591 replies to this topic

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

booNyzarC, on 11 June 2011 - 03:11 AM, said:

Welcome indeed!

Very pleased to make your acquaintance sum_ergo_cogito.  I sense a kindred spirit.  Tell me if you can see the correlation.

I am therefore,
I think.

[moscow]

Hi, ! )

What can be this?

83°52'18.65"N 147°19'23.87"E
84°54'59.59"N 137°26'20.19"E
83°34'57.88"N 149°17'23.22"E
84°31'8.96"N 162°59'15.44"E

Attached Files

•  stairs_one.jpg   99.44K   30 downloads
•  stairs_all.jpg   124.58K   31 downloads

Edited by moscow, 11 June 2011 - 09:57 AM.

[bee]

moscow, on 11 June 2011 - 09:54 AM, said:

Hi, ! )

What can be this?

83°52'18.65"N 147°19'23.87"E
84°54'59.59"N 137°26'20.19"E
83°34'57.88"N 149°17'23.22"E
84°31'8.96"N 162°59'15.44"E

don't know.....but THANKS for sharing


and welcome to the forum....

[bee]

bee, on 02 June 2011 - 07:44 PM, said:

I put it on Photobucket......and applied the 'auto fix'

it's best if you look at it 3 feet ish from computer screen..






edit to say...make that 5 ish feet...lol



.

ThePitOfReason, on 10 June 2011 - 12:05 AM, said:

Good job! It looks like a giant machine as if it turns like a crank does in a engine. It looks like it rotates just saying!

Cheers....I just applied 'auto fix' and photobucket did the rest...

I looked at it long and hard with a 'drilling machine' in mind.....

but at the moment I'm still pulled towards 'nuclear rocket'.....

( errant-pixel-supporters don't panic...just specualtion)

ThePitOfReason, on 10 June 2011 - 12:23 AM, said:

I been wondering where I parked that damn thing thanks for finding it for me sorry it started such a big fight.

LOL

[Marcin]

That guy again... meh.

Want to have some more interesting stuff to talk about?

Take a look at some of these and flame away

giant mars anchor?:
http://worldufophoto...nasa-copyright/

weird geological formation "slash" ruins?:
http://worldufophoto...nasa-copyright/

parallel tracks on mars surface decades before 1st rover landing?:
http://worldufophoto...nasa-copyright/

???:
http://worldufophoto...nasa-copyright/

or maybe you'd rather take a stab at egyptians on mars ?:
http://worldufophoto...-mars-egyptian/


Heh, and that's just one website with images available to public, think about what NASA has stashed away in it's "special occassions" folder

Edited by Marcin, 11 June 2011 - 10:20 AM.

[moscow]

bee, on 11 June 2011 - 10:07 AM, said:

and welcome to the forum....

Thanx, i`m glad  

[curiouse]

"WTF"?. Isn't it amazing,Lets hope we get a better image and soon, so we can really see what it is.

[Pax Unum]

curiouse, on 11 June 2011 - 12:26 PM, said:

"WTF"?. Isn't it amazing,Lets hope we get a better image and soon, so we can really see what it is.

[bmk1245]

moscow, on 11 June 2011 - 09:54 AM, said:

Hi, ! )

What can be this?

83°52'18.65"N 147°19'23.87"E
84°54'59.59"N 137°26'20.19"E
83°34'57.88"N 149°17'23.22"E
84°31'8.96"N 162°59'15.44"E

Thats just because of connecting different images into "one" on the spherical body.
Another example of this sort of google artifact - 77°39'21.64"N 24°58'29.70"E (note distinctive edges of separate images, just zoom in/out few times... on google Earth, of course):

[bmk1245]

double post, sorry

Edited by bmk1245, 11 June 2011 - 02:45 PM.

[Archimedes]

Despite the fact that it's been very well explained by others why this is a glitch, I thought I'd come at this from another direction.

I came across this topic on another forum and while googling the subject, found this thread.

Anyway, the problem is that people don't understand the resolution of the photo they're looking at.  If you zoom in on Google Mars so that "Bio Station Alpha" is nice and big, you can see that the terrain surrounding it is very blurry and blocky.  There's no detail whatsoever - no rocks or ground detail is visible - just a blurry mess of a background.  If you examine it you can actually see the vertical and horizontal color banding that represents the actual pixels of the original image.  You can see that the original pixels are actually about the same size as the north-south diameter of "Bio Station Alpha".  What's happening here is that Google Earth is doing something similar to the anti-aliasing that games and graphics software does to smooth out low resolution textures - a blurry texture looks better than a blocky texture.

If you look at the Mars desert background surrounding "Bio Station Alpha". you can see the same vertical fading amongst the blocks that represent the pixels of the original digital image.  It's just more subtle because there's no much difference in color amongst the dull browns of the Martian desert.  However, if there's a high contrast between a feature and the surrounding terrain, that vertical color fading is more obvious.

It's trivially easy to demonstrate this.  To the east of "Bio Station Alpha" there's some sort of geographical feature that has lots of objects randomly scattered in the desert.  The objects are brighter than the background so stand out easily.  At a distance you can see that they are irregularly shaped and randomly distributed. I suspect that the color contrast is an artefact of either how the image was processed or the time of day the picture was taken.  You can see that east of "Bio Station Alpha" there is an obvious vertical discontinuity where 2 images were stitched together in Google Earth and to the west of the discontinuity, the white objects don't appear.  Here's a screen grab of the area in question.



If you zoom in closer, you'll see something like the following: (note the low resolution of the pics - you can see the blockiness of the pixels even though Google is trying to blur it out)



Zoom in, take a screenshot, and load it into Photoshop or a similar graphics package.  Rotate it to a jaunty angle, apply some brightness and contrast to artificially make it look better, like the image of "Bio Station Alpha" that was already post several times, and hey presto! you've got yourself a little cluster of "Mini Bio Stations"!



The problem is clearly that lots of people don't realise they are looking at an extremely low resolution image blown up.  They think those color gradients of the "cylinders" is photographic detail when it's just Google's automatic image processing blurring out the pixels.  Like I said, you can even see the same effect in the brown background, it's just subtler because of the more subtle range of colours.

Yes, it's not as interesting or artificial looking as "Bio Station Alpha", but that's because the same post-processing on an image that had a neat row of white pixels because some sort of data glitch (as was very well explained by someone else, using 3 images from a series to show that there was only one with that row of white pixels in this location), produce a more striking effect.  What I did wasn't as effect as it was with oddly shaped natural formations with less dramatic color drop off than nice square white pixels on a brown terrain.

Edited by Archimedes, 11 June 2011 - 03:10 PM.

[booNyzarC]

Welcome Archimedes.  All relevant points indeed.

[farandaway]

LOOK---Tents----Archimedes has just proved there is life on Mars!  I knew it!
Just kidding......

[Archimedes]

farandaway, on 11 June 2011 - 05:02 PM, said:

LOOK---Tents----Archimedes has just proved there is life on Mars!  I knew it!
Just kidding......

I've clearly found a massive encampment of a Martian army on the warpath!

[farandaway]

Archimedes, on 11 June 2011 - 05:20 PM, said:

I've clearly found a massive encampment of a Martian army on the warpath!

LOL   The 'Face' better look out, he's in trouble!

Sorry, I need more coffee...