Mars Rover Image w City and Large River. NASA/JPL Image Restored

I for one enjoyed the video. I've been sitting at the capital city Amtrak station waiting for my train to take me back to Gotham and it was really fun for an amateur video. I would say nearing the end however the presentator kept saying "see! Here's another!" and would outline a random rock and I would have no clue to what space oddity he was referring.

So as somebody who obsessed with food I do have a question. Do these rock critters just eat other rocks or how does that work?

Like is there a can of left over pork and beans in one of structures with a nice toscana or what?

Overall, a little long but entertaining!

Thanx

a reply to: Strebor

Hale Crater civilization.

www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

From this;



to this;

I was finally able to find the original photos used to make the "river" part of the panorama, they were taken on sol 64.

So, this image
comes (mostly, as it was taken from the panorama it includes smaller parts of other photos) from this one.


According to this helpful site we can see that the camera was pointing northeast, and that the hills in the background are some rocky hills slightly north of Aeolis Mons.



According to Google Earth, those rocky hills were some 8 miles from the rover at the time.

Now that we know the area seen in the image we can look for high resolution photos of that area, and we can find several HiRISE photos, like this one, with a resolution of 27.3 cm per pixel, good enough to show any city, but there's nothing like that there.

PS: I was wrong about the hills in my first and second look, I should be more careful.

a reply to: ArMaP

You certainly did your homework and I agree, there isn't a city or what looks like one.

However, the "River" still looks like a river, even from that distance. But for the sake of the discussion, I'll say a smooth dried up river bed.

Your first image you posted did look like a river, but I know it wasn't, it looked more hazy and not like the other image.

8 miles is good distance because that means we now havw "some kind" of scale.

a reply to: ArMaP

Nice work... obviously the top image is ummm, 'restored'. The bottom pic in your post is still an awesome image of a distant world...

Good god, that video was awful, not only did I think I'd tuned in to an episode of Stingray with "Phones" doing the audio but the Star Trek style only confirmed how out there the guy was.

If the stuff was so easy to spot why did he need to false colour outline it, he claims the image was changed to hide this stuff but its just inventive colouring on his part but the bit that destroyed the whole kooky content was he admits to using filters and sharpening tools which clearly are seen by the horrendous number of artifacts created all over the image in the shape of squares / rectangles with lines on. These are created by the program as it tries to best guess the sharpening and the application of non lossless mask, just imagine the UFO video's where its over zoomed on a small point of light and the camera generates weird shapes and moving masses but the fact its got no mathematical way to create the right image from an over zoomed digital zoom. The same ideal works when sharpening if its way over done like here but despite knowing this he tries to say the weird squares are parts on the bottom of an alien ship...

Seriously...

Utter hogwash...I'm still yet to see an image apparently from Mars that isn't just a rock and lighting miss direction. At least some of those are not half bad tries, what this guy is saying and showing is snake oil.

Was / is there anything on Mars, I really have no clue, are we even seeing the real surface on Mars or somewhere else but as proof of a past civilisation on Mars or proof of bio entities riding flying scooters, NAH...Not even close..

Proof that "Phones" has too much time on his hands and an over creative imagination...

originally posted by: Arnie123
You certainly did your homework and I agree, there isn't a city or what looks like one.

That's one thing that I think everyone that is really interested in this topic should do, there are lots of information available for those that look for it. Speculation is good, if based on facts.

However, the "River" still looks like a river, even from that distance. But for the sake of the discussion, I'll say a smooth dried up river bed.

It does, and you can even see in the satellite photos that there is a strip of dust and dunes around Aeolis Mons (at least to the north of Aeolis Mons, the area Curiosity is in), and scientists think that water was entering the crater from the north, so it's natural that some sediments got deposited around Aeolis Mons. Not water itself but the result of flowing water.

a reply to: Strebor

Good Thread Strebor! I liked the video also! Lots of interesting things in Mars pix... Fascinating subject!! Syx...

a reply to: Strebor
What an interesting video.
As an archaeologist, I get a lot of folks who find rocks that appear to the person finding them to be "something." Nine times out of ten they are "just rocks." By the same token, I get many pictures of "sites" that appear to be man-made and yet, upon close inspection turn out to be entirely natural. However----nine times out of ten means that sometimes, occasionally, from time to time, they turn out to be something really interesting.
Thank you for the work you've put in on this study. I've watched the video but don't have the time at present to follow other links offered up. All I can say at this point is that as an archaeologist, I'd surely like to be able to "ground truth" some of the areas from which these images originate.

The video is about 25% awesome 75% I should turn this off. After reading the thread here are my thoughts:

Mars once had lots of water and lots of rocks look weird because they were once under water and the rovers are all where there once was water doing research.



I don't think we should send man to mars for the next proposed missions...I like the idea of studying the moons with oceans underneath their icy surfaces or Titan's methane lakes, which have a higher probability of current alien life.

I also like the idea of setting up a base on the Moon. There is a lot of attention on Mars all of a sudden and I don't know why...

originally posted by: ArMaP
I was finally able to find the original photos used to make the "river" part of the panorama, they were taken on sol 64.

So, this image

comes (mostly, as it was taken from the panorama it includes smaller parts of other photos) from this one.

According to this helpful site we can see that the camera was pointing northeast, and that the hills in the background are some rocky hills slightly north of Aeolis Mons.

According to Google Earth, those rocky hills were some 8 miles from the rover at the time.

Now that we know the area seen in the image we can look for high resolution photos of that area, and we can find several HiRISE photos, like this one, with a resolution of 27.3 cm per pixel, good enough to show any city, but there's nothing like that there.

PS: I was wrong about the hills in my first and second look, I should be more careful.

Well done ArMaP

I enjoyed the video. While I don't agree with all the assertions made, there are certainly many intriguing anomalies to investigate on Mars. Certainly enough to warrant further research and skepticism. S & F, keep up the work Strebor.

Perhaps for his next video, he should explore the teapot orbiting Mars.

This remain's for me after the face on Mars which I consider not disproven to be the best evidence of a city, it is not in my opinion dust devil's and look's to be a carpet bombed city that has suffered absolute devestation akin to hiroshima and nagasaki but with the addition of targeted bombing of building's, the road network appears to still be visible and studying the image for hours is both enlightening and scary.

Most of you are already familiar with MarsRuins.com, some fantastic photo's left for your own interpretation.
www.marsruins.com...
Main page for that site.
www.marsruins.com...

Now here is the point for those that agree that this does look like a genuine destroyed metropolis, what are the chances of two different sentient species coming into being in a single solar system and since that would be highly unlikely on statistical probability alone does that suggest a human or human ancestral origin to these ruins', could the human race or an ancestor have once had a far more advanced civilization which was destroyed almost absolutely and could we be the amnesiac descendant's of survivors from such a cataclysm, natural, war or even extra solar alien attack.

I agree most of the images in the suggested video are merely rock's, some are intriguing to say the least however but flying men on hover bike's and jpeg compression as building's can only harm this subject, when there are images such as the one in the link I have just provided there is no need to make such claim's based on such poor evidence as the road network's and devestation in the image at MarsRuins.com speak's for itself as do many other imates hosted on that site.

Also this earlier thread about the Face on Mars which in my opinion is definitely an Artificial construction and most definitely of a human face in my opinion (despite the lack of a nose) is very interesting and a real gold mine for you to pick over.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

So while I disagree with the video maker on many of his claim's but I don't disagree with all of them, I do believe that someone is sitting on information they do not want us to know, power, greed (potential patent's etc), defence reason's and social engineering are all potential motivation's and remember there are those that even today fear revealing undeniable evidence of alien or former human intelligence and superior civilization to our own today would cause religious and societal collapse as well as shock the economy's, maybe they are right and maybe they are wrong.

The first thing I noticed was the giant leap and bounds in logic... "We think NASA brightened this image and didn't release the original! So we mucked around with it and made it much more like the original, that we haven't seen as NASA didn't release it, remember?"

Then zoom in on the furthest point of the field of view and have fun playing with the pretty patterns! Amazing, yup...

There were some building like materials that we've all already seen, could be rocks or a past civilisation, who knows. I didn't see anything conclusive, unfortunately.

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: ArMaP

You certainly did your homework and I agree, there isn't a city or what looks like one.

However, the "River" still looks like a river, even from that distance. But for the sake of the discussion, I'll say a smooth dried up river bed.

Your first image you posted did look like a river, but I know it wasn't, it looked more hazy and not like the other image.

8 miles is good distance because that means we now havw "some kind" of scale.

Regardless it may once had been an ancient river bed of what we are seeing ...
and may had some flow from the seasons on Mars ...

Just throwing this here ::



Curiosity finds ancient riverbed on Mars
Latest images from Nasa's rover show trail of pebbles that were once dragged by water from crater rim to base of mountain
www.theguardian.com...

( see image on site )
NASA's Curiosity Rover Team Confirms Ancient Lakes on Mars
www.nasa.gov...





Panoramic View From 'Rocknest' Position of Curiosity Mars Rover
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

but what the Hell!!

is that in the Upper Right View of the Picture ?
that Hazy Bluish View !! a River/lake or some body of Liquid perhaps ? Image trickery! ?
if it was on Earth People would say thats a River !!! or a Mirage !

( click and blow up image on the site )
Panoramic View From 'Rocknest' Position of Curiosity Mars Rover
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...


Sorry tried to embed but its to big of a file

here its is
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

click to see the blow up ( of what is in question ) body of water or a Mirage ?

a reply to: Wolfenz

ArMap showed me the same image, however I believe he was making a point, but it would seem that it is some kind of blue sand or particulate.
Hell it could be sediment for all we know, but that would imply river...

Science adjusts it's views with evidence, just like we all do, but slowly, as it should.
Attitudes like "Why did they not just come out with it.", have no place in science, and disrespect the diligence that scientists put on data that pass it through the gauntlet and collect what comes out at the other end.

That is why most things that we enjoy today, are here for us to enjoy.

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: Wolfenz

ArMap showed me the same image, however I believe he was making a point, but it would seem that it is some kind of blue sand or particulate.
Hell it could be sediment for all we know, but that would imply river...

yeah that is what im thinking Sediment ... of some kind look kinda dampy.. anyhow ...

Curiosity has showed a similar area like this one ... looking the same but not blue like this,,
it was more dark.. pretty much im thinking it was a Ancient Body Flow of Water River Lake , Stream etc..,
and Just Maybe ... in a particular Warmest Season ... it Flow's

originally posted by: charlyv
Science adjusts it's views with evidence, just like we all do, but slowly, as it should.
Attitudes like "Why did they not just come out with it.", have no place in science, and disrespect the diligence that scientists put on data that pass it through the gauntlet and collect what comes out at the other end.

That is why most things that we enjoy today, are here for us to enjoy.

Why Not just Come Out with it ::


A good Point ..

My view of Reason is :

They dont want to be Discredited , Have a Tarnished named.. ridiculed.. Reputation on the Line

if the claim , came out the opposite of what they said ...


That or

Just a Threat to Silence by the Government or the Company themselves ..