New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: We've recently made changes to our user database and have removed inactive and spam users. If you can not login, please re-register.

#576 2018-11-29 08:30:27

Tmcom
Member
Registered: 2017-03-02
Posts: 363

Re: The Real Mars

louis wrote:

I've certainly read - and I think this is NASA's position - that (in reverse to Earth) the sky tends to be blue at dawn and twilight but reddish during the day.

Ok, the thing l saw may be the sun setting,  for the blue image, and so forth, but unfortunately NASA is tripping over the mound of BS they have made for themselves, here is an example of this...

https://mars.nasa.gov/resources/22159/i … te=insight

Official NASA site showing this first image....

Jt1okJ7.jpg

jd4EGUC.jpg

And this one which l got from the video showing the descent and first image, (l can promise you that that part showing the real sky color will be removed, hence the reason l took a screen shot).

This image which is the first, totally different colors of the same image.

If the image is color and it is the first then this BS manipulation, is intentional and unnecessary.

We may as well get used to this sort of see spot run hide and seek nonsense, the dumb minority don't want to know, and have been brainwashed for so long the black and white evidence above won't sink in.

In 15 years time all will know.

smile

Offline

#577 2018-11-29 09:37:35

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 2,213

Re: The Real Mars

Why does it have to be a conspiracy that we have a difficult time calibrating the color scale used by the CCD imagers correctly in an environment unlike that of Earth?

If they fully understood the process, then why do you think every one of these missions carries a color calibration palette on it for the cameras to use to calibrate their color settings?

I can at least speak for myself when I say that I really want to know what Mars looks like and I'd be more than willing to chase down every single interesting find or anomaly discovered, but I'm not willing to chalk up each weird thing that a computer or CCD imager does to nefarious government activity.

If our government already knew what Mars was like and that it had alien life on it, then why would NASA keep presenting new opportunities for their censors to "forget" to cover something up?  Don't you think they'd get magic piles of cash from Congress to go investigate if they found conclusive evidence of extraterrestrial life?

That part doesn't make much sense to me.  In light of the recent disclosures on UFO's that even include testimony from military personnel about what they saw, why would they try to hide a tree or a bush on Mars when they're showing gun camera footage from fighter jets yankin and bankin with UFO's that are more maneuverable and faster than anything we have in the inventory?

A cactus on Mars would frighten the public too much, but a flying object here on Earth that looks like it came straight outta Independence Day wouldn't?

Seems implausible to me, but I don't have enough info.  That one photo you guys posted looked exactly like a garden variety tree and that's something that would cause me to steer Curiosity towards it to figure out what it was, but the rest are so blurry that I don't know what to make of them.  They could all mean something or they could just be the effects of poor calibration or radiation that's fried the electronics.  That's why some of us want to send humans.  If there's something on Mars that's moving, then we'd surely find it if we sent humans.  Until then, thanks for posting the interesting finds.

Offline

#578 2018-11-29 11:19:06

louis
Member
From: UK
Registered: 2008-03-24
Posts: 4,031

Re: The Real Mars

A lot of vision comes down to what is happening in the brain rather than the landscape. I remember when we were bathed in an eerie orange glow (after a Saharan dust storm blew over the UK) after half an hour your "eyes" (ie brain) started to adjust and although you could see the orange glow was everywhere, nevertheless the brain was kind of differentiating all the orange tinted colours to accord with expectations. Vision is a complex thing!

kbd512 wrote:

Why does it have to be a conspiracy that we have a difficult time calibrating the color scale used by the CCD imagers correctly in an environment unlike that of Earth?

If they fully understood the process, then why do you think every one of these missions carries a color calibration palette on it for the cameras to use to calibrate their color settings?

I can at least speak for myself when I say that I really want to know what Mars looks like and I'd be more than willing to chase down every single interesting find or anomaly discovered, but I'm not willing to chalk up each weird thing that a computer or CCD imager does to nefarious government activity.

If our government already knew what Mars was like and that it had alien life on it, then why would NASA keep presenting new opportunities for their censors to "forget" to cover something up?  Don't you think they'd get magic piles of cash from Congress to go investigate if they found conclusive evidence of extraterrestrial life?

That part doesn't make much sense to me.  In light of the recent disclosures on UFO's that even include testimony from military personnel about what they saw, why would they try to hide a tree or a bush on Mars when they're showing gun camera footage from fighter jets yankin and bankin with UFO's that are more maneuverable and faster than anything we have in the inventory?

A cactus on Mars would frighten the public too much, but a flying object here on Earth that looks like it came straight outta Independence Day wouldn't?

Seems implausible to me, but I don't have enough info.  That one photo you guys posted looked exactly like a garden variety tree and that's something that would cause me to steer Curiosity towards it to figure out what it was, but the rest are so blurry that I don't know what to make of them.  They could all mean something or they could just be the effects of poor calibration or radiation that's fried the electronics.  That's why some of us want to send humans.  If there's something on Mars that's moving, then we'd surely find it if we sent humans.  Until then, thanks for posting the interesting finds.


Let's Go to Mars...Google on: Fast Track to Mars blogspot.com

Offline

#579 2018-11-29 20:35:45

Tmcom
Member
Registered: 2017-03-02
Posts: 363

Re: The Real Mars

kbd512 wrote:

Why does it have to be a conspiracy that we have a difficult time calibrating the color scale used by the CCD imagers correctly in an environment unlike that of Earth?

Because Mars is the only planet in our solar system with this issue!

Saturns moon, no prob's, Venus and the Russian probes, no prob's, but Mars, must be overrun with ghosts that keep messing up,.....

This is obvious, we know as a fact now, that Mars can support liquid water at ground level, and there is very good evidence, (well the water droplets and wet ground l found previously, could have only come from rain) slam dunk evidence that Mars air pressure is Earth like, which means NASA is lying.

I would suggest you go back to that one, (water droplets on the rover) before commenting further here!

If they fully understood the process, then why do you think every one of these missions carries a color calibration palette on it for the cameras to use to calibrate their color settings?

I can at least speak for myself when I say that I really want to know what Mars looks like and I'd be more than willing to chase down every single interesting find or anomaly discovered, but I'm not willing to chalk up each weird thing that a computer or CCD imager does to nefarious government activity.

Lol, this conversation gets funnier and funnier, maybe the Russians should take over, they landed several times on Venus, with crippling pressures and open oven temp's, and for the 40 odd minutes before it succumbed, it took perfect color images of the landscape.

If our government already knew what Mars was like and that it had alien life on it, then why would NASA keep presenting new opportunities for their censors to "forget" to cover something up?  Don't you think they'd get magic piles of cash from Congress to go investigate if they found conclusive evidence of extraterrestrial life?

No, NASA is US military run, and they don't want disclosure yet, as that would lead to free energy and denting crude oil profits, (100 trillion dollars of crude oil profits in the ground, kills the magic piles of cash idea, as does crashing the stockmarket.

That part doesn't make much sense to me.  In light of the recent disclosures on UFO's that even include testimony from military personnel about what they saw, why would they try to hide a tree or a bush on Mars when they're showing gun camera footage from fighter jets yankin and bankin with UFO's that are more maneuverable and faster than anything we have in the inventory?

Because jets following a UFO, with CGI can be faked, and the skeptics can dismiss it. The UFO l found following the Apollo atranuats is a slam dunk in regards to NASA, and Buzz fibbing, (and impossible for a 10 ton panel to reverse and play catchup)

A cactus on Mars would frighten the public too much, but a flying object here on Earth that looks like it came straight outta Independence Day wouldn't?

Seems implausible to me, but I don't have enough info.  That one photo you guys posted looked exactly like a garden variety tree and that's something that would cause me to steer Curiosity towards it to figure out what it was, but the rest are so blurry that I don't know what to make of them.  They could all mean something or they could just be the effects of poor calibration or radiation that's fried the electronics.  That's why some of us want to send humans.  If there's something on Mars that's moving, then we'd surely find it if we sent humans.  Until then, thanks for posting the interesting finds.

Ok, but ponder this, when l found water droplets on the rover, with the only explanation being that the rover sprung a leak, (l checked, the rover is working perfectly, and radiator coolent leaking into the electronics would show something) then rain is the only explanation.

That image should be front page news, but we hear nothing?

NASA is telling individuals which can see it without the monkey mind kicking in, that Mars is Earthlike and inhabited, but doing it in such a way that the monkeys can dismiss it for the most part.

But if l showed the water droplet image elsewhere, (solid proof) l can guarantee you that anger, and every demented reason under the sun would ensure. Or l would be attacked for posting it, or preschool replys would occur.

Maybe some alternatives, but overall anger, and stupid comebacks.

People for the most part just don't want to know, they want to believe NASA never lies, and Mars is a dead rock, and that counter evidence can always be dismissed.

But evidence cannot be dismissed, and not buried forever. NASA will show a HD image of a tree on Mars, but only when third party interests are making it so difficualt to bury that they may as well get it over with, before Musk,etc tells everyone.

A lot of vision comes down to what is happening in the brain rather than the landscape. I remember when we were bathed in an eerie orange glow (after a Saharan dust storm blew over the UK) after half an hour your "eyes" (ie brain) started to adjust and although you could see the orange glow was everywhere, nevertheless the brain was kind of differentiating all the orange tinted colours to accord with expectations. Vision is a complex thing!

And the human mind, unfortunately.

hmm

Offline

#580 2018-11-30 19:00:45

louis
Member
From: UK
Registered: 2008-03-24
Posts: 4,031

Re: The Real Mars

Another excellent video from Joe White. 

To my eye, the "Gravestone" is a very compelling image. The rounded arch relief is definitely to be seen in the original and it does look like some sort of pattern therein.

Edit: Sorry see I omitted the link!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aygNLe8pssw&t=174s

Last edited by louis (2018-12-04 10:59:26)


Let's Go to Mars...Google on: Fast Track to Mars blogspot.com

Offline

#581 2018-12-04 04:24:13

Tmcom
Member
Registered: 2017-03-02
Posts: 363

Re: The Real Mars

VRIDSUT.jpg

Two more good examples of clouds with the potential of forming rain, (according to NASA mars only has wispy, high altitude clouds that have no water bearing properties).

Yeah, right.

smile

Last edited by Tmcom (2018-12-04 04:25:08)

Offline

#582 2018-12-04 10:58:04

louis
Member
From: UK
Registered: 2008-03-24
Posts: 4,031

Re: The Real Mars

Those look like rocks not clouds.Has something got lost in translation?

Tmcom wrote:

https://i.imgur.com/VRIDSUT.jpg

Two more good examples of clouds with the potential of forming rain, (according to NASA mars only has wispy, high altitude clouds that have no water bearing properties).

Yeah, right.

smile


Let's Go to Mars...Google on: Fast Track to Mars blogspot.com

Offline

#583 2018-12-04 19:22:53

louis
Member
From: UK
Registered: 2008-03-24
Posts: 4,031

Re: The Real Mars

Not sure I posted this before (might have done), but this is one of the best artefact finds on Mars because it is so close to the camera  and the detail is quite clear ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ao_pjR … J9yKFvYlUG

How many stones or rocks would you have to look at on Earth before you turned up at before you turned up one with  such a perfect facial alignment of nose, ear, mouth, chin, hair and eye, even eyebrow? I would suggest on average a lot more than the Rovers have looked at. I have never come across one and I've always had an eye for interesting pebbles and stones. I've never come across one that looks anything like a face or facial profile, let alone a face this good.

This is a lot more than pareidolia. No one is straining to see a facial profile here. It is perfectly clear. The issue is whether, like monkeys typing a Shakespeare play, this has happened randomly or whether it is indeed an artefact create by some sort of intelligent being.


Let's Go to Mars...Google on: Fast Track to Mars blogspot.com

Offline

#584 2018-12-04 20:10:49

Tmcom
Member
Registered: 2017-03-02
Posts: 363

Re: The Real Mars

louis wrote:

Those look like rocks not clouds.Has something got lost in translation?

Tmcom wrote:

https://i.imgur.com/VRIDSUT.jpg

Two more good examples of clouds with the potential of forming rain, (according to NASA mars only has wispy, high altitude clouds that have no water bearing properties).

Yeah, right.

smile

True, not the best example, but the bottom one does show clouds with underlying dark areas, or a build up of water vapour, (on the left).

And the video face, good try, but on closer inspection the left eye, mouth are the rover being reflec, back.

cool

Offline

#585 2018-12-06 03:04:49

Tmcom
Member
Registered: 2017-03-02
Posts: 363

Re: The Real Mars

I badly wanted to say that this was a martian rabbit, but it is a ref, rock, no more, sniff.

T40dlQE.jpg

hmm

Offline

#586 2018-12-06 18:45:38

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 13,342

Re: The Real Mars

I love the shark fin... you can see where the water lines were in the image for what mars had before losing most of it. Where it looks to have covered the peak of the hill

Offline

#587 2018-12-10 04:52:23

Tmcom
Member
Registered: 2017-03-02
Posts: 363

Re: The Real Mars

fnGf5iy.jpg

More signs of water or recent rainfall.

x78D9B0.jpg

This one interesting structures, with the middle one being my favorite, (distant white buildings).

cool

Offline

#588 2018-12-10 20:36:11

Tmcom
Member
Registered: 2017-03-02
Posts: 363

Re: The Real Mars

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn … -rolls-on/

This crap gets funnier by the day.

NASA can't explain why one of its rovers has what looks like a torrential downpour on the rover which cleans 70% of the dust off its panels, while the other one doens't, (well Opportunity is dead, but when it was sending back stuff).

Might have something to do with the water droplets l saw all over the more recent one recently and the wet ground, and the storm clouds and......

When l come here l feel like that l am writing a doctorate in what Mars is really like, and elsewhere, writing a Mars 101, for preschoolers.

Some are determined to believe that Mar is dead, eventhough the data NASA is giving humanity now, is full of contradictions and down right impossible events.

I don't see what the big deal is anyway, Mars is the second habitable planet in our solar system, that we know of, that can support life.

I guess that it is the supporting life part that keeps a ball and chain around common sense.

And you will notice that they say that the dust was baked on pretty well, or in other words a mini cyclone would have been the only way to get 70% of it off, but heavy rain and wind for a long enough period could easily have achieved the result.

And NASA calls it a Carwash, just for the irony of it all, (they know that it is rain and wind, as we do).

hmm

Last edited by Tmcom (Yesterday 04:49:32)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB