Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 2 votes

interesting object found on Google Mars


  • Please log in to reply
323 replies to this topic

#196    Otto von Pickelhaube

Otto von Pickelhaube

    A complete moral vacuum

  • Member
  • 30,107 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Garmisch-Partenkirchen

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 02 September 2013 - 06:52 AM

they do seem to have rather a fixed plan of what they decide they'll look at, and they seem to pretty well know already what those things they've decided they'll look at in advance, i must say.

If, as it seems, we are in the process of becoming a totalitarian society in which the state apparatus is all-powerful, the ethics most important for the survival of the true, free, human individual would be: cheat, lie, evade, fake it, be elsewhere, forge documents, build improved electronic gadgets in your garage that’ll outwit the gadgets used by the authorities.

- Philip K. Dick.


#197    S2F

S2F

    Bloodstained Hurricane

  • Member
  • 7,321 posts
  • Joined:22 May 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Right behind you!

  • I know someday
    you'll have a beautiful life
    I know you'll be a sun
    In somebody else's sky
    But why can't it be mine? -Pearl Jam

Posted 02 September 2013 - 10:01 AM

View PostColonel Rhuairidh, on 02 September 2013 - 06:52 AM, said:

they do seem to have rather a fixed plan of what they decide they'll look at, and they seem to pretty well know already what those things they've decided they'll look at in advance, i must say.

Well they are funded and as such are expected to offer new discoveries that are at least of some significance. They may have come to a decision that this particular anomaly isn't significant enough to warrant an explanation as to why funds are being directed toward it. Or it could just be that with a rather meager budget they would rather focus on things that might prove more cost effective.

"You want to discuss plausibility then you have to accept reality." -Mattshark

"Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience." -Obviousman

You know... the plural of ``anecdote'' is not ``data''. Similarly, the plural of ``random fact'' is not ``mystical symbolism''. -sepulchrave


#198    qxcontinuum

qxcontinuum

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,192 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in between

  • The age of stupid is upon us. Scientific conclusions are drawn from missing data, resuming to suppositions and guessing.

Posted 02 September 2013 - 01:58 PM

View PostSlave2Fate, on 02 September 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:

Well they are funded and as such are expected to offer new discoveries that are at least of some significance. They may have come to a decision that this particular anomaly isn't significant enough to warrant an explanation as to why funds are being directed toward it. Or it could just be that with a rather meager budget they would rather focus on things that might prove more cost effective.

Interesting point...


#199    JesseCuster

JesseCuster

    Secret Jesus

  • Member
  • 3,791 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 03 September 2013 - 01:41 AM

View Postqxcontinuum, on 02 September 2013 - 03:09 AM, said:

Thank you. I couldn't say any better!

NASA as Never A Straight Answer :)
BTW, you got some examples of those Photoshopped NASA pics you made claims about and which I asked for earlier in this thread?

Edited by JesseCuster, 03 September 2013 - 01:41 AM.

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman

"If people put enough excrement in one pile they think they can safely claim that there must be something other than excrement in a pile that big." - stereologist

#200    qxcontinuum

qxcontinuum

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,192 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in between

  • The age of stupid is upon us. Scientific conclusions are drawn from missing data, resuming to suppositions and guessing.

Posted 03 September 2013 - 02:27 AM

View PostJesseCuster, on 03 September 2013 - 01:41 AM, said:

BTW, you got some examples of those Photoshopped NASA pics you made claims about and which I asked for earlier in this thread?

I've never said Nasa's pictures were Photoshopped. I think you've lost the track :-)


#201    JesseCuster

JesseCuster

    Secret Jesus

  • Member
  • 3,791 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 03 September 2013 - 06:29 AM

View Postqxcontinuum, on 03 September 2013 - 02:27 AM, said:

I've never said Nasa's pictures were Photoshopped. I think you've lost the track :-)

I was referring to this claim you made earlier in this thread:

Quote

and yet there are numerous Photoshop interventions in many of the pictures provided to the public. Never understood why
What Photoshop interventions in what pics are you talking about?  If you weren't talking about NASA pics then what pics were you talking about?

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman

"If people put enough excrement in one pile they think they can safely claim that there must be something other than excrement in a pile that big." - stereologist

#202    qxcontinuum

qxcontinuum

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,192 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in between

  • The age of stupid is upon us. Scientific conclusions are drawn from missing data, resuming to suppositions and guessing.

Posted 03 September 2013 - 12:33 PM

Ohh, that, it is about adding colour hints, clarity improvement corrections, often there are crops, shadows removed, clear sky removed. Please note that by photoshop corrections i am NOT referring to hiding alien ships or something like that. Are there any pictures where i can see the martian sky as is ? For some reasons this seems to be one of the most common corrections.


#203    JesseCuster

JesseCuster

    Secret Jesus

  • Member
  • 3,791 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 04 September 2013 - 04:21 AM

View Postqxcontinuum, on 03 September 2013 - 12:33 PM, said:

Ohh, that, it is about adding colour hints, clarity improvement corrections, often there are crops, shadows removed, clear sky removed. Please note that by photoshop corrections i am NOT referring to hiding alien ships or something like that. Are there any pictures where i can see the martian sky as is ? For some reasons this seems to be one of the most common corrections.
Ok, so you admit your earlier accusation about NASA Photoshopping pics that they release to the public despite your claim otherwise "I've never said Nasa's pictures were Photoshopped. I think you've lost the track :-)".

Specifics please.  I'd like to see examples and your opinion as to why they are Photoshopped.

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman

"If people put enough excrement in one pile they think they can safely claim that there must be something other than excrement in a pile that big." - stereologist

#204    qxcontinuum

qxcontinuum

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,192 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in between

  • The age of stupid is upon us. Scientific conclusions are drawn from missing data, resuming to suppositions and guessing.

Posted 04 September 2013 - 07:05 AM

You're trying to create a stir from nothing. Don' t get things just from a black and white perspective. There are numerous grey tones as well, in almost everything.

From this

" and yet there are numerous Photoshop interventions in many of the pictures provided to the public. Never understood why "

To

View PostJesseCuster, on 04 September 2013 - 04:21 AM, said:

Ok, so you admit your earlier accusation about NASA Photoshopping pics that they release to the public despite your claim otherwise "I've never said Nasa's pictures were Photoshopped. I think you've lost the track :-)".

Specifics please.  I'd like to see examples and your opinion as to why they are Photoshopped.


It's a looong way....

Sure thing;

http://theperilsofpa...08/martians.jpg


Now seriosly;

Cropped image of the rover, one of many...why?

http://www.nasa.gov/...0-full_full.jpg

http://paranormal.ab...hotoshopped.htm

http://www.huffingto...o_n_841187.html

Are you saying that Nasa is not using photoshop ? Often they are admitting changing colours of backgrounds and adding more hue to pictures.

Edited by qxcontinuum, 04 September 2013 - 07:16 AM.


#205    qxcontinuum

qxcontinuum

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,192 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in between

  • The age of stupid is upon us. Scientific conclusions are drawn from missing data, resuming to suppositions and guessing.

Posted 04 September 2013 - 07:19 AM

Ohh no... Trolls... :(


#206    Otto von Pickelhaube

Otto von Pickelhaube

    A complete moral vacuum

  • Member
  • 30,107 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Garmisch-Partenkirchen

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 04 September 2013 - 07:23 AM

yes, cunningly disguised Spam. :no:

If, as it seems, we are in the process of becoming a totalitarian society in which the state apparatus is all-powerful, the ethics most important for the survival of the true, free, human individual would be: cheat, lie, evade, fake it, be elsewhere, forge documents, build improved electronic gadgets in your garage that’ll outwit the gadgets used by the authorities.

- Philip K. Dick.


#207    JesseCuster

JesseCuster

    Secret Jesus

  • Member
  • 3,791 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Ireland

Posted 04 September 2013 - 08:56 PM

View Postqxcontinuum, on 04 September 2013 - 07:05 AM, said:

Cropped image of the rover, one of many...why?

http://www.nasa.gov/...0-full_full.jpg

Because the image is of the Martian landscape. You'll notice that the bits 'cropped' were of the sky and the Rover itself.

Why? Because it's not a cropped image.  It's a composite of many narrow angle images put together.  The bits you say are 'cropped' are places where they never bothered taking pictures of.  They decided not to use valuable time, bandwidth, memory, power, etc. taking pictures of a blank and empty sky and pictures of the rover itself.  So they didn't bother taking pointless pictures of the sky and the rover, instead took pictures of the landscape which they were interested in and stitched them together into a high-res panorama where the blank bits are things that they didn't bother to photograph.

Quote

Video not available.  Dang.  I'll try again later.  I'd like to examine the original photo to see for myself if the clone tool has been used.

Quote

That's an example of the kind of inocuous everyday things that astronomers do with images.  They're not intended to deceive anyone or cover up anything.

Quote

Are you saying that Nasa is not using photoshop ? Often they are admitting changing colours of backgrounds and adding more hue to pictures.
I know that.  But that's not controversial, is it?  Colorising an image or color correcting images to provide more accurate representation or even exagerrating colours (which they sometimes do with satellite pics of Mars) to show more clearly areas of different mineral make-up is what they're known to do.  I assumed when you mentioned that they Photoshopped images and you 'didn't know why' they you weren't referring to corrections and editing where you do know why (apart from the sky being removed thing, it hasn't been removed from the high-res panoramas, it wasn't photographed in the first place).

I (perhaps incorrectly) assumed you were referring to images being edited to cover up something (otherwise why mention it?).

I'm interested in the claim about the clone tool being used but video isn't working for me and I don't have a reference for the image that is claimed to be edited to examine myself in Photoshop.

Edited by JesseCuster, 04 September 2013 - 09:02 PM.

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman

"If people put enough excrement in one pile they think they can safely claim that there must be something other than excrement in a pile that big." - stereologist

#208    Ugly1

Ugly1

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 573 posts
  • Joined:07 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Texas USA

Posted 04 September 2013 - 11:07 PM

View PostHazzard, on 28 August 2013 - 10:27 AM, said:

If NASA wanted to cover something up, why in the hell would they release it on the net!!??

No, those are craters from mundane objects, ie rocks or ice. You can find them all over Mars.

Book smart and wise are to me two separate things. The people reviewing these photos are just normal human beings who make mistakes like the rest of us. I suppose there could be a computer program that looks for abnormalities contained in a photographs from other planets but these would also have their flaws. Either way you look at it, you have a computer program or human scanning through these images prior to releasing them and that leaves room for error.


#209    ReaperS_ParadoX

ReaperS_ParadoX

    “What’s wrong with accepting madness?

  • Member
  • 2,521 posts
  • Joined:29 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:A really cold region devoid of stars

  • The boundaries which divide Life from Death are at best shadowy and vague. Who shall say where the one ends, and where the other begins?

Posted 05 September 2013 - 12:07 AM

View Postqxcontinuum, on 29 August 2013 - 07:15 PM, said:

Then perhaps is a battle of power and  supremacy. I would not be surprised to see Orcas and dolphins in the future winning and becoming the predominant species in the top of the trophic chain. I mean we know they are already capable of very complex thinking including vocabulary and emotions like love to their pair or babies in the same time revenge against killers and fisherman. They are smart creatures comparing to those dumb ass sharks using tons of jaw power but brainless.

Sharks are far from brainless, and they've been on earth for more than 450 million years, there one of  natures top predators.

Edited by R4z3rsPar4d0x, 05 September 2013 - 12:20 AM.

COME WITH ME. OVERWHELMING POWER AND MADNESS AWAIT

THAT IS NOT DEAD WHICH CAN ETERNAL LIE AND WITH STRANGE AEONS EVEN DEATH MAY DIE

#210    psyche101

psyche101

    The Customer.

  • Member
  • 38,300 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 24 September 2013 - 06:44 AM

View PostCodemonger, on 31 August 2013 - 01:03 AM, said:

I think Hawking throughout history has struggled with his belief in God, and also his claim that the pope told scientists to “not inquire into the big bang itself.” may have helped trigger a push to disprove God.  I do believe what Hawkings thinks is that God is not required to explain the laws of physics

Hawkins said God's presence was not required at the creation of the Universe I think.

I assume that is maintained if we are talking about a "Bulk" Universe as well.

NB* A "Bulk Universe" means that a star floating through a multidimensional plane got sucked into a black hole, half of it got swallowed up and the other half that survived spawned the creation of the universe.

Edited by psyche101, 24 September 2013 - 06:44 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users