Curiosity Has Not Landed - But Is Good Entertainment For The TV Brain Washed Masses

Originally posted by Moonraker22
reply to post by chrisb9

 

I tend to agree with the OP that if they wanted to NASA could easily generate landscapes "from mars" using computer programs designed to utilize fractal geometry to generate complete images that look so real as to be indistinguishable from what a "real" image from mars would look. I'm not saying i believe it's happening right now for sure, but ever since i saw an image made using fractals i view all NASA images with caution, because there is no way to tell if what you're looking at is the real deal. Just my opinion though

Since there are other instruments on Curiosity (spectrometers for example) that can't be airbrushed or replicated with fractals, why would they bother with manipulating the images? If it's all a fake, then the hundreds (thousands?) of scientists analyzing data over the next decade or more will have to be fooled too...

Originally posted by frazzle

First thing that comes to mind on these kinds of hoo rah's is how broke the US is and upcoming budget cuts.

Early Monday morning will be a critical time for NASA. After facing budget cuts, NASA’s future arguably hinges on successfully landing a $2.5 billion rover named, “Curiosity” safely on the surface of Mars.

Read more: www.digitaltrends.com...

Exactly The Point !

Did anyone Really Think for one Second that Nasa was " Not " going to have a " Successful Landing of the New Mars Rover " ???

All of the Hype and Excitement and Jumping JPL Crew Members High 5 ' ing each other and everything.

Or, if it was a complete failure, and have everyone saying, there's $2.5 Billion down the drain. So lets give Nasa another $2.5 Billion and see if they can have a " Successful Landing " Next Time....

Oh no... "Nasa" was going to have a Successful Landing on Mars, for Countless and Endless Reasons. To boost the American's Spirit's, and to also Impress the rest of the World. And not to mention that it's " just good for business " that all..

So yes, no Big Surprize that they had a completely successful landing with this latest SUV type Mars Rover.

The pictures coming in now though, and for the endless years down the road to come, where will they be coming from ? Anyone's guess is as good as anyone else's guess.

The Technology to Fake things in our age is so good, ie 9/11 Bld # 7 etc, anyone's proof is good...

Bottom line in it all, every person will believe what they want to believe, as is always the case.

Originally posted by DutchBigBoy
just one recent picture of curiosity on mars with proof of life

Thanks for posting this latest Picture of Life on Mars, no doubt this is one " Secret " Nasa Mars Photo's that somehow leaked out !

At least this leaked Nasa Photo is Solid Proof Beyond a Shadow of a Doubt that Nasa has Indeed Landed on Mars.... This actual mars photo should give some absolute proof for this latest mars landing.

Originally posted by abeverage

Originally posted by chrisb9

No one on the earth can Prove that Nasa has landed the new Curiosity Rover on Mars period. No one on earth can hop on their private space ship, blast off to Mars, and then Verifiy with their own eyes and personal photographs that " Yes " the new Mars Rover Curiosity is Actually sitting on the surface of Mars right now.

You are absolutely 100% WRONG and worse you are what is wrong with America and this world.

You obviously do not know a thing about science and make incorrect accusations with no merit or proof!

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

Well " abeverage " In Your Mind You have Certainly Set Me Straight with Your High and Mighty Post of Rebuke...!

I hope you feel better now that you have " Vented Your Righteous Frustrations and Anger at me "

You are of Course Right, We Did Land on Mars, the Picture Just Above I replied to Provides the Solid Proof and Evidence 100 % Beyond a Shadow of a doubt...

BTW I like your ATS Name: ( abeverage ) - No doubt drinking various " Beverages " has had a great influence on " How You Think "

My Suggestion to you, is to slack off a little bit on whatever " Beverage's " you are drinking, that would help clear up your thought processes...

Originally posted by NoExpert
This thread is an insult to the hard work and endless hours put in by extremely talented individuals in order to make this mission and fantastic achievement a reality. It's a sad reflection on you that you feel the need to air your irrational and unfounded views, all out of some misplaced sense of spite and anger at the government. How about instead of spouting nonsense you educate yourself and pipe down until such a time that you have something worthwhile to add to the discussion.

Thank you " NoExpert " For Your " Solid Rebuttle and Scornful Disgust to my posts!

Next time I'll check with you before I even think to make any post on ATS...

BTW - I like your ATS Name " NoExpert " at least you seem to have made an Honest and Accurate judgement of your education and critical scientific thinking skills used in your stern warning to me....

Since there are other instruments on Curiosity (spectrometers for example) that can't be airbrushed or replicated with fractals, why would they bother with manipulating the images? If it's all a fake, then the hundreds (thousands?) of scientists analyzing data over the next decade or more will have to be fooled too...
don't get me wrong, i definetely believe they have a rover on mars right now snapping pics and sending em back to NASA. I just meant the pics that could show something that couldn't be denied (like for example maybe a ufo parked next to the rover, or an alien posing for a photo op) could just be silently removed from the data and replaced with a cut n paste job with everything not rover removed from the pic and replaced with a landscape that was CG, and from what i understand would be indistinguishable from a real natural landscape. Of course, if what your saying is that the rover takes constant spectrometer readings 360° at all times then yeah it would make it harder to fake, but not impossible. But since i have no clue if that's the case i'll have to look more into it. I have to admit my knowledge of this particular mission is limited.

reply to post by excentryk

Sorry my last post was meant to quote excentryk, im new here and i don't have everything figured out

Just saw on CNN that Nasa have a big room with orange light
a false back ground image of mars and an identical rover
with rocks beside it

they say it is to replicate exactly the rover on mars

Originally posted by chrisb9

Originally posted by abeverage

Originally posted by chrisb9

No one on the earth can Prove that Nasa has landed the new Curiosity Rover on Mars period. No one on earth can hop on their private space ship, blast off to Mars, and then Verifiy with their own eyes and personal photographs that " Yes " the new Mars Rover Curiosity is Actually sitting on the surface of Mars right now.

You are absolutely 100% WRONG and worse you are what is wrong with America and this world.

You obviously do not know a thing about science and make incorrect accusations with no merit or proof!

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

Well " abeverage " In Your Mind You have Certainly Set Me Straight with Your High and Mighty Post of Rebuke...!

I hope you feel better now that you have " Vented Your Righteous Frustrations and Anger at me "

You are of Course Right, We Did Land on Mars, the Picture Just Above I replied to Provides the Solid Proof and Evidence 100 % Beyond a Shadow of a doubt...

BTW I like your ATS Name: ( abeverage ) - No doubt drinking various " Beverages " has had a great influence on " How You Think "

My Suggestion to you, is to slack off a little bit on whatever " Beverage's " you are drinking, that would help clear up your thought processes...

What does my name have to do with your post? You are deflecting my arguement. Where is your proof that it has not landed? Even with all the beverages I drink (which has nothing to do with the name) I am still clear minded enough to stay on the arguement.

Oh and by the way I am not defending NASA I am however calling you on your statement. Prove your theory is all I am asking and if you cannot then my first reply is correct.

You offer NO PROOF it didn't happen....so I guess I can listen to you or look at some some so far pretty boring pics. Or I can just wait for someone on ATS that swears there is a Grey in one of the pics and look at their Post of pics...I don't know to many options for me to decide.

reply to post by Ben81

they say it is to replicate exactly the rover on mars

You mean this?
newsroom.blogs.cnn.com...

The mockup doesn't really look a lot like the real thing.

error

Originally posted by Moonraker22





... if what your saying is that the rover takes constant spectrometer readings 360° at all times then yeah it would make it harder to fake, but not impossible. But since i have no clue if that's the case i'll have to look more into it. I have to admit my knowledge of this particular mission is limited.

Hey Moonraker~ I can say for sure that the spectrometers do not operate continuously and do not read 360°, but I really don't think that faking the signatures would be plausible considering how long the deceit must last, and the knowledge of the scientists who will be analyzing...

as for 'airbrushing' the images to remove the aliens (natives?), I really don't believe that anyone is employed to do such a thing because I really don't believe there's anything to remove from the images ... now, having said that, it's ironic that the reason I joined this site is to post a few images of weird Martian alien-lookin' stuff that perhaps would've been airbrushed... hahaha! I'll be posting them this afternoon ... cheers~

NASA's 1976 Viking and NASA's 2012 Curiosity



yep everything looks same here

www.nasa.gov...
www.inflexwetrust.com...

In your opinion, you take a peace of metal, then you put 4 rocket engine and magically, with computers, that peace of metal is able to land as a helicopter from a height of 3 km slowing down velocity from 360 km/h
to 0 km/h.

What magic technical devices do you employ to keep that peace of metal horizontal as a helicopter?

If you have technology to do that, why don't you show in a video the prodigious ability of that peace of metal that does all things by itself without the pilot?

BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT THAT PRODIGIOUS ABILITY.
If you had that technology, you would not be in the s..t as all other countries in the world.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------

reply to post by SkepticGuy

What magic technical devices do you employ to keep that peace of metal horizontal as a helicopter?

reply to post by Phage


Are you so naive to believe that you can keep that peace of metal horizontal with gyroscopes?

Gyro works on the helicopter, it helps only the pilot. The pilot does most of the job

reply to post by SkepticGuy

Gyro works on the helicopter, it helps only the pilot. The pilot does most of the job

The gyros are linked to the computers which operate the rockets.


Where's the pilot here?
heli.stanford.edu...

Originally posted by SkepticGuy
In your opinion, you take a peace of metal, then you put 4 rocket engine and magically, with computers, that peace of metal is able to land as a helicopter from a height of 3 km slowing down velocity from 360 km/h
to 0 km/h.

What magic technical devices do you employ to keep that peace of metal horizontal as a helicopter?

ummm ... oh! trick question! you already said it right? Computers!

Well, a computer that talks to gyroscopes and thrusters at the same time.

Actually a pilot could never adjust quickly enough to steer a multi-rocket platform alone. With such a vehicle, a pilot could only express a desired direction to the computer, which then makes it happen with hundreds of small course adjustments each second.

A programmed course of action replaces the human pilot, the computer doesn't even know the difference.

You sound very adamant about your stance on this. Please tell me why this is beyond our capabilities. Sure it's a challenge to engineer, but the principles are quite basic ... and well within our capabilities.

I imagine we don't see such rocket platforms used on Earth because there's no niche where they'd be cheaper or better~

reply to post by o0pinMind0o


Great Picture there of Mars and the Viking Probe landing in 1976 in contrast right next to the most recent Curisosity Photo!

Yep, I agree - Nothing unusual about the Mars terrain, looks exactly the same to me in both pictures too...



Notice how that in the 1976 Nasa Viking Photo, the great big boulders strewn all over the viewing area. A nice picture like that gives the " Viewing Audience " a Great Picture to look at and gawk at. Also think about " How Lucky " the Viking Lander was to have a " Level Landing " in such a rocky area... Sure was " Lucky " it didn't fall over.... Nice Bright Color Photo from 1976 also, Too bad we don't have that type of Color Photo Technolgy today on our Satellites Circling the moon in 2012 as they had on Mars way back in 1976...

Also, a smooth area was not needed for the Viking Lander, as it had no wheels...

Also notice how that in the most recent " Curiosity Landing Photo " How Perfect the terrain is for a wheeled vehicle such as the new Curiosity Rover, so that it will have no problem to just take off and drive away...

Just think how " Extremely Lucky " the Curiosity Rover is to have landed on such a smooth area, with no big boulders or anything in the way to block it's path... It also didn't land and fall over on it side into a Giant Rocky Ravine, with No Way of Ever Driving out of it.... Sure was a " Lucky Landing... "

Yep, Nasa sure is " Lucky "