Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Varelse

Latest Pic from Mars. Where's Waldo?

176 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

seeder

Thanks seeder, for both drawing my attention to this, and also providing a link to a high (?) res version... here.

snip

:tu: Good job matey!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AZDZ

Apparently they're being imported!

deepfried%20abomination_zpsu9dg0hya.png

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zeek wulfe

NASA does move the rover in for closer shots of interesting phenomena. The problem is that if the thing of interest does not fit the NASA narrative the pictures are heavily edited or simply not released. Space shuttle missions had a controller whose only job was to sit in front of the big screen with his hand on the "kill" switch or the switch that suddenly made

the screen 'snowy.' A perfect example of this is the 'snow' that showed up during the mission in the early 90's when the shuttle paid out 12 miles of cable and then (what a surprise) broke. Views of the broken cable show indistinct blobs floating around. Incidently, if the Great Eastern paddle wheeler could lay 2000 miles of telegraph cable unbroken in the mid-19th century, how is it that the space shuttle failed after only twelve miles with better materials?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zeek wulfe

NASA does move the rover in for closer shots of interesting phenomena. The problem is that if the thing of interest does not fit the NASA narrative the pictures are heavily edited or simply not released. Space shuttle missions had a controller whose only job was to sit in front of the big screen with his hand on the "kill" switch or the switch that suddenly made

the screen 'snowy.' A perfect example of this is the 'snow' that showed up during the mission in the early 90's when the shuttle paid out 12 miles of cable and then (what a surprise) broke. Views of the broken cable show indistinct blobs floating around. Incidently, if the Great Eastern paddle wheeler could lay 2000 miles of telegraph cable unbroken in the mid-19th century, how is it that the space shuttle failed after only twelve miles with better materials?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aftermath

Thanks seeder, for both drawing my attention to this, and also providing a link to a high (?) res version... here.

First up, a few comments - I'm being lazy and not bothering to check if there is a better, uncompressed version - this image is most certainly badly compromised by jpeg artifacting. In particular look at the horribly obvious little 8x8 pixel 'quantised' squares that are so typical of a high-compression / low-quality jpeg. Here's a PROPERLY enlarged (ie NO fancy enlarging algorithm, just a pixel by pixel enlargement) and UN-processed version. I've crudely drawn some squares around some of the jpeg block boundaries (click to enlarge):

post-95887-0-95850000-1438862193_thumb.j

Note that every one of those squares is just a vaguely close match to what the camera *actually* recorded - JPEG uses various techniques, eg using the same squares over and over, or using squares that can be generated by very compact maths. What does that mean, in reality? Simple, it means that you CANNOT trust any small low contrast shapes to be accurate. Even when viewed at 100% (where the image will only be about 5" across), you can see the false detail. Enlarging it is asking for trouble - it is NOT of good enough quality to enlarge (as should be clear from how awful it looks), let alone to add contrast or sharpening (both of which add false detail on top of the already false detail..).

For anyone who really sees a crab, or indeed anything terrestrial in that mush, I'd simply ask you to do a simple experiment.

You're going to need a good quality image processor that allows you to enlarge an image WITHOUT interpolating (ie making up new pixels and inserting them), but that also allows you turn interpolation on.... I use XnView - in the options you can turn 'high quality' enlarging off and on. Off means true enlarging so you get to see the original pixels. ON means you are seeing false data that Xnview makes up to fill in the details with realistic looking data... Good for faces and pics of flowers, NOT good for analysing unknown objects.

Look at the image at 100%, and then slowly enlarge it and watch the area in question. When interpolation is OFF, at some zoom levels the shape seems a little more defined, but at no point is it convincing. Then turn interpolation ON ('high quality') and watch - the 'crab effect' becomes quite strong, and more and more false detail gets added as you zoom in.... If you play with the sliders and add contrast and sharpening you can virtually turn it into whatever takes your fancy..

Face it, when we pore over gigabytes of images, there *will* be some shapes that look a bit odd, just like seeing animals in the clouds... And that 'enhanced' image that is being circulated has very obviously had detail added to it. Probably not deliberately, but very much INCOMPETENTLY, I'm afraid. Step away from Photoshop, dude who did that...

Well done. :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seeder

Incidently, if the Great Eastern paddle wheeler could lay 2000 miles of telegraph cable unbroken in the mid-19th century, how is it that the space shuttle failed after only twelve miles with better materials?

Did the paddle steamer travel at 17,150 miles per hour?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seeder

NASA does move the rover in for closer shots of interesting phenomena. The problem is that if the thing of interest does not fit the NASA narrative

And what is the NASA narrative exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seeder

NASA does move the rover in for closer shots of interesting phenomena. The problem is that if the thing of interest does not fit the NASA narrative the pictures are heavily edited or simply not released. Space shuttle missions had a controller whose only job was to sit in front of the big screen with his hand on the "kill" switch or the switch that suddenly made

the screen 'snowy.'

When transmitting data from Mars, there is no need for a kill switch, the images dont exactly download instantly you know

The data rate direct-to-Earth varies from about 12,000 bits per second to 3,500 bits per second (roughly a third as fast as a standard home modem). The data rate to the orbiters is a constant 128,000 bits per second (4 times faster than a home modem). An orbiter passes over the rover and is in the vicinity of the sky to communicate with the rovers for about eight minutes at a time, per sol. In that time, about 60 megabits of data (about 1/100 of a CD) can be transmitted to an orbiter. That same 60 megabits would take between 1.5 and 5 hours to transmit direct to Earth. The rovers can only transmit direct-to-Earth for at most three hours a day due to power and thermal limitations, even though Earth may be in view much longer.

http://mars.nasa.gov/mer/mission/comm_data.html

Edited by seeder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

NASA does move the rover in for closer shots of interesting phenomena. The problem is that if the thing of interest does not fit the NASA narrative the pictures are heavily edited or simply not released. Space shuttle missions had a controller whose only job was to sit in front of the big screen with his hand on the "kill" switch or the switch that suddenly made

the screen 'snowy.' A perfect example of this is the 'snow' that showed up during the mission in the early 90's when the shuttle paid out 12 miles of cable and then (what a surprise) broke. Views of the broken cable show indistinct blobs floating around. Incidently, if the Great Eastern paddle wheeler could lay 2000 miles of telegraph cable unbroken in the mid-19th century, how is it that the space shuttle failed after only twelve miles with better materials?

Can you show us your proof of the bolded? BTW, your telegraph cable to tether comparison is really absurd, do you realize that? First, as said above, the cable was attached to a space-borne platform traveling in a vacuum at 17K+ miles an hour and its job was not to transmit telegraph signals but to generate electricity. So different mission and different environment. Also, a cable laying ship has little concern for weight as it doesn't cost $27,000.00 per pound to launch it so the tether was designed to different standards and needs than an undersea telegraph cable therefore completely different materials, design considerations and mission requirements. Finally, the failure was found to be that the cable was melted by an electrical current, not sheered by tension, as you are clumsily alluding to, so different causal factor for the failure. (To anyone interested (that wouldn't be zeek) here is a link to an in-depth analysis of the tether failure).

As you can see, or maybe not, there really is nothing comparable between a cable laying ship with undersea telegraph cable and a space shuttle with a 12 mile tether designed to generate electricity in the vacuum of space. I have to ask, what woo site were you visiting that used this as an apt comparison? Did they discuss the failure or just ignorantly make the comparison?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zeek wulfe

I made a reply to anti-woo magician, the 'man in black' lookalike, and Shakespeare-like it was only to have it disappear when I pushed the "post" button. I wept!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timothy

Apparently they're being imported!

deepfried%20abomination_zpsu9dg0hya.png

This made me laugh! Hence repost.

Apologies if the humour is not yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TonopahRick

If it weren't for all the CT's on the net I believe life would be quite boring. Although sometimes things do get a bit stretched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs

The problem is that if the thing of interest does not fit the NASA narrative the pictures are heavily edited or simply not released. Space shuttle missions had a controller whose only job was to sit in front of the big screen with his hand on the "kill" switch or the switch that suddenly made the screen 'snowy.'

And you have evidence for this? Please give it, and if you think this lame attempt to handwave an example is it:

A perfect example of this is the 'snow' that showed up during the mission in the early 90's when the shuttle paid out 12 miles of cable and then (what a surprise) broke.

you have another think coming... So, just show us that footage - it's on Youtube, properly described and anotated, right?

Or do you just make stuff up?

Views of the broken cable show indistinct blobs floating around.

Oh, look, I'd love to take your word for it... but NO.

Cite all this, Zeek.

Now. (if I was you I'd run and hide.. not because the MIB are comin' for you, but because I and many others here know what it is that you are very poorly trying to describe, and it isn't anything like what you are waffling on about.)

Or you could politely apologise for getting it all wrong..

Or you could do some genuine research on it. May I suggest that you might find a member of this very forum, Jim Oberg, might be a very valuable starting point. Google "James Oberg STS-75".. in my Google, James' site comes up as the third result.

Or you could just ignore reality and keep your credibility where it currently is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zeek wulfe

I would like to take my critics by the hand and lead them to the truth, but as the late Newton Minnow once observed, television is a "vast wasteland." Substitute 'cyber space' for television and one learns that the inarticulate is rapidly becoming the norm whilst the literate, once common, is morphing dodo-like into extinction. I repeated the words and concepts spoken in error by a guide at JPL during a recent spring open house. This person, overwhelmed by the attention had allowed her mouth to overload her brain. She was immediately shut up by her companion. Those of us standing in the hot SoCal sun were stunned despite the 'clarifying' remarks later offered. This is in reference to the NASA protocol/narrative about Mars...namely, that Mars is not now nor has ever been visited or inhabited by humans, humanoids, space aliens or intelligences of any kind. This protocol could change, but for the moment the airbrush artists will remain and particularly interesting photos unreleased. zw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Space Commander Travis

Oh right, so you've got proof that humans have visited Mars because you watched a viedo on youtube, is what you mean?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

I would like to take my critics by the hand and lead them to the truth, but as the late Newton Minnow once observed, television is a "vast wasteland." Substitute 'cyber space' for television and one learns that the inarticulate is rapidly becoming the norm whilst the literate, once common, is morphing dodo-like into extinction.

I agree with you, to a point, zeek, but usually guys like you run away from here when there ridiculous claims are fully debunked and their ignorance fully illuminated for all to see. You're taking care of this all by yourself, however, because to date, you've offered no evidence for your wild claims.

I repeated the words and concepts spoken in error by a guide at JPL during a recent spring open house. This person, overwhelmed by the attention had allowed her mouth to overload her brain. She was immediately shut up by her companion. Those of us standing in the hot SoCal sun were stunned despite the 'clarifying' remarks later offered.

You boys were stunned zeek? Really? You were stunned that some college kid doing a summer gig at JPL goofed up her presentation? Here is a hint for you and your chums. zeek, tour guides at JPL aren't privy to whatever little secrets you and your crew think JPL is hiding from you.

This is in reference to the NASA protocol/narrative about Mars...namely, that Mars is not now nor has ever been visited or inhabited by humans, humanoids, space aliens or intelligences of any kind. This protocol could change, but for the moment the airbrush artists will remain and particularly interesting photos unreleased. zw

They don't use airbrushing on photos any longer zeek, just sayin'. You do realize that NASA/JPL could simply not release any photos don't you? Nah, that probably never entered your mind, such as it is,did it? Try harder, zeek, because you aren't doing well here with your silly claims and I hope you and your crew of "stunned" seekers of woo didn't harass that poor kid at JPL like you guys harass former astronauts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seeder

And what is the NASA narrative exactly?

Strangely I got this answered via a pm....I will take the liberty of posting the pm reply, seeing as it was asked publicly

The NASA narrative is...there is not now, nor has there ever been a human, humanoid or space alien presence on Mars. Any evidence to the contrary no matter if inane, lunatic, silly or scientifically interesting (or troubling) will be ignored or debunked. Anomalies, laughable ones will be shown, but those posing a threat to the narrative will be studied deeply in secret with nothing released to the public except in broad and meaningless generalities. JPL in Pasadena, not far from California Institute of Technology, has an open house every spring. The place is flooded with visitors. Guides and docents giving directions, information and showing space hardware are all over. Sometimes guides let their mouths overload their brains and the above paragraph (paraphrased) popped out in my hearing. ZW

Well now, NASA are actively looking for life, and signs of past life etc, the next rover even more so. Even nasa suspect Mars could have once had life, albeit bacterial/microbial

On December 9, 2013, NASA reported that, based on evidence from the Curiosity rover studying Aeolis Palus, Gale Crater contained an ancient freshwater lake which could have been a hospitable environment for microbial life.

https://en.wikipedia...i/Water_on_Mars

The NASA narrative is...there is not now, nor has there ever been a human, humanoid or space alien presence on Mars

This makes total sense, a being from Mars would be a Martian, not a human, but an alien presence on Mars? There is alien machinery on Mars, and a fair bit of alien debris.

We know this, as we sent it there

.

.

Edited by seeder
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zeek wulfe

Gracious, nerves seem a bit frayed when I mentioned goings on at JPL. The 'guide' blabbing secrets had gray hair, a turkey neck and thick spectacles. She also was smooth using scientific terminology, mathematical and chemical phraseology, and, clearly was comfortable describing JPL's mission. This person was not a young, pretty guide/intern from Pasadena City College moonlighting at JPL while considering the Rose Parade queen pageant...should she enter as a contestant???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Space Commander Travis

So what were these secrets she was unauthorisedly blabbing? That Nasa had in fact already visited Mars, or that they had discovered life there, and, for some reason that's never been adequately explained by those who hold such theories, it's been Suppressed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seeder

Some people forget that India also has a probe round Mars....taking photos, etc.. just as Europe's ESA does...

Its not just Nasa up there now is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anomalocaris

Gracious, nerves seem a bit frayed when I mentioned goings on at JPL. The 'guide' blabbing secrets had gray hair, a turkey neck and thick spectacles. She also was smooth using scientific terminology, mathematical and chemical phraseology, and, clearly was comfortable describing JPL's mission. This person was not a young, pretty guide/intern from Pasadena City College moonlighting at JPL while considering the Rose Parade queen pageant...should she enter as a contestant???

As Merc14 said, you need evidence. Without that, this is just another woo woo tantrum.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PersonFromPorlock

Wait a minute... if it's got Jesus's face on it, what's it doing on Mars instead of eBay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

Gracious, nerves seem a bit frayed when I mentioned goings on at JPL.

You seem to have a penchant for misreading situations don't you zeek? First the tour guide misspeaking as seen by you and your crew as some world changing peek into JLP's inner workings and now you think you have frazzled some nerves. Nerves aren't frazzled, zeek, we are simply demanding you provide details and evidence of your wild claims and you refuse to do so. You can call it whatever you like but the demands won't stop.

The 'guide' blabbing secrets had gray hair, a turkey neck and thick spectacles. She also was smooth using scientific terminology, mathematical and chemical phraseology, and, clearly was comfortable describing JPL's mission. This person was not a young, pretty guide/intern from Pasadena City College moonlighting at JPL while considering the Rose Parade queen pageant...should she enter as a contestant???

There you go zeek! See, you gave us some details to work with and now we can converse. Just what do you think this person's role was at JPL, deeply embedded physicist working on the secrets of the universe or retired science teacher doing volunteer work at JPL to pass the time and give back to teh community? Or was she something else entirely?

BTW, did you and your crew attack and harrass this senior citizen and demand answers or not?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish

Every time I see new pics of mars I expect to see a sandworm.

"The spice must flow."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zeek wulfe

The point is well taken about the guide at JPL. I visited the clean room where landers and satellites were constructed. The views are from the second or third floor, down and through thick glass. A lot of the tools and equipment would not be out of place in an appliance or car repair shop. Everything is super clean but not all white like a hospital. I have a university degree and this woman spoke with the authority of a professor with long experience and intimate knowledge of the subject. My guess is that she had some connection with Cal Tech. Her companion interrupted a couple of times almost like a 'minder' with 'clarifications' concerning NASA's Mars protocols. She spoke for about 20 minutes. She and her minder walked away and I could see that they were having an animated conversation not altogether friendly. .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.