Why does NASA deliberately alter the color of the Mars photograhs ? Just because science mistakenly has always referred to Mars as the "Red Planet" is no reason for NASA to be deceptive about the planet's real color . Below are some of the Martian pictures before and after NASA changed their real color . They show the true color of Mars . Something the world has been denied until recently .

"Investigation shows that there are several indications that the NASA is tampering with the colors, and changes them from an Earth-like environment into a red inhospitable environment. But it seems that the young scientists at Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) are not convenient with this.

At the press conference last saturday, the JPL-scientists showed the latest picture of the Martian landscape. It showed a salmon-coloured desert with a blue sky. It seems that they did it on purpose, since previous pictures were all extremely red. Below the pictures of the conference are shown:"





This is the link to the article discussing how NASA changed the color of Mars and shows more before and after photographs.

http://xfacts.com/spirit2004/

Maybe there is life on Mars.

I find it rather a shame that, having gone to great length to explain in another thread to tucker why these images vary in colour tucker should chose to ignore fact and link to a website which has plenty of accusations but not a single fact to back them up. Such is the way of those who will believe anything they find on the internet but never engage enough common sense to ask the obvious questions.
One such question would be this:

There are tens of thousands of geologists, astronomers and planetary geologists in the world. If NASA is so obviously doctoring these images how is it that a conspiracy site hinting at alien life on Mars has noticed but the people actually educated in the subject haven't?

Here is an example of the sort of half truths that site tucker has linked to:



This sort of thing relies on the fact that the people that believe this sort of rubbish will not be able to work out the truth for themself. The link to the press conference will take you to an article where you will find the first temperature range in FULL CONTEXT:

(my emphasis of the word daytime. Compare that to the second range of temperatures given:

(again my emphasis of the phrase "predicted daily change")

The daily change will include night time temperatures. Which of those figures is right.. both of them.

The authors of that site are either deliberately lying, too incompetant to understand what they are talking about or, quite possibly, both.

I have to agree with you, although I do find disagreeing with you a bit....exciting. Your passion and reactions to ones that don't agree, are quite refreshing. I find it wonderful when someone stands up for their beliefs. Keep it up..and I'll make it a point to disagree with you at a later date

This is not a question of "believing anything on the internet". It is a question of why did NASA intentionally alter the color of the Martian photographs . I read your explanation on the space forum and told you that your information was incorrect . If you work for NASA then I can understand why you would not want the evidence of them tampering with the real color of the Mars photographed to be revealed. Most scientists already know that this has been done . Why more of them are not upset by this deception is another question .

Here are two more photgraphs which prove that NASA has deliberately altered the color of Mars to suit their own agenda . What a shame they felt the need to do this . You would think they would know that their reputation was tarnished enough with their very questionable Apollo moon photographs .

NASA's Flag.
http://rense.com/1.imagesC/viking%202%20original.jpg

The real flag.
http://rense.com/1.imagesC/viking%202%20correct%20flag.jpg

Ever thought someone outside of NASA has altered the contrast of the images? The 2 pics u just posted are an extremely poor example as it is clear that the entire print screen has been altered (look at the toolbars on both), not just the image supposedly 'altered'.

This is not about my beliefs, this is about scientific facts.

Belief is a wonderful thing when it is in agreement with, or at least not in contradiction of, reality. Things become problematic when beliefs simply don't fit the reality. The logical choice is to disregard the belief and embrace the facts. Sadly too many people do the exact opposite.

I'm no science buff and don't really care about the topic.

But as a regular person just looking at the pictures I'll tell you that the reddened pictures make the planet look uninhabitable.

The natural shots look more earthlike and would make me believe that perhaps with the right technology it would be possible to sustain human life on the planet.

SO perhaps they are trying to keep that thought out of the public mind.

Here is another link to an article explaining how NASA deliberately altered the Martian photographs along with more photographs to prove it .

These articles are written by very credible sources and it is dishonest of you Waspie_dwarf to claim otherwise just because you want to disagree with the evidence. There is an even more damaging article about NASA concerning this unfortunate matter but it may take me some time to locate it again . It explains in detail how NASA employees were ordered to change the color of the Mars photographs two hours after they had come in . Too late to hide the fact that the "RedPlanet" is not really red .

http://mars-news.de/color/blue.html

You make a good point but no one "outside of NASA' altered the color of Mars or would have any reason to. The flag photographs originally came from a science web site which included more information about NASA employees being orderd to alter the color . I will post it here when I find it .

NASA has tampared with nothing. I will repeat in this thread what I said in the other. You might not get it but hopefully others will.



Now would you care to tell me which part of my explanation is incorrect?

Given that even you admit that scientists know that there are differences in colour from image to image which explanation do you consider most likely, that there is a good reason for it, ie along the lines of the explanation I have given or that NASA is doing something naughty and every qualified scientist on the planet is either in on the conspiracy or is too stupid to notice?

Here is another article which explains how and possibly why NASA has deliberately altered the color of the Martian photographs . It doesn't matter in the least bit to me what some people like Waspie_dwarf choose to believe about this or why they post the misleading information they do . I just thought this would be an interesting topic to discuss here . I didn't consider this to be a conspiracy theory because it is a scientific fact that NASA has deliberately altered the photographs of Mars but maybe the reason they altered them is a conspiracy. I just read another article which shows how NASA is airbrushing out Martion images on the surface and is photoshopping in faked images of the sky . Maybe there is much to hide about the "Red Planet" after all . I will post that article on this thread too.

THE MARS RECORDS

Evidence that NASA is altering
the true colors of the pictures of Mars

http://themarsrecords.com/mars_red_planet_colors.html

This article explains how NASA is altering more than just the color of Mars. It does seem like they are hiding the truth about the "Red Planet" from everyone for some reason.

"Why Is NASA Editing These Images?"

"These "raw" images are in fact being edited with simple graphics software

NOTE: Some of these images have been removed from the NASA site."

Go here for the article and altered pictures of Mars.

http://xenotechresearch.com/NASAHACK.htm

NASA is clearly protecting the Ice Warriors who live on Mars; they are clearly collaborating with them to make us dull and unresponsive to the CLEAR THREAT OF INTERPLANETARY WAR they offer us.



--Jaylemurph

By all means of respect, but your notion is leaning up against being outright absurd. Mars is read and is is due to an abundance of iron oxide (which is rust). You might believe that NASA is hiding the true color of Mars, but if it isn't red, what is it then? Iron oxide makes things red (just look at anything rusty) and spectral analysis shows it's there in vast amounts (I have a vague recollection of up to ~10% of the Martian soil being iron oxide).

When mars is closest to Earth, amateur astronomers can and do take pictures of Mars, like this. And, lo and behold, it is red. But I guess that, even though he is from Sweden, the astronomer behind this picture is in on the conspiracy as well. And so is the European Union and Russia, and anybody else with a large telescope. I guess you are the only one left out

Thus, Waspie_Dwarf is absolutely correct in his assessment. Secondly, pictures aren't always enhanced to show what it really looks like in true colors, but to enhance certain features that could be interesting. And, finally, why on Earth would they make Mars another color? If they really wanted to convince someone that Mars was completely uninhabitable, why not make it yellow or gray, like the moon? With the current explanation you are putting forth, they are placing themselves between two chairs. You claim that they don't want us to think that it is habitable, but now they are saying that with some work it could be habitable? Doesn't make any sense. Make it gray and call it absolutely uninhabitable

Best,
Badeskov

Where did you get that picture of my Mother in Law from?

Best,
Badeskov

LMAO! Ice Warriors. everyone knows they're ACTUALLY protecting the Fire People for their Technology.

wow. i never thought i would come across a forum saying that the mars pics were tampered with. if youi dont believe the planet is red, get a telescope. who is to say that JPL didn't tamper with the pics? i mean, get the right programs for like, 50 bucks and you can enhance certain colors too. i can make a red mars look green with some of the stuff on my computer.

I see more misinformed people have shown up in NASA's defense . The color of Mars is only red to the naked eye and through telescopes from Earth . It is a myth that the planet is really red or the sky pink . Here is the article I was looking for that explains how NASA employees were ordered to alter the color photographs of Mars two hours after the images came in . This was not an accident or a mistake on NASA's part . It was deliberate tampering with the photographs to disguise the fact that Mars looks very much like Earth . Below is a few paragraphs from the article and the pictures of the American flag which shows beyond a doubt that the pictures were altered on purpose to make Mars a color it really isn't .

Here's part of the article.

"The "witness" is the son of the scientist in charge of one of Viking’s three historic "biology investigations," the Labeled Release Experiment: Principle Investigator, Dr. Gilbert Levin. His son’s name is Dr. Ron Levin, now also a scientist a physicist -- at MIT.

In the summer of 1976 (when Viking landed), Ron was a newly-graduated high school student, assisting his father at JPL during that incomparable "Viking Summer" (where this writer was also present, covering the extraordinary Viking story for millions of readers of a major magazine, and a couple of broadcast television networks …).

The following is from Levin’s first-hand recollections of the whole affair, recounted in a recent book by science writer Barry DiGregorio -- the remarkable "over reaction" by JPL that occurred in response to Ron Levin’s naive efforts to "correct" what seemed to him that July afternoon to be "a deliberate – if perplexing – methodical distortion of the incoming Viking Lander data" (Mars: The Living Planet, B. DiGregorio, G. Levin and P. Straat, Frog Ltd, Berkeley, CA 1997).

According to DiGregorio’s narrative:

"At about 2:00 P.M. PDT, the first color image from the surface of another planet, Mars, began to emerge on the JPL color video monitors located in many of the surrounding buildings, specifically set up for JPL employees and media personnel to view the Viking images. Gil and Ron Levin sat in the main control room where dozens of video monitors and anxious technicians waited to see this historic first color picture. As the image developed on the monitors, the crowd of scientists, technicians, and media reacted enthusiastically to a scene that would be absolutely unforgettable – Mars in color. The image showed an Arizona-like landscape: blue sky, brownish-red desert soil, and gray rocks with green splotches ...

"Gil Levin commented to Patricia Straat [his co-Investigator] and his son Ron, ‘Look at that image! It looks like Arizona’ [below].




"Two hours after the first color image appeared on the monitors, a technician abruptly changed the image from the light-blue sky and Arizona-like landscape to a uniform orange-red sky and landscape [below]. Ron Levin looked in disbelief as the technician went from monitor to monitor making the change. Minutes later, Ron followed him, resetting the colors to their original appearance. Levin and Straat were interrupted when they heard someone being chastised. It was Ron Levin being chewed out by the Viking Project Director himself, James S. Martin, Jr. Gil Levin went immediately and asked, "What is going on?" Martin had caught Ron changing all the color monitors back to their original settings. He warned Ron that if he tried something like that again, he’d be thrown out of JPL for good. The Director then asked a TRW engineer assisting the Biology team, Ron Gilje, to follow Ron Levin around to every color monitor and change it back to the red landscape.



"What Gil Levin, Ron and Patricia Straat did not know (even to this writing) is that the order to change the colors came directly from the NASA Administrator himself, Dr. James Fletcher. Months later, Gil Levin sought out the JPL Viking Imaging Team technician who actually made the changes and asked why it was done. The technician responded that he had instructions from the Viking Imaging Team that the Mars sky and landscape should be red and went around to all the monitors‘tweaking them to make it so. Gil Levin said, The new settings showed the American flag (painted on the Landers below as having purple stripes. The technician said that the Mars atmosphere made the flag appear that way [emphasis added].’"





As someone who was also at JPL that afternoon, and vividly remembers a similar shock -- when the "Arizona Mars" initially flashed on the JPL monitors was suddenly transformed into a Martian "Red Light District" . I now kick myself for not asking lots more questions.

But, it was 1976 -- and we all trusted our Space Agency back then ….

One of the basic questions that I should have asked involves the physics behind JPL's abrupt color alterations. Or, as Gil Levin put it:

"If atmospheric dust were scattering red light and not blue, the sky would appear red, but since the red would be at least partially removed by the time the light hit the surface, its [the direct sunlight’s] reflection from the surface would make the surface appear more blue than red. There would be less red light [in the direct sunlight illumination] left to reflect. And what about the sharp shadows of the rocks in the black and white images yesterday? If significant scattering of the light on Mars occurred [from lots of red dust in the atmosphere], the sharp shadows in those images would not be present, or at best, would appear fuzzy because of diffusion by the [atmospheric] scattering [emphasis added]!"

Levin was describing the well-known phenomenon of "Raleigh scattering" -- whereby the similar-sized molecules of all planetary atmospheres (be it the primary nitrogen of Earth; the carbon dioxide atmosphere of Mars; or even the predominantly hydrogen atmospheres of Jupiter and Saturn!) all produce blue skies when sunlight passes through them.

If you examine the long Martian photographic record which encompasses hundreds of thousands of images, acquired by dozens of observatories even before the Space age dawned you can see blatant evidence that Levin's right and JPL is wrong regarding the scientifically expected color of the Martian atmosphere."

The rest of the article is here .

http://www.enterprisemission.com/colors.htm

No, I'm just here for a right old laugh, really, not to defend NASA.

--Jaylemurph


And I'm told on good authority that NASA have been doctoring radar reading to make Santa Claus disappear at Christmas, as well. Bas*****s.

This has nothing to do with NASA, just trying hold on to the facts.



What?!?! Do you have any idea how color is defined? Do you really believe that the color of mars changes as the light traverses space from Mars to Earth? I would read up on physics if I were you. Admittedly, it has been a while since I have heard anything so absurd.



No, it's a fact. Sorry to break it to you.



I won't even bother. The Enterprisemission is not a place to look for facts, and one shold only go there if one deliberately wants to be mislead. And did you even read Waspie_dwarfs post on how "color" cameras mounted on space crafts work? You know, the one with the different wavelength filters? If so, you wouldn't even suggest that the colors had been altered.

Best,
Badeskov

this is hilarious keep the bull coming tucker

Actually... it can be argued that it does... due to redshift and blueshift... but with these distances it really doesnt affect color much.

It's velocity that affects red/blue shift, not distance, and the few km/s difference in velocity between Mars and earth is too small compared with the velocity of light to have any noticable effect.

this is not correct, Mars is reddish in color because it is covered with iron oxide...


in your picture you can see the rust covering the landscape


you can see from these rover tracks, under the rusty covering, Mars has other colors...

what would be gained by making Mars look too red? and wouldn't the truth be uncovered when the E.U. or China gets there and sends back pictures? surely you don't think NASA will be able to cover that up...

The EU has already got there, and its pictures look decidedly reddish:
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/images/marsex..._Pack_Ice_H.jpg

of course reddish, Mars IS covered with rust... I'd like to see a EU picture of the Martian sky, to see if it's pink or blue...




Mars_sunset_PIA00920 - Courtesy: NASA/JPL


Mars_violet_sky - Courtesy: NASA/JPL

LINK-> Astronomy on Mars

Stellar, very true - the frequency and thereby the color of the light can and does change. However, as you also say, with the velocities and distances involved, the frequency shift is minuscule. And you need quite a bit of frequency shifting to change the color to a degree where it can be observed by the naked eye.

Best,
Badeskov

Don't mistake the EU for ESA. They are totally seperate. You do not have to be a European Union member to join the European Space Agency nor do you become an ESA member by being in the EU.

Not even to mention what possible benefit the "evil minions of NASA" could be looking to achieve by bamboozling us about the real color of Mars?




I've found that facts have little place in revisionism. Speaking of which, so what color is Mars going to be *revised* to? Purple perhaps...how about Puce?

Indeed, but everything in space is moving. You're right, its the relative velocities that cause the phenomenon, I wasnt really paying attention and I misspoke when I said "distance".



Indeed.

What? This statement confuses me...so this is saying it IS red, right? To the naked eye...
Then the next sentence says it's NOT red, right? WTF.

Tucker, is jimmyphelps a friend of yours?

Thats not me at all.
But if you're interested in NASA covering up the image of mars, trry to google "Alternative 3"

Ha!

--Jaylemurph

I still say it's puce. Let's take a vote...all for puce raise their hands!

The main reason for the two color tonal values is the difference of some 20 years of visual technology capability.

NASA does not alter imaging from any of its on orbit assets.

RAMS

NASA has not ever, nor would it now or at any time past, order anyone to alter photos of anything concering thier mission. The #1 mission of NASA is to explore the unknown. In fact, if there would be the remotest possibiiy of the discovery of exo-earth life, this would ensure the future of NASA for the next million years. Finding the bizarre is what we do. Just look at the HUDF array photos for such wonder.....

Sorry.


RAMS

This man is /clearly/ a NWO Shill.
And he's probably poisoning wells and eating god-fearing Christian babies with aliens and Masons.

--Jaylemurph

Um.....to make them clearer..DOH

Now, now let's not be silly here...everyone knows that no self respecting Alien would ever attend a Baby B-B-Q with Masons!

Who's the blind one here?!
Clearly the Jews come from reptilian, alien stock. The Knights Templar found that out in Solomon's Temple and found out that Mary Magdalene carried the lizard genes through her and Christ's love-child into the Merovingian line. Which the Templars defended till they were disbanded and became the Freemasons.
And since we know the Freemason are part and parcel of the Illuminati and the Illuminati run the US government, IT'S CLEAR that the US Gov. through NASA is merely protecting the Ice Warrior Lizard Jewish Ancestors of Jesus by making Mars not quite so red.
And also they all Christian babies together, a la Tom and Jerry-style 50s Bar-B-Qs.

--Jaylemurph

Being absolutely objective, you have hit the truth in heart, line, and sinker--on target. Absolutely correct.

Excellent discernment as well, btw.

Pesky NASA......

RAMS

Now that's some really *mad revision* if I've ever heard it.



Yes indeed, there's a fine art to revisionism...Bravo!

Here is an interesting site I found.

"Investigation shows that there are several indications that the NASA is tampering with the colours, and changes them from an Earth-like environment into a red inhospitable environment." (Taken from www.libertythink.com).

See what you think?
Link...

Site in reference: www.libertythink.com

^^^
As this is cospiracy theory stuff I am moving it to the correct forum and merging it with the thread that already exists there.

Thanks Waspie. I didn't think about Conspiracies. I was simply interested as to why NASA would want to change image colors. Will read through the whole thread.

The controversies which have continued to hover around Mars in scientific arena have been paralleled by less constrained speculation, rumor and embellishment of context with its own following. A historical background, examples, and speculation of the sociological influences at play is given here:

http://www.donaldedavis.com/2008%20new/CLRMARS.html

Don

Excellent link, Don.

Botoom line:

Mars IS red....always was, always will be....

Indeed MID!

Cheers,
Badeskov

Cheers, my friend!

There is a highly complex device which can be used to prove this. Despite it's complexity it is cheap and easy to use and readily available, although the user will have to do a little research to use it properly.

Firstly you must learn how to find objects in the night sky. Then you must learn when Mars is visible from your location. That's the research over.

Now the bit involving the complex equipment...

Go outside on a clear night. Point a standard issue human eyeball at Mars (they usually come in pairs, use both if you wish). Now see what colour Mars is. I'll give you a clue, it's been known for centuries as the "red planet".