Hoagland pic...Mars Curiosity "Pump" Anomaly???? Not a Rock...

Iscool
reply to post by Iscool

 

More examples:

www.ebay.com...

www.ebay.com...

www.alibaba.com...

It looks very much like that first link. If someone took that picture on Earth and told me that's what it was, I wouldn't question it for a second.

The only bad news about Art Bell being back on the air is that it means more Hoagland nonsense hitting the airwaves.

Problem here is that we have ONE photo from FAR away. If we had more pictures with different light angles or from different points of view it would help. What appears to be cylindrical, my just be an optical illusion. What appears to me to be a pipe sticking out pointing towards the camera, may just be coloring and/or shadows. If you explore optical illusions and how our brains work you may see more what I mean. There is a show series call "You're Bleeped up Brain". I watched it on Hulu+. They explore this subject. The truth is, we see what we know. All that being said, it could be space craft debris from Earth; even from the stage that landed the rover, which flow off and crashed. But, if I were putting money on the table, I would put it on "Rock". I have no proof, just my judgment.

Anyone saying it 100% is definitely a rock is wrong.

Anyone saying it 100% is defiintely not a rock is wrong.

The evidence we have is inconclusive. It could be a rock, it could be a part of a rover or something else. Either way it points to human life, not martian life. There is really no point in arguing over it.

reply to post by duke396

It looks very much like that first link. If someone took that picture on Earth and told me that's what it was, I wouldn't question it for a second.

I agree that context matters.
But why assume the other side of the "rock" resembles the side we can see?

Phage
reply to post by duke396

 

It looks very much like that first link. If someone took that picture on Earth and told me that's what it was, I wouldn't question it for a second.

I agree that context matters.
But why assume the other side of the "rock" resembles the side we can see?

edit on 9/30/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

That's a fair question, I guess I can't say for sure. Even if it doesn't look the same though what kind of deformation could have been caused by impacting the ground if it's a part from something we sent? In any case this would be a great time for pics from different angles to show up so we could get a better idea. There have been plenty of rocks up there that looked like "something" from one angle and were laughably obvious from other angles. The part that gets me on this is the "tube" coming out of it along with the top, bottom, and middle sections that appear from this angle to be pretty uniform.

reply to post by duke396

I really don't think it's a piece of a spacecraft.

"Appear from this angle." That's a reasonable outlook.

Putting "tube" in quotes is also appropriate since all we really can see is a roughly circular shape that appears to be concave. No way to tell if it actually is tubular.

New picture from Art Bells `Dark Matter` site.

artbell.com...
(there is a much higher rez version of this in the link)

reply to post by bluemooone2


Aha, at last we have the raw images:
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Here is the pointing data for those images, so that the approximate location of the object can be found:
curiosityrover.com...
curiosityrover.com...
curiosityrover.com...

The object is located quite far from the rover, and is therefore fairly large.

If it weren't for the round hole, I'd give no second thought to it being just a peculiar rock. The hole makes it interesting, and was probably made by a bubble of gas. Some moon rocks have round holes in them from gas bubbles too. Or it could be a little impact crater in the sediment rock (judging by the layers), and the rock itself has been battered and rounded by wind erosion.



The object has the same colour and appearance as the surrounding rocks, and has some very pitted and rugged surface. I wouldn't think a metal object would look like that. It would be smoother, more regular, and perhaps more shiny.

I really wish there was a MAHLI shot of this object (or more MAHLI panorama shots in general). MAHLI camera provides better, more natural-looking colours, that allow for subtle variations:




Mastcam images are often practically monochromatic.

From the more recent images (Sol 412, Oct 3rd), here's another rock with what seems like a perfectly round hole in it: mars.jpl.nasa.gov...


A very interesting rock in the foreground as well, looks like some sort of primitive shoe.