Curiosity Has Landed!!

Big deal it's not like they are showing their real shops etc, we all know the cabal have real ships. Wake up guys

reply to post by CaptainBeno


Evening my good sir!

Strait outta Cali not far from Pasadena JPL.

But what they SHOULD do to make me happy is simply put a distance scale on it. Just for us to get a feel of what they were showing us at least. Still an amazing picture though.

But i guess it was taken at area 51 hahah. So why bother. [sarc]

reply to post by frenzy4444


I dont understand a word you said friend.

Can you re type that message please lol.

reply to post by TheCaucasianAmerican


Good Morning! 10:48 am Perth Western Australia.

Yeah, that would be a good idea.......i.e. depth perspective.......nice one

There is another thread doing the rounds on here at the mo....not sure, could not find it again or I would have posted a link, but it's basically saying we are a ll suckers for believing this stuff bla bla bla.

I felt sorry for the guy really. I love a good conspiracy like the next person, but this guy seemed unhinged!

Oh well, keep up the good work mate

Oh just found it (Search function worked!)
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Read at your leisure / Peril! ha!

reply to post by CaptainBeno


Awesome how's the Aussie winter down there. Its blazing hot up here.

And yea I saw the thread. I also feel bad for these people that say rediculous things.

But do you know when there supposed to get the real color 8 mb pix ?

reply to post by TheCaucasianAmerican


G'day Mate,

Hmmm cold, it barely goes over 25/28 Deg C here during winter, not sure how that compares to you? Believe me 25 deg c is cold when your used to 40/45 Deg even 50 Deg in the summer.

Yeah, not sure about photo's. I think, maybe another day but really not sure.

I can't wait! (He says, trying not to sound really nerdy!)

I 'll be hanging around this forum should one be posted!

reply to post by CaptainBeno


Were all nerds here! Dont be ashamed and i looked it up and its 77 degrees f. Thats a warm spring day to us!

Where im from in California in the mountains our winter average is about -7 degrees C.

But tomorrow? Dang that would be pretty fast. Nasa said it could take up to a month. But hopefully not.

reply to post by TheCaucasianAmerican


Brrrrrrrrrrrrrr! That's cold!

Oh, Sorry! I may have heard incorrectly! Oopps!

I will have a trawl around sites, maybe find some info.

Cheers!

reply to post by CaptainBeno


Don't be sorry your the most likeable person i've met so far on this site. But as far as Mars goes i think im about to retire from this thread for now. Maybe ill create something new i suppose. But have a good afternoon im guessing lol. Dont know the time zones

reply to post by TheCaucasianAmerican


Cheers Mate, that is very kind of you.

I will keep an eye out for you around the site, no doubt we will meet up again!

It's 12:25 in the arvo here! I'm at work at the mo, should really be doing some work!!

Take care buddy!

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher

Originally posted by Soulece
So nobody else really wants to discuss the photo I posted? I mean its got some artifacts in it. But yet, nobody is really willing to go into detail about it. Another guy posted a photo that was released by nasa and it was edited. Well, I got the raw photo.

Do you really need to ask why people aren't responding to two anomalous white dots on a low resolution image?

Why don't you start your own thread on it, if you think it's important? Then you can have all the whacko's tell you about it being the 'Galactic federation of whites' (they really hate grays), tell you how they are over seeing the mission. You'll get to feel fuzzy, they'll get to feel fuzzy, and we can start having serious conversations in this thread.

Everyone is a winner.

Pathetic. Simply pathetic. You're better than this, right?

Originally posted by Blue Shift

Originally posted by Soulece
So nobody else really wants to discuss the photo I posted? I mean its got some artifacts in it. But yet, nobody is really willing to go into detail about it. Another guy posted a photo that was released by nasa and it was edited. Well, I got the raw photo.

Artifacts, eh? Well, good for you. I'm sure your name will go down in history as the 5,000th person who swears they discovered evidence of life on Mars. It must be quite an honor.

Again, pathetic. Really?

My intentions is not to boast about this. Without me bringing it up you would NEVER see the photo. I am merely bringing it to light for discussion. I mean isn't that what threads are for? Or do you want me to be boring and say "oooh look rocks!"


Some of us are paying attention to detail here.

reply to post by flexy123


Actuall if you read this link the hi-res cameras are way better than ANY 8mp camera!!!

www.msss.com...

One Mastcam camera head has a 100 mm focal length, f/10 lens. This provides the capability to obtain images with a scale of 7.4 centimeters per pixel at 1 km distance, and about 150 microns per pixel at 2 meters distance. The camera’s square field of view covers 5.1° over 1200 by 1200 pixels on the instrument’s 1600 by 1200 CCD. The other Mastcam camera head has a 34 mm focal length, f/8 lens. The camera’s 15° square field of view covers 1200 by 1200 pixels on a 1600 by 1200 CCD detector. The camera can obtain 450 microns per pixel images at 2 meters distance and 22 centimeters per pixel at 1 kilometer distance.

Originally posted by Soulece

Originally posted by Blue Shift

Originally posted by Soulece
So nobody else really wants to discuss the photo I posted? I mean its got some artifacts in it. But yet, nobody is really willing to go into detail about it. Another guy posted a photo that was released by nasa and it was edited. Well, I got the raw photo.

Artifacts, eh? Well, good for you. I'm sure your name will go down in history as the 5,000th person who swears they discovered evidence of life on Mars. It must be quite an honor.

Again, pathetic. Really?

My intentions is not to boast about this. Without me bringing it up you would NEVER see the photo. I am merely bringing it to light for discussion. I mean isn't that what threads are for? Or do you want me to be boring and say "oooh look rocks!"


Some of us are paying attention to detail here.

edit on 7-8-2012 by Soulece because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2012 by Soulece because: (no reason given)

We'll see what KAI-2020CM sensor is capable of.
We have to be patient, as others said.
Just found interesting info about curiosity cameras on DPreview

A megapixel is just a term for one million pixels.

Unless you're making rather massive prints you're not going to need more than 8 megapixels. There are other far more important factors in a camera.

To give an idea, a 1080p still frame is about 2 megapixel. If you're not complaining about your television screen or monitor quality, you shouldn't be complaining about an 8 megapixel image being transmitted from Mars.

Edit: It actually makes me face palm massively when film students shoot in 4k - 6k frames when their out put isn't going to be more than 2k or sometimes even less.

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

More pics from Mars! (Sol 2)

Looks like Curiosity is flexing her NavCam and checking herself out among other things. Mostly thumbnails but still pretty awesome in my book.

Enjoy!

By the way, what about video and audio? Are we to believe they have again gone to all this trouble and there is no audio capability? This came up with the last round of landers, why wouldn't they include some sort of audio (let alone, video)?

Why is the picture of the lander parachuting down in black and white and terrible res? Did they just use a "hazcam" for that too?

See, this is their problem, today, we know better. But, they act like it is still 1969 and they can just feed us any explanation or rationalization they wish.

Originally posted by sprtpilot
By the way, what about video and audio? Are we to believe they have again gone to all this trouble and there is no audio capability? This came up with the last round of landers, why wouldn't they include some sort of audio (let alone, video)?

Why is the picture of the lander parachuting down in black and white and terrible res? Did they just use a "hazcam" for that too?

See, this is their problem, today, we know better. But, they act like it is still 1969 and they can just feed us any explanation or rationalization they wish.

Obviously YOU actually don't know better

What do you think you would hear?

The atmosphere is very thin at ground level Mars Surface pressure (0.4–0.87) kPa Earths 101.3 kPa so very little sound to prove a point



basic school science!

Originally posted by wmd_2008

The atmosphere is very thin at ground level Mars Surface pressure (0.4–0.87) kPa Earths 101.3 kPa so very little sound to prove a point

There was enough atmosphere to allow the use of a parachute. Why look for a reason to NOT do something simple, it makes no sense. A mic would allow monitoring of the lander if needed, might be kind of nice to be able to listen to any of the motors operating the propulsion or the booms to detect or troubleshoot a problem. The sounds of wind or storms from another world would be kind of amazing too, no?