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

reply to post by RFBurns


SO NASA spends billions of dollars and sends spacecraft up there and the only reason is to say "nothing to see here" and to prove that, they change the colors of original data to red.

To be honest, the OP is the one altering the photos, not NASA.

I have an idea, unfortunately I don't have the software to do it

Could someone find a picture or two of similar scenes here on Earth, and apply the saved settings from the Nasa pictures, that would give an excellent indicator, because it is from something we know for sure, set to their settings if that is possible, and we would see instantly if I am right?

Does anyone agree? I would do it, but I cant.

Would provide some proof.

Originally posted by Phage

Originally posted by RFBurns

Well I am finding tons of more images with this color chart on the sundail and a few of the also show this magic swapping of the color tabs going from blue to red and red to yellow and everything in between except for what they are supposed to be.

How very clever of you. You have caught the dreaded NASA at its game! Little did they know that you would be on their trail. I hope no one tells them their editbots need to be reprogrammed.

Oh, in light of what we know about Rayleigh scattering, what would the big secret about a blue sky be again?

Im glad to know that I, along with hundreds of thousands of other taxpayers, are hot on their tails to get at the truth. Thanks for pointing that out!

As to the blue sky..this isnt a debate about the Rayleigh scattering and is why it causes the blue sky, the debate is about the so called color images and why they (NASA) is purposely giving us red saturated images.

Somone even tried to use the excuse that its all that red dust being blown around by the Martian winds. Well if the Martian winds were kicking up red oxidized dust all the time, then every single picture, including the black and white images, would be showing us "Dust In The Wind" (Boston) all the time, and everything within the frames of every picture would be obscured by this "Dust In The Wind". (Boston)

Not every single picture NASA publshes is during a dust storm. It is THESE very pictures that we are talking about and comparing to some of the other color images published by NASA that clearly shows us clear, no wind conditions and blue skies with white clouds and sunsets that look like as if you were standing out in the western desert on a nice calm sunset evening here on Earth.

Sometimes I think that NASA must believe that we are still mentally infant and cant see obvious things going on within these images, and that we must all still be "Dust In The Wind" blowing around aimlessly and have no clue as to how to do simple, very very simple adjusting of a simple white balance process on something white in a picture where there is "clearly" no red dust flying around, no major red dust storm, and clearly see that when a very expensive color calibration chart of red, green and blue, suddenly change their colors like magic and just be willing to accept their word becasue they are the big NASA and they say so.

As I said before, I can think for myself, examine for myself, and see for myself. Others can too. Someday, maybe NASA will understand this and start telling us the truth.

There is absolutely no reason for them to be playing this mind game with the taxpayers who pay for their mission and very exsistance. It is OUR data, OUR images, and OUR rovers and probes. Who the heck are they to be throwing us rotten bones when we pay the MEAT of the costs for these missions and hardware?

I think WE deserve more, and deserve the honest TRUTH from OUR taxpayer paid for data and hardware.






Cheers!!!!

This was already proven in DARK MISSION... no question NASA is doing this.. the question is why?? why potray the martian sky as red? is it to keep us from seeing the potential mars has for future expansion..?

I find it amusing and hliarious, the egos of the people on here who think they have just outwitted an agency full of rocket scientists.

Yeah, when NASA turned the colors red they never for a minute thought about people with photoshop.

PUHLEASE.

reply to post by thefreepatriot


PROVEN in Dark Mission how? Notice how the book came and went and absolutely no one cared? That's because it didn't prove anything. It is the same nonsense and dribble we have heard from Hoagland forever. He is a joke in the scientific community and so was that book.

Originally posted by azzllin
I have an idea, unfortunately I don't have the software to do it

Could someone find a picture or two of similar scenes here on Earth, and apply the saved settings from the Nasa pictures, that would give an excellent indicator, because it is from something we know for sure, set to their settings if that is possible, and we would see instantly if I am right?

Does anyone agree? I would do it, but I cant.

Would provide some proof.

You got it!

Here is an image of a place called Boysen Peak overlooking the Wind River Lake in Shishoni Wyoming at an altitude of 8,500 feet ASL at a tower location during a tv trasmitter repair/maitenence contract I did last winter.

I have taken the RGB levels of a color panoramic image directly from one of the NASA websites I linked to in my posts in earlier pages, and applied it to the image.

Here is the result.





And here is the same image with the saved RGB settings taken from another adjusted image that used the RGB saved settings from an image of Opportunity as it sat in the assembly plant. What I have done is used the settings directly from the corrected color image right off of page 1 in this very thread in the 2nd set of images I posted.

Here is the result.




There ya go.




Cheers!!!!

[edit on 11-12-2008 by RFBurns]

Great job here RFburns and others. Beautiful pictures. Simple technique, not perfect, but close enough for government work ya? :p

As to why NASA would be hiding the fact that Mars may be more habitibal than previously thought....? It's fairly simple.

It's called recolonization for when/if the snip hits the fan here on earth.

Do you really believe NASA tells you the whole truth all the time?
In the same case, do you believe the american givernment, or nay government for that matter tells it's people the whole truth 100% of the time? Of course not.

It is up to us, the everyday person to figure this out. If not us, then who else?


[edit on 11-12-2008 by Nola213]

reply to post by RFBurns


I apologize for not quite getting your point.

A couple of comments though. As pointed out in the old thread that was linked near the beginning of this thread, the process of coming up with a "true color" image is not simple and at best it is an approximation. It is also entirely secondary to the science being done. The scientists really don't care what color Mars is, the only reason there is any attempt to produce "true color" images is for general consumption. It's not too surprising (or alarming, to me) that there may be some variation in the "almost true color" images.

About the dust in the Martian atmosphere. Do you remember when Mount Pinatubo erupted in 1991? Do you remember the sunsets afterward. Mount Pinatubo threw a lot of gunk high into the atmosphere and it affected the atmosphere of the whole planet (northern hemisphere mostly) for several years. On Mars, the dust storms are huge, in 1971 one covered the whole planet. The storms carry dust very high into the atmosphere where it lingers for long periods of time. These storms and the dust devils ensure that the atmosphere of Mars carries a load of dust most of the time. The finer particles don't settle out when the storm is over. Because of the thinness of the atmosphere, Rayleigh scattering is much less of a factor on Mars than Earth and the dust becomes the major agent in the coloring of the sky.

This image of a Martian sunset gives a good indication of what I'm talking about. You can see the sun setting indicating that the air is relatively clear at the surface yet you can see the haze created by high altitude dust.

And yes, there is a tinge of blue.




[edit on 12/11/2008 by Phage]

Originally posted by rocksarerocks
I find it amusing and hliarious, the egos of the people on here who think they have just outwitted an agency full of rocket scientists.

Yeah, when NASA turned the colors red they never for a minute thought about people with photoshop.

PUHLEASE.

"ignorance is Bliss" isn't it?

-ohhh Rocket scientists you say?

What do you think these people are infallable? godlike perhaps? Unable to slip up, and accidently show a "true color photo" of mars during a press conference? Yes even a Rocket Scientest clicks on the wrong thumbnail from time to time.

You give NASA, and "rocket scientists", way too much power. they are only human.

It seems they've dumbed down some of the population enough to believe they are all knowing, and incapable of being wrong. Or being caught when they lie.

I mean for cripes sake, look at the NASA released photos, you can see Blue sky in Many of them. You don't even have to "fix" the pictures.

I for one will believe only what I see firsthand. The last groups I will trust is the US gov. and NASA.

reply to post by Nola213


Thank you for the comment!

Tho I woulndt say its anything that could be used for actual scientific analyzation, but were not trying to re-write scientific analysis protocols or procedures.

I used to stand with my folks, and thousands of other Americans, at the Cape in Florida, watching the huge Saturn 5 rocket take off for the Moon. I witnessed first hand the launch of Apollo 8, and it was so awsome, the massive rocket lifting steadily off the launch pad, the ground shaking and feeling it through my feet and legs and in my chest. It was like a huge roar of inspiration and imagination flowing through my whole body. I can still remember that day vividly and remember how it felt.

It sure would be nice to be able to get that same feeling and inspiration again before my time is up with witnessing a return trip to the Moon, or a Mission to Mars, taking off once again from the Cape, shaking the ground, hearing the very loud rockets, roaring through the air making the sound of American inginuity and exploration, feeling that once again America has again become the leading pioneers of space exploration and discovery.

The probes, rovers, are all successes, except for those few that got lost or crashed, lessons learned. But none of those successes are in any comparison to the Apollo missions, and not even comming close to the inspiration and intrique on the "Viking Summer", the day we launched Vikings 1 and 2 to Mars to land a scientific probe to search for life for the first time!

I wish we were right now where we were at back in those years. Especially back in 72 to try to prevent the politicians and NASA from scrapping the Saturn 5 rocket piece by piece, tearing down the launch facilities, the engineering plants, releasing all those scientists, controllers, workers, and shredding the dream. Because I truely believe that had NASA been allowed to continue, we would be in a much better world today, I am convinced of that.




Cheers!!!!

reply to post by RFBurns


Using the color adjustment settings you used for the rover image is meaningless in this context. There is no common ground between the images from the rover and the one you've used here. Different sensors and different filters (unless you used a rover camera when you took the photo). The filters used on the rover capture a limited range of wavelengths, actually rejecting some. The filters built into your camera are designed to create a "true color" image. The ones on the rovers are not.

reply to post by Phage


Yes that is the image I linked to on my post about the Martian sunset. Its awsome isnt it!

And it does show a "haze" in the air, but not so much haze that the image is saturated in red from the haze. It clearly shows the blue in the sky even at the decrased sunlight intensity.

That image looks to me alot like a west Texas desert sunset. And in west Texas, the wind can kick up alot of dust and dirt out there! On a mild wind evening, that image you linked to which is the same imgage I linked to earlier at the begining of this thread, is almost exactly how it looks during a sunset in west Texas!

I think its very cool!!



Cheers!!!!

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by RFBurns

 

This image of a Martian sunset gives a good indication of what I'm talking about. You can see the sun setting indicating that the air is relatively clear at the surface yet you can see the haze created by high altitude dust.

Do you also see that about 20%-30% of that sky is Blue? Alot is grey,then some Browns, hardly any, if any real red in the sky.

As RF said, you can see sunsets just like that in Central/Western N. America.

If the sun weren't so small, I wouldn't be suprised if that photo was taken on earth. In Arizona maybe, after a Dust storm.

[edit on 11-12-2008 by Nola213]

reply to post by Nola213


Yes I do see that (I added a note before I saw your post).
What do you think the blue coloration means?

[edit on 12/11/2008 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by RFBurns

 

Using the color adjustment settings you used for the rover image is meaningless in this context. There is no common ground between the images from the rover and the one you've used here. Different sensors and different filters (unless you used a rover camera when you took the photo). The filters used on the rover capture a limited range of wavelengths, actually rejecting some. The filters built into your camera are designed to create a "true color" image. The ones on the rovers are not.

It would be a valid statement if I was trying to precisely mimick the on board camera's abilities to the nth degree. But as I have stated about 10 times already, that is not what the intent is, nor is the goal. I, nor anyone else, is trying to re-write scientific analysis or protocols or claim that these simple elementary white balance ajustments are to be considered cannon for scientific historical fact. It is to try to determine why color charts on offical NASA released pictures are changing their assigned colors, and why the images are always so red saturated and why it is so easy for us simple folk out here in the backwater woods of American, can get those color tabs looking like they should and the white parts looking white in all these red saturated images.

Thats all were doing. The analysis is not meant to replace the official status quo results of NASA. But they sure do open the eyes to obvious changes of assigned color calibration tabs on a color calibration sundial meant to calibrate color bands of a camera that should know the difference between red, white and blue!!




Cheers!!!!

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Nola213

 

Yes I do see that (I added a note before I saw your post).
What do you think the blue coloration means?

[edit on 12/11/2008 by Phage]

I dont know what it means other than the sky is not always red as shown in many of the NASA released color images. Perhaps the scattering effect as you described earlier due to the elements within the atmosphere.

So that would mean that the elements in the atmosphere on Mars would not always be so red saturated...it would be if you had 50 or 100 feet level of kicked up red oxidized dust, but on a relatively calm Martian evening like that in the image, we are seeing what we are seeing as it is, not as it is altered.

I did mention earlier in the thread that I believe that the sunset image is most likely a real color real data, real unaltered or unchanged color adjusted image from NASA. NASA doesnt always lie, but they dont always tell us the truth either.



Cheers!!!!

reply to post by RFBurns


Ok, you missed my point this time. Fair's fair.

The point I was making is that the Martian atmosphere carries dust most, if not all, of the time. The dust isn't in the sky only while a dust storm is occurring. And it doesn't make the sky red, probably more of a yellow/beige.

Once again, the fact that the "true color" images, show different colors in different images is neither surprising nor alarming. They are composites of images containing narrow wavelengths, they are not true color. They cannot be.

reply to post by Phage


I can certianly agree with you when a dust storm occurs. But honestly, that sunset image does not look to me like it was taken during a dust storm. It looks calm, perhaps light wind or mild wind enough to sir up some dust. And with the lighter gravity that dust would remain up in the atmosphere for longer periods of time.

But I dont agree that the winds are "always" blowing so much that Mars is under constant severe dust storms. True Mars does go through some very nasty high wind dust storms of the extreme, and those can last a very very long time. But really in that sunset image, can you say that we are seeing a dust storm along with a sunset?




Cheers!!!!

reply to post by IceColdPro


Funny thing is a few years ago i made a (ufo) website and had photos up there of there rover on tv then on mars and i pointed out the red lens they used. I had a few photos i un-filtered and it looked like you could live on mars. One day ill remember the link i think its still up.