Evidence that NASA is altering the true colours of the pictures of Mars

reply to post by Yoda411


Surely you arent suggesting that the photo, and the new one DA found, are fabricated and are not in fact of a NASA press conference where not only do we see an image up on a screen showing the blue sky on Mars, but also NASA emblems on two of the people in the 1st photo?

You know, all those websites that are using that first photo say its an AP photo, why would thousands of websites say the same thing and in the photo we see NASA emblems and the picture of Mars with the bluish sky, in two seperate photos to boot!

Im sure that if you go sign up at AP, you will find your evidence. So why not do that then? Is it because you have to sign up or possibly have to pay for subscribing to their archives? Well nothings free anymore, wish it was for free because I would have already signed up. But then again, linking to the image into here wouldnt work because you have to get permission from them first to link to their images, and second, the link would return their log in page, which is what all other subscription sites do.

This has been interesting for sure! Now back to my image processing so I can continue to contribute to offering pretty pictures.



Cheers!!!!

[edit on 15-12-2008 by RFBurns]

Mars image with blue sky:


Columbia Hills loom with increasing detail at the Spirit rovers' Gusev Crater site.
Credit:NASA/JPL

www.astrobio.net...

RFBurns, I like you and your posts, but Yoda does have a point.
If you provide a picture or quote to try to prove your argument- You have to provide us with the source.
You can't simply display a picture and tell us to "Look it up."
The validity of your proof rests in your hands- It's not the responsibility of the opposing faction to prove your claims or give verification to photos provided.

Surely you can see that.

It's like in threads where posters make the comment "The truth is all around you." or they say "Do your own research."
The fact is, if your arguing someone- We do our research to prove our claims; likewise you need to do the same, and provided us with a credible source.
Otherwise, the information provided, however damning it may be, is entirely useless.

[edit on 15-12-2008 by Dewm0nster]

reply to post by ziggystar60


Nice find ziggystar!

I notice that even with the bluish sky, the ground still retains its normal red texture. That is to be expected and quite normal.

Its a great image! Thanks for posting it!


Cheers!!!!

reply to post by Dewm0nster


I agree, but as I found out and stated, and remember, I didnt post the image as proof, someone else did, the AP site with the archive requires you to sign up and subscribe to access their photo archives.

The only reference I ever made with that photo was that someone posted it on page 1 showing the martian landscape with the blue sky. I never based any of my claims or images to that photo. My claims are entirely based on NASA"s own published color images, some with all red, some with blue in the sky. That I do acknowledge and have provided the links directly to those images for yoda411.

Is it my job to also provide proof for other's claims or use of photos to point out the OP's thread title? I believe I have provided all the evidence and links for my claims. Again, I never said anywhere that the news press conferece was part of my evidence about NASA's two versions of red saturated images, and their bluish sky images. I refered to those images directly, not the news press conference photo.

But regardless, to try to appease yoda411, I spent over 3 hours searching the web for the source, and the source I did find happens to be AP news itself, which I pointed out, requires you to sign up and subscribe to access their photo archives. Since I did not make any direct reference or post that image to support my claims, why should I be the one to have to provide said proof? Shouldnt the original poster of the image do that?

Its not like I didnt try or and I never refused to find the source. As I said, I spent 3 hours on it. I found hundreds of websites using that image, all stating it is an AP photo. I provided links to those websites, and even the link to AP. It is not my duty or responsibility to prove to yoda411 about an image that has been used by hundreds of websites, and has been out on the web since 2004. Therefore, it is also not my responsibility to have to pay for a subscription to AP to get this photo and show that it is in fact an AP photo. I never used it, I never posted it, I never used it as part of my claims anywhere in this thread. I simply said that there is a photo of a NASA press conference with the image of the martian landscape with blue sky on page 1, thats all.

I do understand yoda411's point. Thats why I spent 3 hours looking for it and linked to all those sites. But again, since I am not the one who made any claims to it as proof, why should I have to be the one to provide said proof?

Even the original poster cannot find the source, but has posted another image of the press conference showing the projected image on the screen with the landscape and blue sky, and the people at the table being asked questions by the press. Am I going to be expected to have to prove that one too?


Cheers!!!!

reply to post by ziggystar60


All credit due to ZiggyStar for stepping up to the plate where others stumbled and fell.

Now the question remains, is this the generally normal appearance of the sky from a point of view on the surface of the planet? Light refractive phenomenon? Sunset appearance as the NASA hosted image?

What are the chances that these images were accidentally leaked, supporting the wildly unassertive conclusion that all MARS images are purposely discolored before releasing to the public?

In my opinion the dull blue is an effect the sun makes when abnormally large amounts of Nitrogen are in the Mars atmosphere. Keep in mind our atmosphere is 78% Nitrogen and Oxygen is only 21% of our atmosphere.

[edit on 12/15/08 by Yoda411]

Originally posted by Yoda411

All credit due to ZiggyStar for stepping up to the plate where others stumbled and fell.

I cant argue with the fact there is a link, even tho the link ziggy provided isnt a direct NASA website like the ones I provded. Ahhemm!!!

Originally posted by Yoda411
Now the question remains, is this the generally normal appearance of the sky from a point of view on the surface of the planet? Light refractive phenomenon? Sunset appearance as the NASA hosted image?

It is when there isnt alot of wind kicking up dust into the air, just like it does here on Earth in a big dust storm, it blocks out the sky with the dust and dirt and the sky turns into that dirt color.

Originally posted by Yoda411
What are the chances that these images were accidentally leaked, supporting the wildly unassertive conclusion that all MARS images are purposely discolored before releasing to the public?

Usually on leaked images, they are rarely put up on the offical NASA sites, often the reference images, such as the filter layerd datasets, are changed, but I cant say for sure. I know that NASA themselves has posted color images with bluish skies and posted color images of nothing but red skies even when there is no dust storm going on.

Originally posted by Yoda411
In my opinion the dull blue is an effect the sun makes when abnormally large amounts of Nitrogen are in the Mars atmosphere. Keep in mind our atmosphere is 78% Nitrogen and Oxygen is only 21% of our atmosphere.

[edit on 12/15/08 by Yoda411]

It has to do with Rayleigh Scattering article HERE.





Cheers!!!!

[edit on 15-12-2008 by RFBurns]

[edit on 15-12-2008 by RFBurns]

reply to post by Yoda411



I found this information interesting regarding the color of the Mars sky:

The first color image (12A006/001) of the surface of Mars was taken July 21, 1976, at the Viking 1 site, one day after the landing. Immediately displayed on color monitors at JPL, as seen in Figure 1a, the landscape awed observers with its resemblance to that of Arizona. Typical desert colorations of soil and rock, ranging from umber sand to yellowish-brown and olivine-colored rocks stood out clearly under a blue sky. Two hours later, however, the official image was changed to the monotone of orange-red (NASA P-17164), Figure 1b, that, with few exceptions, has prevailed in NASA-published images of Mars ever since

Go here to see the photos (figure 1a and 1b):
mars.spherix.com...


The first Viking image with blue sky, taken from the NASA source I have linked to below:


Here you can also read NASA's version of the story about the first Viking image:
history.nasa.gov...




[edit on 15/12/08 by ziggystar60]

reply to post by RFBurns


This could be a sad end to the debate:

No consensus has evolved concerning the color calibration of Martian lander images. There is a wide variation in the calibration of published images seen in newspapers, scientific articles, and on the Internet. Important basic questions have remained unresolved. The color and scattering physics of the sky is still at issue. There is a wide range of uncertainty about the coloration of light illuminating the Martian surface. There is wide uncertainty about the coloration of the soil and rocks. Because of these unknowns, there is a great uncertainty about the reflectivity of objects on the ground and how those geological objects would appear if they were illuminated by a known light source.

reply to post by Yoda411


Can you give us a link to the source for your quote?
Thanks in advance.

reply to post by ziggystar60


Looks like it came from here
mars.spherix.com...
It's somewhat dated though, talking about Viking and Pathfinder, not the Mars Explorers.



[edit on 12/15/2008 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by ziggystar60

 

Looks like it came from here
mars.spherix.com...
It's somewhat dated though, talking about Viking and Pathfinder, not the Mars Explorers.

Indeed it is - nice job Phage.

Have the proposed problems been resolved? Or, can we assume professional skepticism?

reply to post by Phage


Thanks, Phage, I just found the excact quote, it is from the same source I provided a link to a couple of posts ago.

reply to post by Yoda411


The MRO is using hyperspectral imaging but the rovers are not. I don't know why but I think it's just better suited to orbital use.

It should also be noted that Gilbert Levin carries a chip on his shoulder toward NASA about his interpretation of the Viking experiments. Not to denigrate this paper or imply that the conclusions aren't valid, but the anti-NASA bias is apparent.


[edit on 12/15/2008 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage


Anti-Nasa bias? Nooo Never! :p

Thankfully they at least cite their sources (below).

I wonder if it's worth contacting this individual at MIT to ask his professional opinion towards the color of Mars sky, and the ability to obtain true color imaging from the current rover.

*Currently working at MIT Lincoln Lab: e-mail [email protected]; phone781-272-1497; fax 781-272-1497.

[1]. Mutch, T.S., A.B. Binder, F.O. Huck, E.C. Leventhal, S. Liebes, Jr., E.C. Morris, W.R. Patterson, J.B. Pollack, C. Sagan, and G.R. Taylor, Science, 193, 791, 1976.
[2]. Levin, G.V., P.A. Straat, and W.D. Benton, “Color and Feature Changes at Mars Viking Lander Site,” J. Theor. Biol., 75, 381-390, 1978.
[3]. Levin, G., personal observation, as reprinted in B.E. DiGregorio, Mars: The Living Planet, Frog Ltd. c/o North Atlantic Books, Berkeley, CA, p. 194, 1997.
[4]. Strickland, E., “Color Enhanced Viking Lander Images of Mars,” abstract, Second International Colloquium on Mars, NASA Pub. 2072, 1979.
[5]. Strickland, E., “Soil Stratigraphy and Rock Coatings Observed in Color Enhanced Viking Lander Images,” Lunar and Plan. Sci., 10, 3, 1192-1194, 1979.
[6]. Op Cit 2.
[7]. Kieffer, H.H., B.M. Jakosky, C.W. Snyder, and M.S. Matthews, Eds., Mars, U. Ariz. Press, Tucson and London, 1992.
[8]. “NSSDC Image Collection, Mars,” nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov... and “Mars Pathfinder Images,” nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...
[9]. G.A. Landis, “Solar Cell Selection for Mars,” Proceedings of the 2nd World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion III, 3986, 1998.
[10]. Appelbaum, J., T. Segalov, P. Jenkins, G.A. Landis, and C. Baraona, “Verification of the Mars Solar Radiation Model Based on Mars Pathfinder Data,” Proceedings of the 26th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, 103, 1997.
[11]. Ockert-Bell III, M., J. Pollack, C. McKay and F. Forget, “Absorption and Scattering Properties of the Martian Dust in the Solar Wavelengths,” J. Geophys. Res., 102, No. 104, 9039-9050, 1997.
[12]. Williams, S.H., “The Winds of Mars: Aeolian Activity and Landforms,” www.lpi.usra.edu/publications/slidesets/winds.html.
[13]. Tillman, J.E., N.C. Johnson, P. Guttorp and D.B. Percival, “The Martian Annual Atmospheric Pressure Cycle: Years Without Great Dust Storms,” special edition, J. Geophys. Res., 84, 10,963-10,971, 1993.
[14]. Kissell, L., “RTAB: the Rayleigh scattering database,” RTAB data files, www-phys.llnl.gov...
[15]. Aller, L.H., Atoms, Stars, and Nebulae, Harvard University Press, 3rd Ed., Cambridge, p. 62, 1991.
[16]. Withrow, R.B. and A.P. Withrow, Radiation Biology, 3, Chapter 3, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965.
[17]. Grossweiner, L.I., “Photophysics,” The Science of Photobiology, 2nd ed., Plenum Press, New York, 1989.
[18]. James, P.B., M.J. Wolff, R.T. Clancy, S.W. Lee, J.F. Bell, III, and L.J. Martin, “Synoptic Monitoring of Mars by HST: 1996-1997 Observations,” Bull. Amer. Aston. Soc., 28,1069, 1996.
[19]. Op cit 2.
[20]. “Mars Pathfinder Geological data: First analysis of Barnacle Bill rock,” www.xtec.es...
[21]. “Hyperion instrument,” eo1.gsfc.nasa.gov...
[22]. Op Cit 11.
[23]. Op Cit 21.

To continue...

Here is an image from source Sol 122 found HERE of the controversial rock/wood feature. Filters L2 in deep red, another filter L2 for red, L5 for green and L6 for blue were used to create the image.



Full size HERE.




Cheers!!!!

From Sol 123 source HERE. Its a wide angle view of a rocky edged dropoff and byond a fairly smooth landscape.



Full size HERE.


Cheers!!!!

From the Spirit rover, dataset Sol 008 found HERE, a view of a fairly decent sized hill off in the distance and quite a few of NASA's favorites scattered here and there....rocks!!!




Full size HERE.



Cheers!!!!

reply to post by RFBurns


Your doing it again. Those are NASA hosted images.

reply to post by Yoda411


These particular images I created from their datasets...as I have been doing.

So whats your point this time? Are you finally seeing that NASA has both red saturated and color ones like these????



Cheers!!!!

[edit on 15-12-2008 by RFBurns]