specialist seeing signs of past life on Mars

[psyche101]

You're beyond a joke at this stage. You're literally just making stuff up off the top of your head.

I am starting to wonder if Donna Hare is coaching him......

[qxcontinuum]

lolol

what a waste of your potentials...

[qxcontinuum]

What the hell are you talking about? What 'optics' are you talking about? The images you see in Google Earth aren't taken by Google, they are taken by companies and govt. agencies who license those images to Google to be used in Google Earth/Maps. Are you really this ignorant to think that Google has invented cheap 'optics' that takes the images you see in Google Earth? This conversation has gone beyond a farce. You're embarrassing yourself qx.

You're beyond a joke at this stage. You're literally just making stuff up off the top of your head.

A hell of a lot more curious than you and your fact-free rantings.

read again

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeoEye-1

GeoEye-1 provides 0.41 m (16 in) panchromatic and 1.65 m (5.4 ft) multispectral imagery in 15.2 km (9.4 mi) swaths. The spacecraft is intended for a sun-synchronous orbit at an altitude of 681 km (423 mi) and an inclination of 98 degrees, with a 10:30 a.m. equator crossing time. GeoEye-1 can image up to 60 degrees off nadir. It is operated out of Dulles, Virginia.

At the time of its launch, GeoEye-1 was the world’s highest resolution commercial earth-imaging satellite.^[10] GeoEye-1 was manufactured inGilbert, Arizona by General Dynamics and launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The first image was returned on October 7, of Kutztown University in Pennsylvania.^[11]

Google, which has its logo on the side of the rocket, has exclusive online mapping use of its data. While GeoEye-1 is capable of imagery with details the size of 41 cm (16 in), that resolution will only be available to the US government. Google will have access to details of 50 cm (20 in). Prior maximum commercial imagery was 60 centimeters (24 in).^[12]

Edited February 25, 2015 by qxcontinuum

[JesseCuster]

read again

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeoEye-1

GeoEye-1 provides 0.41 m (16 in) panchromatic and 1.65 m (5.4 ft) multispectral imagery in 15.2 km (9.4 mi) swaths. The spacecraft is intended for a sun-synchronous orbit at an altitude of 681 km (423 mi) and an inclination of 98 degrees, with a 10:30 a.m. equator crossing time. GeoEye-1 can image up to 60 degrees off nadir. It is operated out of Dulles, Virginia.

At the time of its launch, GeoEye-1 was the world’s highest resolution commercial earth-imaging satellite.^[10] GeoEye-1 was manufactured inGilbert, Arizona by General Dynamics and launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The first image was returned on October 7, of Kutztown University in Pennsylvania.^[11]

Google, which has its logo on the side of the rocket, has exclusive online mapping use of its data. While GeoEye-1 is capable of imagery with details the size of 41 cm (16 in), that resolution will only be available to the US government. Google will have access to details of 50 cm (20 in). Prior maximum commercial imagery was 60 centimeters (24 in).^[12]

Did you read your own link? GeoEye1 was designed and manufactured by General Dynamics. Google have merely purchased rights to use its imagery at a maximum resolution of 50cm/pixel. How does that square with your claim that Google have invented cheaper optics than NASA taking better satellite imagery than anything NASA has? the maximum resolution of the GeoEye camera you mention to is less (40cm vs. 30cm) than that on the HiRISE NASA camera onboard the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter which can take images at up to 30cm/pixel and which is hundreds of millions of miles away taking better imagery on another freaking planet than the images you are talking about, which have merely been purchased by Google, not invented by them, and not taken by optics invented by Google as you claimed.

What Google optics are you comparing with with what NASA optics? Inquiring minds want to know...

While you're at it, I'd love to know what make and model of camera you had in highschool pre-1995 that was 2 megapixels in resolution...

Edited February 25, 2015 by JesseCuster

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

Qxcontinuum many of the highest resolution images on Google Earth is actually taken from relatively low flying airplanes, not satellites.

Google Earth uses whatever images are available, that is why the resolution varies from place to place. If Google had their own satellite the resolution would be the same everywhere - wouldn't it ?

[toast]

read again

As the resolution of the rover cams seems to be yr favorite candy in general, I would like to say, read first:

A number of factors led to the use of 2MP sensors in the main imaging cameras used on NASA's Mars rover, Curiosity, says the project manager

responsible for their development. The slow data rates available for broadcasting images back to Earth and the team's familiarity with that family of

sensors played a part, says Malin Space Science Systems' Mike Ravine, but the biggest factor was the specifications being fixed as far back as 2004.

Multi-shot panoramas will see the cameras deliver high-res images, he explains, but not the 3D movies Hollywood director James Cameron had wanted.

'There's a popular belief that projects like this are going to be very advanced but there are things that mitigate against that. These designs were proposed

in 2004, and you don't get to propose one specification and then go off and develop something else. 2MP with 8GB of flash [memory] didn't sound too bad

in 2004. But it doesn't compare well to what you get in an iPhone today.'

Full article: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0353350380/curiosity-interview-with-malin-space-science-systems-mike-ravine

Maybe this article will help you to understand that the rovers did not have a kind of snap-on clutch where the newest Canon/Nikon/Panasonic DSLR

gets attached 4 hrs before the lift off of the carrier.

[toast]

no it doesn't but it is my money invested there... so i care how they are being spent!

Ok, if you are an USA citizen, then your share (by your paid taxes) on the MSL hardware is approximately 14USD in total and so approximately

1,74USD per year for the time period 2004-2011. If you feel that yr 14USD have been spent wrong, pls feel free to get in contact with the mission

hardware development responsible managers. You will find full contact details of these persons on the NASA HP.

As I`m very interested in the communications, please be so kind and open a new thread (in the Jokes&Humor section) to keep us posted about.

Thank you.

[qxcontinuum]

Did you read your own link? GeoEye1 was designed and manufactured by General Dynamics. Google have merely purchased rights to use its imagery at a maximum resolution of 50cm/pixel. How does that square with your claim that Google have invented cheaper optics than NASA taking better satellite imagery than anything NASA has? the maximum resolution of the GeoEye camera you mention to is less (40cm vs. 30cm) than that on the HiRISE NASA camera onboard the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter which can take images at up to 30cm/pixel and which is hundreds of millions of miles away taking better imagery on another freaking planet than the images you are talking about, which have merely been purchased by Google, not invented by them, and not taken by optics invented by Google as you claimed.

What Google optics are you comparing with with what NASA optics? Inquiring minds want to know...

While you're at it, I'd love to know what make and model of camera you had in highschool pre-1995 that was 2 megapixels in resolution...

from the same article;

Google, which has its logo on the side of the rocket, has exclusive online mapping use of its data. While GeoEye-1 is capable of imagery with details the size of 41 cm (16 in), that resolution will only be available to the US government. Google will have access to details of 50 cm (20 in). Prior maximum commercial imagery was 60 centimeters (24 in).^[12]

The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and Google both paid $502 million for the satellite and upgrades to GeoEye's four ground stations.^[13]

So you don't think that since google has paid so much money having it's own logo on it, owns it or at least half of it ?

IN the same time you might want to read the following article about google purchasing the Skybox mini satelites capable of taking pictures at higher resolutions.

http://www.theatlant...-skybox/371531/

Here is a snapshot to the quality of the videos taken

http://www.theatlant...m-space/282684/

Edited February 25, 2015 by qxcontinuum