street, does anyone remember that pic?

Yes I do. I once asked someone who should have known, why pictures from the moon were crappy, but pictures of a dime from a satellite were possible. I was met with darting eyes, and silence. That answered my question.

You'd have got a similar reaction from me, but not because of the reason you hope for or think. Because I get increasingly frustrated by stupid questions from people I can't be bothered to waste my time with, especially when they've already made their minds up and think their simplistic reasoning has all the answers.
For instance if I started trying to explain link budget limitations and mission priorities to you I expect I'd be wasting my time? Such a shame some people would rather listen to the views of a moron than to people who actually have experience, knowledge of the subject and ironically the true answers to their questions....

Originally posted by AgentSmith

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by g146541

 

About that coin pic taken on a city street, does anyone remember that pic?

Yes I do. I once asked someone who should have known, why pictures from the moon were crappy, but pictures of a dime from a satellite were possible. I was met with darting eyes, and silence. That answered my question.

You'd have got a similar reaction from me, but not because of the reason you hope for or think. Because I get increasingly frustrated by stupid questions from people I can't be bothered to waste my time with, especially when they've already made their minds up and think their simplistic reasoning has all the answers.
For instance if I started trying to explain link budget limitations and mission priorities to you I expect I'd be wasting my time? Such a shame some people would rather listen to the views of a moron than to people who actually have experience, knowledge of the subject and ironically the true answers to their questions....

No such animal as a stupid question.
Every question is there as a mental logical check and balance.
So, mr scientist, why can we take a hi res pic on earth and not on the environment free moon?

reply to post by AgentSmith

You are quite presumptuous and insolent, aren't you? You haven't the slightest idea what I was thinking. If you did, you wouldn't have made an ass of yourself in this thread.

reply to post by pellian



Have you ever written software, or designed, or built something yourself???? Then you will know that things takes time, you need to test, test, test and more testing, before you can be sure everything works as you planned. If you don't test enough, you might end up with egg on your face, or much worse, you might just destroy all the things you worked on so hard. So, you do things one step at a time. First you make sure, for example, that all the power supplies are on line, that nothing draws too much current, etc, etc, etc.... Only when you, the designer are satisfied that everything is within the established parameters, do you progress. In 90% of the time, things are not within parameters, and then you have to recalibrate, or rethink methodologies.

The high-gain antenna has been deployed today, successfully.

The next instrument to be employed was the REMS (Rover Environmental Monitoring Subsystem), but guess what, not a total success...

Another Instrument that was checked as part of Sol 1 operations was REMS - Rover Environmental Monitoring Station. It was activated and took several minutes of data. A second start-up was intended to occur, but was not successful. Teams are assessing the situation and are confident that it is not a hardware issue. Currently, teams are looking at the parameters of the software to find any problems related to instrument commands to make sure the next instrument start is successful. REMS is a meteorological instrument suite that will record six atmospheric properties: wind (speed and direction), pressure, relative humidity, air temperature, ground temperature and ultraviolet radiation. The instruments are located at three locations on the rover, two booms that are attached to the Remote Sensing Mast, the Ultraviolet Sensor (UVS) assembly on the rover deck and the Instrument Control Unit (ICU) inside the rover body.

Now the designers and software writers have to go back and see what they left out of their equations...

Only when everybody is sure that their subsystems are working successfully (or as close as they can get to that), will real science begin.

www.spaceflight101.com...