Alien City On Mars? Check This Out!

i saw pixellization all over that image, BUT, the area that was pointed out was uniquely- shaped and had a highly suspicious appearance. i attempted to get other areas that were clearly pixellated to show that same depth of detail and
overall organization, and there was no comparison. it was obvious, in other words, that it wasn't ...if nothing else... the same kind of pixellization. the first possibility that springs to mind is that there is something artificial in that area but because of the resolution, the pixellization all but obscured it so the only way you can tell something is indeed there is by comparative analysis.

EDIT: do we have access to another image of the same area, taken at a different time? this thread is kinda old so i don't recall.

[edit on 18-6-2008 by undo]

Originally posted by undo
i saw pixellization all over that image, BUT, the area that was pointed out was uniquely- shaped and had a highly suspicious appearance. i attempted to get other areas that were clearly pixellated to show that same depth of detail and overall organization, and there was no comparison.

Bingo! It seems Ron, you and I are on the same boat!! Now is this getting to be a conspiracy by the Pegasus Consortium?

do we have access to another image of the same area, taken at a different time?

That's what I've been requesting since the age of the dinosaurs!! But it's a blank so far!

Cheers!

Originally posted by mikesingh
Bingo! It seems Ron, you and I are on the same boat!!

Now is this getting to be a conspiracy by the Pegasus Consortium?

I would be surprised if you were not on the same boat, you are as predictable as the sceptics.

That's what I've been requesting since the age of the dinosaurs!! But it's a blank so far!

These are all I have found:

From Mars Express
The original 3D image that was the origin of all this discussion (1.2 MB file).
The colour image that I think was used to "dress" the 3D model (943 KB file).
The nadir image (the higher resolution image from Mars Express, 922 KB file).
Here are the h0533_0000_re2.img, h0533_0000_gr2.img and h0533_0000_bl2.img files (the closest we get to the data received from the probe) used to make the colour version (you can see that they have less levels of grey than they should, and that is why I thought of doing my experiment from some pages back).
It also has the original nadir image, h0533_0000_nd2.img.


From Mars Global Surveyor
The area near the centre of the crater (more than 4 MB file).
The area more to the east of the centre (more than 4 MB file).
The original IMG files for the first and second images (S18/02365 and S20/01741, respectively).

From Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter
From the Context Imager (22.5 MB file). Original IMG file (128 MB) here.
More or less the same area to the east of the centre of the crater, from HiRISE

As you can see, I have been looking for it.

PS: to open the IMG files it's need NASAView or The Gimp with a plug-in.

[edit on 21/6/2008 by ArMaP]

Originally posted by ArMaP
From Mars Express
The colour image that I think was used to "dress" the 3D model (943 KB file).

As you can see, I have been looking for it.

ArMaP, I often wonder why the devil you haven't been made a Subject Matter Expert as yet? I'm gonna take it up with the powers that be!

Now here's a crop of the image taken by Mars Express which hasn't gone through the 3D rendering which you said was the culprit for all those strange shapes.



So we see that the anomalies are visible on the original image even before the 3D 'dressing-up'. If you convert this image to gray scale, and zoom it, you will still find these strange shapes.

I’m not contending that these ARE alien structures, but these shapes are pretty intriguing!

Cheers!

Originally posted by mikesingh
ArMaP, I often wonder why the devil you haven't been made a Subject Matter Expert as yet?

I'm gonna take it up with the powers that be!

If that means more work, then no thanks.

Now here's a crop of the image taken by Mars Express which hasn't gone through the 3D rendering which you said was the culprit for all those strange shapes.

I should have expressed myself better.

At first, I thought that the reason for those shapes was the stretching of the original colour image over the 3D surface (as you can see, that was what I said in this post), but in this post, after trying to find another image that looked like that (you had asked for it), I had noticed that the image had less colours than usual.

After this post I was starting to think that those shapes were not made by the stretching of the image over the 3D surface, all other images I had studied did not had those things, despite having artifacts from the stretching.

In this post I said:

I think (but haven't really reached a definite conclusion) that the reason for those "stripes" is the fact that the original image had too few colours, and when stretched over the 3D rendered image their pixels were too stretched and created those shapes.

At the time of this post I was already thinking that the shapes were the result of too few colours, and it was because of it that I did my little experiment.

So, as you can see, my original idea (that those shapes were the result of stretching the image too much over the 3D surface) was replaced by the idea that they are the result of too few colours, and my experiment shows that results that look somewhat like that are achievable by using less colours.

And if I am right this time, those shapes should appear on the 3D image and on the colour image (as they do) and they should not appear on any of the grayscale images (the ones from the red, green, blue and nadir images).

I am now trying to do just that, trying to compare an area that shows those shapes in the colour image and not on the grayscale images.

Originally posted by ArMaPIf that means more work, then no thanks.

Comes with a paycheck though
...or is that only "Conspiracy Master

ArMap is simply the best, day in, day out. The truth and ArMap can't be "bought". Palavra de honra is ArMap.

As today was the town holiday here in Almada I used some of my time to put together some images.

This is a small crop of the colour image used for the 3D scene, resized to 200%.


This is the same image but with brightness and contrast changed to make the artifacts more visible.

As Mikesingh said before, the artifacts are already present in the colour image, now we must know from where did they came.

This is the image from the red channel. The original IMG file was converted to a GIF file to avoid further artifacts, then it was cropped to show more or less the same area as the images above and also resized to 200%. The area is not exactly the same because the images from the different sensors (I think that Mars Express has different sensors but I am not sure) do not have the same shape, they have are affected by some distortion.

This is the same image as the one above but with brightness and contrast altered to show better the artifacts.

This image has many artifacts, and only 31 shades of grey, while the complete image has only 146 in a possible maximum of 256, so I think this may be the reason for the artifacts.

This is the image from the green channel. It was submitted to the same process as the previous image.

And this the altered image to show the artifacts.

Once more, the image suffers from too few shades of grey, only 40, and the full image has only 145.

This is the blue channel, treated in the same way as the other images.

And altered to show the artifacts.

This image has even less shades of grey, only 37, while the full image has only 127.

I could not make a RGB composite using the images from the three channels because of the distortion of the images, I could not align them, but I am sure that if I could have done it it would show that some artifacts would be reduced when superimposed with the others while some other artifacts could "resist" the merging of the three images and remain visible in the colour image.

To complete my "investigation", this is the nadir image, the higher resolution image available, cropped and resized to 200% like the other images.

You have to click on the links, the image is too big for ATS (1200 x 1200).
Just cropped and resized.
Nadir image 1
With brightness and contrast altered to enhance the artifacts.
Nadir image 2

These images also have few shades of grey (36) but it looks like the algorithm used was a different one.

As can be seen, this image does not suffer from the same artifacts as the images from the red, green and blue channels, and although it suffers from different artifacts(it almost looks like canvas), I think that artifacts interpreted as an "alien city" or "signs of a civilisation" are just the result of the artifacts from the images used to create the colour image.

Why do those artifacts exist is a different story, some of them look like JPEG artifacts, but the lack of shades of grey may also be a factor.

Could they be the result of the different compression used, as pointed out by anti72? Maybe, the only thing I know is that the nadir image does not have the same type of artifacts.

The only thing I did not had time to do was to compare with a different image. If this was a result of the artifacts, an image without so much (or so visible) artifacts would result in a 3D image without "cities".

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by ArMaP
If that means more work, then no thanks.

Comes with a paycheck though

...or is that only "Conspiracy Master"

Nope! There ain't no free binges here!!

Originally posted by ArMaP
The only thing I did not had time to do was to compare with a different image. If this was a result of the artifacts, an image without so much (or so visible) artifacts would result in a 3D image without "cities".

Thanks ArMaP! Let's try and get an image of the area taken by some other camera and see the difference. Does Viking cover it? That would be interesting, the lower resolution notwithstanding!

Cheers!

reply to post by mikesingh


Viking covered it, but the resolution was too low.
Viking image.

Mars Global Surveyor also covered that area, with a resolution of 2.91 metres per pixel for imageS20/01741 and 2.92 for imageS18/02365. Neither show the exact area, but they are inside Hale crater, as seen in the image bellow.



There is also an image from THEMIS, and this shows the same area, as you can see here.

The images from the context camera and HiRISE (from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter) I have already posted on this post, and these are all the images I know from that area of Hale crater.

Nice job creating artifacts ArMaP... you can now apply for a job at NASA


But I still think the OP image looks more like THIS

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by mikesingh

 

Viking covered it, but the resolution was too low.
Viking image.

Here's one from Viking. No gimmicks where 3D rendering or color is concerned. Needless to say, this pic in the general area has been cropped, brightness/contrast adjusted, mask unsharped etc etc. And this is what comes out! Notice some strange markings?



Cheers!

Originally posted by zorgon
Nice job creating artifacts ArMaP... you can now apply for a job at NASA

I am not interested.

I would like to point (mostly for those that do not read all the posts) that the only images with artifacts created by me that I posted were the ones from the works in Almada, I did not create any artifacts in any image from Mars.

But I still think the OP image looks more like THIS

I would be surprised if you had changed your mind, you never see rocks or artifacts.

reply to post by mikesingh


Yes, I notice some marks (and I think vze2xjjk would see at least one face ).

Could you please point from where on the image did you get that crop, it would be helpful.

Thanks.

Probably poor etiquette, but check this out:

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

Also, Hale Crater is cool. I usually also convert ESA images to b&w to compare. They do funny stuff with color.
Also found that every Mars Express image in the ESA gallery features anomalies or life-ish weirdness.

Yep the pic looks interesting to me . Why does Nasa never send probes to spots that posses interesting geometrical formations , such as the place in the picture in the OP or to any one of many of the very interesting places that we have all seen pictures of and find out first hand what the @!#$ these very interesting things are ?

Originally posted by ArMaP
I would be surprised if you had changed your mind, you never see rocks or artifacts.

I see plenty of rocks ArMaP, but since there are so many here pointing out the rocks, I figure its not necessary for me

But just because I like you here are two 'rocks'

Roosevelt



and Wopmay




To djerwulfe

That b&w photo you posted is interesting especially the geometric patterns in it... but we would need the source... perhaps ArMaP has time to look for it. If its real I would say you have a winner

reply to post by ArMaP


Check it out West of that large crater and East of the squarish formation you see toward the left edge. It's 2/3rd of the way from that crater. You will need to zoom it to more than 300% to even notice it.

There's more where that came from!!

Cheers!

reply to post by mikesingh


OK, I see it.

This is the same as your image but without any alterations, just a resize (using the pixel resize method).



Yes, those markings are there, but by their look I don't know if they were there on the ground or if they exist only on this digital image.

reply to post by zorgon


Thanks for the rocks, they are very interesting.