It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by youallcrazy
Originally posted by DragonFire1024
Originally posted by 001ggg100
reply to post by blupblup
Thats because most people are to lazy to read the entire thread and/or to entrenched in their own beliefs that faced with any semblence of hard facts, they refuse to accept they may be misinformed....
Misinformation = Telling people its "pixels", when regardless of what these "debunkers" say, don't line up...at all. The pixels above are blocks. Clear as day. Whereas the original photo is not. The pixels are a block line. The original photo contains more than one set of 'blocks' or whatever you want to call them. They are two totally different things. Anyone who doesn't see that, and is willing to accept that they are pixels, isn't contributing anything but misinformation. Funny how these so called pixels show up just in that area. Did this happen anywhere else? Show some more photos of these pixels elsewhere. That's what is called "hard facts." So far there have been no "hard facts" presented in this thread.edit on 7-6-2011 by DragonFire1024 because: typoedit on 7-6-2011 by DragonFire1024 because: typo
The picture above and the missing "blocks" is the original photo.
What you are calling the "original" photo is a screenshot from Google Mars, this program takes the original photo and makes it 3D, and obviously adds information to the true original photo and it's missing pixels to create 3D imageedit on 7-6-2011 by youallcrazy because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by youallcrazy
reply to post by DragonFire1024
Obviously you just can't fly the satellite willy-nilly around Mars taking photos of whatever you want. We got the choice of specific areas based on the current orbit path of the satellite etc. There is some latitude of choice with these imaging satellites, but do you seriously think they would re-prioritize the mission to re-image an area based on what is clearly an imaging artifact?
Originally posted by youallcrazy
reply to post by DragonFire1024
the point is Google Mars does something to the images to incorporate it into the program whether 3D or not. Look at the original photo. That is the source of everything that google uses. If you want to argue that NASA is covering something up by deleting pixels, a different story...but from the original photo, clear that it is missing pixels. If you somehow think that the Google Mars data is somehow more correct than the original then you are fooling yourself.
As a cosmic ray passes through a camera's image sensor, it deposits a large amount of its electric charge in the pixels that it penetrates. If the particle passes through at a shallow angle to the plane of the camera, it affects several pixels along its path. The result is a bright streak on the image. Read more: www.foxnews.com...
Originally posted by Yukitup
reply to post by DragonFire1024
I am not entirely convinced it is a pixelation issue, but Fox is reporting that the "artifact" has been debunked -- that it was caused by a "cosmic ray":
As a cosmic ray passes through a camera's image sensor, it deposits a large amount of its electric charge in the pixels that it penetrates. If the particle passes through at a shallow angle to the plane of the camera, it affects several pixels along its path. The result is a bright streak on the image. Read more: www.foxnews.com...
Article
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by DragonFire1024
Please see this post.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by DragonFire1024
Sure. I'm gonna scan the entire surface of Mars looking for things a couple of hundred yards long.
Tell you what....no.
youallcrazy
If you want to argue that NASA is covering something up by deleting pixels, a different story
Originally posted by DragonFire1024
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by DragonFire1024
Please see this post.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Why can't any of you even point this out in other places on Mars or even provide other photo evidence? I mean if you want to debunk something, then do it properly. Is it really that hard to provide more photos of this artifact situation on Mars? I said it before and will say it again: If this happened in this spot, it happened elsewhere on the planet. This isn't an isolated incident. So my question is: where has it happened before on Mars? If there is a photo of it in this area, there must be more artifacts exactly the same as what we are discussing. It's only logical. It's not possible for this to be the absolute only spot on mars to have such an artifact.edit on 7-6-2011 by DragonFire1024 because: clarify