Pax Unum Posted June 4, 2011 #151 Share Posted June 4, 2011 (edited) The ATS discussion on this began on May 31st: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread711623/pg1 Who really cares about some other forum?... It's a glitch, let it go... Edited June 4, 2011 by Pax Unum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonie2012 Posted June 4, 2011 #152 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Who really cares about some other forum?... It's a glitch, let it go... QFT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
booNyzarC Posted June 4, 2011 #153 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Who really cares about some other forum?... It's a glitch, let it go... The capable in that other forum have reached the same conclusions that we have. A glitch. No station on Mars, just a glitch - most likely a loss in data transmission, and further distorted by the overlay process of Google Earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMcGuffin Posted June 4, 2011 #154 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Who really cares about some other forum?... It's a glitch, let it go Well, I care, and in any case I was asked where I first saw these pictures. As I said, the people who claimed they were only in black and white were wrong, since the Mars Express is capable of taking IR, UV and color pictures, and also doing subsurface radar analysis--looking for minerals? I was the only one who posted links to all these, but evidently my post was ignored. Most of the rude questions come from those who did not even look at what I posted earlier. It seems the "glitch" was corrected yesterday, when one of the pictures was pulled from that website and two of the older ones were "modified". In what way were "modified"? Who "modified" them and why? If you can find that out, you might even be onto something real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMcGuffin Posted June 4, 2011 #155 Share Posted June 4, 2011 The capable in that other forum have reached the same conclusions that we have. A glitch. No station on Mars, just a glitch - most likely a loss in data transmission, and further distorted by the overlay process of Google Earth. Perhaps, and perhaps not, but forgive me if I remain skeptical of you and your "capable" friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pax Unum Posted June 4, 2011 #156 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Well, I care, and in any case I was asked where I first saw these pictures. As I said, the people who claimed they were only in black and white were wrong, since the Mars Express is capable of taking IR, UV and color pictures, and also doing subsurface radar analysis--looking for minerals? I was the only one who posted links to all these, but evidently my post was ignored. Most of the rude questions come from those who did not even look at what I posted earlier. It seems the "glitch" was corrected yesterday, when one of the pictures was pulled from that website and two of the older ones were "modified". In what way were "modified"? Who "modified" them and why? If you can find that out, you might even be onto something real. Yea, huge conspiracy... get a grip man!... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonie2012 Posted June 4, 2011 #157 Share Posted June 4, 2011 (edited) It seems the "glitch" was corrected yesterday, when one of the pictures was pulled from that website and two of the older ones were "modified". In what way were "modified"? Who "modified" them and why? How convenient for you, not posting any examples of the glitch "pre-edit" or anything. Lots of posturing and roundabout, but no actual proof of it. As far as I've seen, the glitch never existed in those photos - and I DID look at them. I found nothing. It's ok to be wrong, but being wrong (and admitting it) seems to be a concept you can't accept. Nobody takes anyone seriously that can't admit being wrong now and then - and on this, you're just flat-out incorrect. Or there's a huge govt. conspiracy to hide a row of errant pixels in some photo nobody (other than us) gives a damn about. Edited June 4, 2011 by Moonie2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
booNyzarC Posted June 4, 2011 #158 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Perhaps, and perhaps not, but forgive me if I remain skeptical of you and your "capable" friends. No need to ask for forgiveness. I encourage skepticism. I must ask though, what exactly are the flaws in the arguments which have shown this to be nothing more than a glitch? Are you skeptical merely because it was a finding shared by skeptics? Or do you have a more legitimate and substantiated reason to be convinced that this conclusion is incorrect? And if you don't mind dropping your attitude for the sake of healthy and good natured discussion, I'd much appreciate it mate. I also wouldn't mind understanding why you've adopted this attitude in general, specifically toward me. I've apologized once already in this thread alone for whatever wrongdoing I may have done. You do seem to have made this whole subject matter into a personal thing and I'm a bit perplexed by that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMcGuffin Posted June 4, 2011 #159 Share Posted June 4, 2011 (edited) Yea, huge conspiracy For all I know that's just what it is, no matter whether we want to roll our eyes or not. In any case, at least I'm asking the questions. I do wonder how much creative editing has been going on. Edited June 4, 2011 by TheMcGuffin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonie2012 Posted June 4, 2011 #160 Share Posted June 4, 2011 (edited) For all I know that's just what it is, no matter whether we want to roll our eyes or not. In any case, at least I'm asking the questions. I do wonder how much creative editing has been going on. Please show proof that the pics were edited yesterday. You're claiming it, so show it. The "skeptics" have shown their side - you've shown nothing but irrelevant complaints and irrelevant data. And once again - it's ok to admit being wrong. It takes fortitude, but it's ok. Edited June 4, 2011 by Moonie2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pericynthion Posted June 4, 2011 #161 Share Posted June 4, 2011 As I said, the people who claimed they were only in black and white were wrong, since the Mars Express is capable of taking IR, UV and color pictures, and also doing subsurface radar analysis--looking for minerals? I think you misunderstood my post. I apologize if I wasn't clear. I was just trying to explain a bit about the file naming convention for HRSC images. You mentioned having seen images H1597_0000_ND3 and H1564_0000_ND3 in color and infrared, so I replied: And just to be precise, both H1597_0000_ND3 and H1564_0000_ND3 are black and white images. The "ND" at the end of the image number refers to the nadir imager. The infrared imager data ends in "IR" and the color channels end in "RE" "GR" and "BL". Just a little bit of interesting trivia ... This is a correct statement. The "ND" images are grayscale images from the nadir sensor. Actually, all of the sensors on HRSC record grayscale images. The color images are created on the ground by combining the three black-and-white images from the red, green, and blue filters. It's just a bit of trivia about the camera I though might be useful for better understanding the file names. It seems the "glitch" was corrected yesterday, when one of the pictures was pulled from that website and two of the older ones were "modified". In what way were "modified"? Who "modified" them and why? If you can find that out, you might even be onto something real. Please help me out here. Which glitch was corrected, and which images were pulled? This data is stored in multiple archives, so I'm sure a copy can be found if we know the image IDs. As for the modification date listed on the ASU web site, have you tried looking at the dates for other images besides the two you're so concerned about? I just checked about a dozen random HRSC image IDs and ALL of them show a modification date of 2011-06-02. I think your grand conspiracy may be nothing more than a general database update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lost_shaman Posted June 4, 2011 #162 Share Posted June 4, 2011 As I said, the people who claimed they were only in black and white were wrong, since the Mars Express is capable of taking IR, UV and color pictures, and also doing subsurface radar analysis--looking for minerals? I was the only one who posted links to all these, but evidently my post was ignored. Most of the rude questions come from those who did not even look at what I posted earlier. You're really coming off as being totally full of yourself! You do not deserve any credit here because all you've done is state the obvious. Peri said the image from the Nadir camera is what Google Earth used, and that was a B/W image. The Satelite itself has many different cameras, as Peri pointed out other photos don't show the 'glitch'. So you pointing out that there are other photos is rather meaningless considering the veiwer Peri linked to (before you posted) allows you to flip between the different photos in the first place. I do thank you for showing me that it wasn't anything I did that upset you the other day, you've proven here that everyone who might dare to disagree with TMG is in the same boat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pericynthion Posted June 4, 2011 #163 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Hi, what you (and others)suggest is looking the most likely explanation, but what about HRSC: H5620_0000_ND3...? Hi Kantzveldt. After reading all the posts from earlier today, I think you may already know the answer to your question, but just in case: H5620_0000_ND3 is the same image I've been showing. If you're wondering about the difference between H5620_0000_ND2 and H5620_0000_ND3, the "2" and "3" just refer to the level of processing that's been performed on the original raw data. The Level 2 version I've been posting has less processing applied than the Level 3 version, so it better shows the original pattern of pixels recorded by the camera. All of image processing is applied in stages and each stage is archived because researchers may need a specific level of image correction for their work. P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pericynthion Posted June 4, 2011 #164 Share Posted June 4, 2011 I guess we'll have to search elsewhere for that damned rebel scum! Dantooine ... they're on Dantooine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lost_shaman Posted June 4, 2011 #165 Share Posted June 4, 2011 The color images are created on the ground by combining the three black-and-white images from the red, green, and blue filters. Hey Peri, Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't some of the color scales arbitrailiy assigned to certain images and raw data simply to make it easier for the Human eye to make sense of the data? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMcGuffin Posted June 4, 2011 #166 Share Posted June 4, 2011 I do thank you for showing me that it wasn't anything I did that upset you the other day, you've proven here that everyone who might dare to disagree with TMG is in the same boat. I'd say that I got to know you very well, at least from your views of history, but as we were reminded before, the fact that I don't like those at all has nothing with the subject at hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMcGuffin Posted June 4, 2011 #167 Share Posted June 4, 2011 How convenient for you, not posting any examples of the glitch "pre-edit" or anything. Lots of posturing and roundabout, but no actual proof of it. As far as I've seen, the glitch never existed in those photos - and I DID look at them. I found nothing. It's ok to be wrong, but being wrong (and admitting it) seems to be a concept you can't accept. Nobody takes anyone seriously that can't admit being wrong now and then - and on this, you're just flat-out incorrect. Or there's a huge govt. conspiracy to hide a row of errant pixels in some photo nobody (other than us) gives a damn about. Of course you found nothing, nor were you supposed to. How do you know that no one else cares about it, since the story also appeared all over the Internet and even in some of the tabloid papers? Maybe it was just a general update of the entire database on June 2nd, and maybe it was something else. Those who really know aren't going to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lost_shaman Posted June 4, 2011 #168 Share Posted June 4, 2011 I'd say that I got to know you very well, at least from your views of history, You can't know me or my views of History from a two page thread! That being said... The other 4/5th's of my post were directly related to this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
booNyzarC Posted June 4, 2011 #169 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Dantooine ... they're on Dantooine. "Help me Pericynth Kenobi! You're my only hope!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
booNyzarC Posted June 4, 2011 #170 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Of course you found nothing, nor were you supposed to. How do you know that no one else cares about it, since the story also appeared all over the Internet and even in some of the tabloid papers? Maybe it was just a general update of the entire database on June 2nd, and maybe it was something else. Those who really know aren't going to say. Do you honestly think that there is a conspiracy behind this? And do you honestly put stock in tabloid papers? If you manage to get around to it, I also wouldn't mind a response to my previous direct question either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonie2012 Posted June 4, 2011 #171 Share Posted June 4, 2011 (edited) Of course you found nothing, nor were you supposed to. How do you know that no one else cares about it, since the story also appeared all over the Internet and even in some of the tabloid papers? Good god - tabloids now? Show ONE tabloid that talked about it this (or last) month. As per your repertoire of showing proof of ANYTHING you claim, you won't. Actually, don't bother (not that you would). You've proven time and time again nothing you say means a damn thing, nor do you answer direct questions about your claims. Edited June 4, 2011 by Moonie2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lost_shaman Posted June 4, 2011 #172 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Maybe it was just a general update of the entire database on June 2nd, and maybe it was something else. Those who really know aren't going to say. When was the last modification before this last one you are making such a big deal over? Do you know? Is the site in question updated often? Regularly? In order to make any claims of the type you seem to wish to imply you should be able to answer those questions. Otherwise how can you even insinuate that something other than normal operations are taking place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMcGuffin Posted June 4, 2011 #173 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Good god - tabloids now? Show ONE tabloid that talked about it this (or last) month. As per your repertoire of showing proof of ANYTHING you claim, you won't. Actually, don't bother (not that you would). You've proven time and time again nothing you say means a damn thing, nor do you answer direct questions. The Sun, "Space Station Found on Mars", June 2, 2011: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/ufos/3615234/Space-station-found-on-Mars.html You don't know me very well, since I can always back up everything I say. That's why I'm so popular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMcGuffin Posted June 4, 2011 #174 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Good god - tabloids now? Show ONE tabloid that talked about it this (or last) month. As per your repertoire of showing proof of ANYTHING you claim, you won't. Actually, don't bother (not that you would). You've proven time and time again nothing you say means a damn thing, nor do you answer direct questions about your claims. But I did bother. Do you want some more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonie2012 Posted June 4, 2011 #175 Share Posted June 4, 2011 (edited) The Sun, "Space Station Found on Mars", June 2, 2011: http://www.thesun.co...nd-on-Mars.html You don't know me very well, since I can always back up everything I say. That's why I'm so popular. The Sun - oh man, what a reputable rag. You back up nothing (unless it involves crap tabloids). Then again, infalliable believer mentality takes into account rags as proof, so I shouldn't call fault. Edited June 4, 2011 by Moonie2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now