It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I suppose different people see different things, I don't see any pipe-looking thing on the original photo.
originally posted by: wildespace
originally posted by: amazing
No, the silly thing is yelling it's a rock. Again, you wouldn't do that in a geology class, you would talk about what it actually is, how it formed, what it's worth, why it's unique, what that might indicate as far as water or plate tectonics or volcanic activity, etc. Let's move on from that ignorant statement, shall we.
No, not as long you're assuming I've been ignorant. Wanna discuss/analyse/theorise about this dome from geological and chemical perspective? Be my guest. If it's something that's extremelly odd and never seen before, I'd love to see substantiated arguments and evidence.
The silly thing is to bypass the scientific side of this and simply yell "aliens!"... which many people did both here, UFO forums, and in the MSM articles that popped up about this dome. The yelling that it's a rock is purely in response to those people. I'm glad you agree that it's most likely to be a natural formation.
According to ArMap we won't see anything more definitive till MAR2016.
Not according to me, according to the this PDS page.
originally posted by: amazing
Probably natural in my opinion but again, but just because someone says it looks artificial does not give you the intellectual authority to yell rocks. Yelling it's a rock is ignorant and unintelligent and close minded and it's trolling. It's just as bad as yelling aliens.
It isn't natural color, as seen by normal human eyes, because the IR, RED, and BG channels are displayed in red, green, and blue colors. [...]
Dust (or indurated dust) is generally the reddest material present and looks reddish in the RGB color and yellow in the IRB color. Coarser-grained materials (sand and rocks) are generally bluer (or sometimes purplish in IRB color) but also relatively dark, except where coated by dust. Frost and ice are also relatively blue, but bright, and often concentrated at the poles or on pole-facing slopes. Some bedrock is also relatively bright and blue, but not as much as frost or ice, and it has distinctive morphologies.
originally posted by: ArMaP
originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
I was. Don't know what your "Hugo" reference is about.
I suppose you didn't notice that the word "Hugo" was a link to this thread.
originally posted by: ArMaP
Zooming in the browser resamples the image, creating a smoother look.
originally posted by: ArMaP
It's on the opening post:
mars.nasa.gov...
Also, here's the link for the left side camera:
mars.nasa.gov...
originally posted by: ArMaP
Until those images are uploaded to the PDS (sol 4073 will be included on the 47th release, scheduled for March 17, 2016) we have only access to the JPGs uploaded to the rovers' site, after the PDS release we can have access to the IMG files that do not suffer from that heavy compression and automatic level correction.
originally posted by: ArMaP
originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
It doesn't just look like smooth rock, however. Anyone viewing these pics can see that this looks like domes. Two large ones, and the smaller thing with the pipe-looking bit attached. That should be worth the time to investigate.
I suppose different people see different things, I don't see any pipe-looking thing on the original photo.
originally posted by: ArMaP
originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
They don't look like rocks, and how would anyone know what else was found, considering that they won't investigate, or, if they do, don't tell us about it? You are assuming they are totally honest and forthcoming.
Different people, different interpretations, to me they look like rocks.
And yes, I am assuming they are being honest, in the same way I am assuming you are being honest on your posts, I always start by accepting people's words, only when they are proven to be liars do I stop trusting them, and I have never seen a lie on a science-related NASA site, only on the sites direct more to the "public relations" side.
originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
Don't know about alive.
Why "Hugo"? Some reference in the thread?
Now that will be handy! Hopefully someone here will take a look at those, for all these odd cases, and see what we can see in them.
It's there, though, and looks as clear not zoomed as it does zoomed. A magnifying glass might help there.
However, I do consider that information can be and is covered up, by various groups for various reasons.
Structures could as easily be ours. Perhaps more has been done than is said, for military purposes. Wouldn't be the first time there! Why should we assume that's limited to this planet?
originally posted by: ArMaP
originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
Don't know about alive.
I don't think it's alive either, but it's one of the most interesting things I have seen on the Mars photos.
Why "Hugo"? Some reference in the thread?
It's the name of Arken's dog.
Now that will be handy! Hopefully someone here will take a look at those, for all these odd cases, and see what we can see in them.
I hope I remember it or that someone reminds me, but I have my doubts, it's a long wait.
It's there, though, and looks as clear not zoomed as it does zoomed. A magnifying glass might help there.
Zooming the image in an image edit program will not resample it, and when resizing most programs have an option not to resample the image. I used PaintShopPro's pixel resize option. In GIMP (freeware) you can do the same with the "None" option of the interpolation section of the Scale Image command, in Photoshop, if I'm not mistaken, it's the "Nearest Neigbor (preserve hard edges)" option in the Image Size command.
However, I do consider that information can be and is covered up, by various groups for various reasons.
I know that's a possibility, but I think that the best way of covering it up would be by not even talking about it, using separate missions for the public and for the hidden reasons.
Structures could as easily be ours. Perhaps more has been done than is said, for military purposes. Wouldn't be the first time there! Why should we assume that's limited to this planet?
I doubt it, unless there's a real threat or lots of money to be gained.
originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: bkfd54
What's that to the right of it?