Crashed saucer on Mars?

reply to post by Phage


Okay, that has been sorted. Now back to the hi-res image you provided of calypso.

As i have posted earlier on, images of panoramic views and several close ups seem to have the rover blackened out. Although there are images which do have irregular surface indications that the rover portrayed across the web is not actually the rover that is taking several of these public images. In fact, the hypothesis is that there are several more rovers which are indeed doing far more than sampling rocks and looking for water. As one person pointed out to me, the solar panels are not arranged in the position which are depicted within the jpl site, indicating its a completely different rover. Have you noticed this yourself.

reply to post by tristar

Now that the pussyfooting is over and you finally came out and said what's on your mind; no.

I have seen nothing that makes me think there are more that 2 rovers on Mars. Everything seems to be where it is supposed to be.






[edit on 12/7/2009 by Phage]

Originally posted by martinhuyton
reply to post by Chadwickus

 

Chadwickus....you're correct, the object is very small so, having seen your picture with the rover's tracks I think we can safely assume that the mystery object is not a flying saucer. Whatever it is, it aint no rock so what's it doing on Mars?

MH

err.... it fell off the rover?

Just a thought

reply to post by tristar


Here is a panorama which includes the rover.

reply to post by Phage


Indeed so far we have identified two distinct models.

From the link : Calypso_LZ257,

If you open the hi res image in photoshop and place a vertical guideline at position 539,63 on the ruler measurement then place a horizontal guideline at position 86,19 you will see a particular sensor next to another sensor.

___________


From the link PIAO 3610

If you open that image in photoshop and try to locate what i have just referenced to you as position on the Calypso image you will find its another rover.

What i am trying to find is an image which shows a shot from mars from the rover which has completely different solar and sensor arrangement from the two that are known. Have you found anything regarding this.

reply to post by tristar

I don't understand your coordinates. Are those pixel positions? I cannot place a guide at "539,63" (or 539.63).

Maybe it would help if you posted an image of what you are talking about but I see no difference in the parts of the rover which are visible in both images. I would not expect to since they are both from Spirit.

There are two Mars Exploration Rovers on Mars and they are identical.



[edit on 12/7/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by tristar

Ok I figured out what you're talking about. You have units set to centimeters, not pixels. The object in the "Calypso" image is not a sensor, it is the sundial

It is visible in PIA03610 at 14.8, 6.6.


[edit on 12/7/2009 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by tristar

 

Ok I figured out what you're talking about. You have units set to centimeters, not pixels. The object in the "Calypso" image is not a sensor, it is the sundial

It is visible in PIA03610 at 14.8, 6.6.


[edit on 12/7/2009 by Phage]

Oh well thats piece of pie on my face, at some point i thought before i mentioned it as a sensor i actually did think that maybe its a sundial, but then i thought, nah, its impossible such a simple instrument to be located on such a technical object. Then again just thinking about it makes more sense. Why have an electronic device which can have multiple problems rendering it useless and not have an ancient non mechanical/electrical device which can give us the exact location based on the sun through the video image feedback. Simple and most effective.

But getting back to the point im trying to make, do see you were the sundial is located at, well look at the other image which shows the panoramic view without the blackened rover and see if you can pin point were the fixture is. I myself have found no such point of reference indicating that its a another rover. correct ?

edit: Ill get the two photoshop images ready to show you what i mean.

[edit on 8-12-2009 by tristar]

What's all this about tiny aliens? Nearly all spacecraft sent out by humans have been robotic. There are many factors about space-travel that give robotic exploration a significant advantage over the manned kind, in terms of cost, chance of success, etc...

Look around our own earth, if we wasn't here, and another civilization was looking around our planet, don't you think they would discover some amazing rock formations. This is all from the angle of the picture, little dirt, and some strange rock formations, thats all, nothing more, nothing less.

Like the Giant's Causeway.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Chadwickus

 

They are teeny tiny aliens.

Apparently when Aliens reach a certain level of high technology that enables them to traverse the galaxy they also develop the unexplainable ability to crash their high tech spacecrafts on alien planets.

Whats to say they cant be shot down? And theres always a margin for error. But i dont think it is an alien ship

reply to post by martinhuyton


Looks like rocks to me.

I see no reason to think its a UFO and if it were I see no way to prove it, unless you think you can convince NASA to send the rover to that exact spot to investigate.

It looks like rusted metal parts to me (but then again, what do I know?). I've come across junk on this planet that looks natural when its been exposed to the elements for so long.

Also- a gripe... WHY Does Nasa need to photoshop out the Martian horizon in certain pics? Why do they still have this need to turn some of the pics the reddest red I've ever seen, and make a few occasional 'earthlike' pics? And they wonder why conspiracy theorists like to have a field day with what they produce... well DUH.

reply to post by tristar

Maybe what's confusing you is the format of the panoramas. They are 360º views, a circle. A circle has no beginning but to make a panorama you have to start somewhere. A different starting point has been used in the two panoramas.

Here I have edited PIA03610 to have the same starting point as the "Calypso" pan. Does this help?


[edit on 12/8/2009 by Phage]

Just confused on a few things here:

1) Why do people assume anything on Mars is alien and not a remnant from previous civilisation?
2) Why is the idea of this thing being engineered reason enough to jump straight to the conclusion it's a "UFO"? I mean it's not flying for one -_-"
3) Why is it some people have used its size to debunk it? Have you any idea the range in sizes life here on earth spans? Not all alien life need be our size.

This does have a look to it that makes it stand out. That said I have no intention of calling it a saucer or part thereof. It could just as easily be a gas station sign, a child's toy or a piece of sporting equipment, which if it were those or anything else created by intelligent craftsmanship it would still be a significant find.

I joined this site just to comment on this thread. Sorry that I'm bumping it...but did you guys even read the article?!

"The piece of rubble or debris is reminiscent of a machine part and could be the remains of a UFO wing or a drive unit."

I see no where that it claims to be a whole UFO/spacecraft.

reply to post by MrPenny


The size of the object, and by the way, the size of the Martians is not really the issue is it?

Actually, the thing reminds me of a round patio table I had once that the wind upended and badly bent the square-tubed legs.

But the real reason for this post is to question how come the rover went right by the thing and no pics were issued of it then--oh, damn! I forgot Malin and crew are on the job. Chalk up another tease from them. (You know that has gotta be in their contract to do that to us.)

reply to post by spikey


I agree. We relate to size as we see ourselves, or nearly, i.e. 3 to 4 feet tall. I think that we should broaden our views to include different theories and realities.

Consider this if we believe two findings by scientists recently:

1) A small meteorite (redundant?) is found to be from Mars.

2) Microbes are found in the rock.

Would this not be a crash of an alien vessel? Life that started on Mars and journeyed here on what we call a rock? Some would say that this is not intelligent life but hey, they got from Mars to Earth, unsuccessfully yes, but we haven't gotten to Mars from Earth.

Are we so conceited and arrogant that we say"absolutely, there is life out there. They have almond shaped eyes, they are gray, they have no nose and about 4 foot tall" or do we say "it is sad that their vessel could not protect them on their journey"?

that is a pretty neat photo although i dont believe i could call it a crash site it looks more like soil movement due to winds but there are tracks beside it that do look out of place.

[edit on 8-1-2010 by alt.conspiracy.ufo]

Sorry to say this but its a rock.

I am interested in Mars Anomalys also but this is a R_O_C_K!

reply to post by martinhuyton

G'day martinhuyton

Did you see what else is on that stupid site?

"Half-man, half goat...."

"Bigfoot stalks bikini girl....."

Fair dinkum it's a worry!