Something is definitely up. They DID take down those Mars Curiosity thumbnails. Proof:

You seem to be obsessed with Nasa itself SPECIFICALLY releasing the images.

Let me ask, if you see an image in a magazine, would you care were it came from? You would accept that the image was taken by a independent photographer and given to a third party source (the magazine).

The images were taken by NASA, a independent orginization, and released to third party sources, a.k.a websites/newspapers etc. Nasa have better things to do than fret over images being released specifically on their website on a constant basis, especially when the images are avaliable in all there glory on the big wide web and beyond. This is the best I can muster in attempting to answer your question, naturally you will not accept it and this thread will continue to spiral endlessely.

Originally posted by therovers
You seem to be obsessed with Nasa itself SPECIFICALLY releasing the images.

Let me ask, if you see an image in a magazine, would you care were it came from? You would accept that the image was taken by a independent photographer and given to a third party source (the magazine).

The images were taken by NASA, a independent orginization, and released to third party sources, a.k.a websites/newspapers etc. Nasa have better things to do than fret over images being released specifically on their website on a constant basis, especially when the images are avaliable in all there glory on the big wide web and beyond. This is the best I can muster in attempting to your question, naturally you will not accept it and this thread will continue to spiral endlessely.

edit on 21-8-2012 by therovers because: (no reason given)

You seem to know me very well - judging by the way you communicate with me.

If you don't care, then leave the thread. I'm doing work. I'm putting together panoramics and videos for you folks to see, but all I get is frigging anger and I'm tired of it.

And I will take the 70-something flags from this thread over your 32 posts any day. And what are your credentials? Specialties?

Actually, I will take NASA's answer over yours. And I will adjust my position.

Unlike many, you won't see me walk away with my tail in between my legs if I am wrong. I will openly admit it if I see it. Right here. How many people do that on an online forum?

So I'm sorry. You haven't provided much, if anything. And due to your low post count at the moment, I can't take you seriously or personally.

I try to do something good. Who are any of you to flame me for that? Who is anyone to?

The low post count jibe pretty much sums you up. The fact you think that a post count on a forum discussing subjects such as alien beings correlates somehow to credibility and validity in terms of discussing and debating a subject is both disturbing and mind bending to me. You would take in words with more intensity and believe the words to have more credibiltiy if my post count said '1000' rather than '100'?

I live in the real world, go to school, have hobbies etc. I dont have time nor do I want the time to be posting on a forum such as this on a regular basis, but if people want to thats great. I dont care if someones post count is 1 or 10000, its irrelevant to me as it is to any normal human being.

Your above post is clearly a get out of jail free card, you cannot refute nor accept my point and thus have to fall back to personal attacks. I couldent say I expected anything more, and as predicted, you wholeheartedly ignored my answer or refused to accept it, and thus, the spiral continues.


P.S - A few posts ago you were saying you post on this forum because you want to know why. I and other supply you with answer as to why, which you have ignored. All of a sudden you are stating you will 'Take NASAs answer over mine'. You never posted here looking for answers, you are only willing to accept ONE answer, which is that you are right. You wanted an ego stroke, and probaly got it from a few morons. Hopefully Nasa will finally destroy your delusions, although I suspect you will refuse to accept there answer and thus it goes on.

Originally posted by therovers
The low post count jibe pretty much sums you up. The fact you think that a post count on a forum discussing subjects such as alien beings correlates somehow to credibility and validity in terms of discussing and debating a subject is both disturbing and mind bending to me. You would take in words with more intensity and believe the words to have more credibiltiy if my post count said '1000' rather than '100'?

I live in the real world, go to school, have hobbies etc. I dont have time nor do I want the time to be posting on a forum such as this on a regular basis, but if people want to thats great. I dont care if someones post count is 1 or 10000, its irrelevant to me as it is to any normal human being.

Your above post is clearly a get out of jail free card, you cannot refute nor accept my point and thus have to fall back to personal attacks. I couldent say I expected anything more, and as predicted, you wholeheartedly ignored by answer or refused to accept it, and thus, the spiral continues.


P.S - A few posts ago you were saying you post on this forum because you want to know why. I and other supply you with answer as to why, which you have ignored. All of a sudden you are stating you will 'Take NASAs answer over mine'. You never posted here looking for answers, you are only willing to accept ONE answer, which is that you are right. You wanted an ego stroke, and probaly got it from a few morons. Hopefully Nasa will finally destroy your delusions, although I suspect you will refuse to accept there answer and thus the spiral continues.

edit on 21-8-2012 by therovers because: (no reason given)

Ok. You're right and I'm wrong. I'm delusional.
An ego stroke? No. How many times do I have to say it isn't about me? How many times?
Whenever I see someone speak of someone in certainties over the internet, I can't take them seriously.
You're a troll/trolling. You are deliberately pushing my buttons and we will let the mods take care of this.
But I will continue working on images. That's where this all started anyways.
So you and I are done, but get your last word in. I won't respond because I know me and you don't know me. Ego stroke? You're out of your mind.
I think the attention of the thread and of the videos is killing you. Why else are you deliberately pushing my buttons?
Like I said. Let the mods deal with it. You don't have -958 points for nothing... - Which comes down to credibility and ill motives. What? You got all of those negative points with low posts because you're right?
So, yes. It does matter.
And I see you offending people in other threads. Not for much longer. I've seen your posts and your skeptic position:

www.abovetopsecret.com...&display=posts

And keep bumping this thread. Thanks.

And to quote someone from this thread. Directed at someone else but perfect for you:

Originally posted by Kangaruex4Ewe
Just an FYI... That is why they are called conspiracy THEORIES and not conspiracy truths.

The OP is free to express his theory and you are welcome to take 5 minutes to create an account and berate him for it. Ain't America great?

Thanks for the laugh, truly.

Im a believer in a wide variety of topics on this site, rendlesham forest being one of many. I choose not to post in them as I have nothing to contibute towards them, the motto of this website after all is deny ignorance. Using the disbelieving skeptic card isnt valid nor on topic.

At no point did I say you were delusonal.. I said your opinions on NASA not posting non descript images on there website which are avaliable through other third party sources meaning something as being the deluded part of you. You seem intelligent and thus I wanted to debate and try and get my point of view across, but you lowered yourself to a personal attack on my credibility once you feel your point is threatened rather than debating back at me. Look at my post at the top of this page then look at yours directly below it. The only one who went off on a tangent and began going off-topic/trolling is you. Every post I made before you began the personal attack on me was throughly ontopic. Anyway, heres a few posts for you to ponder.. I wont bother posting on this thread after this





Just because NASA does not post EVERY little snippet, every little photo, every little bit of information in high quality full resolution non thumbnail wholesome goodness does not mean they are hiding something, rather its that there is so much stuff that posting all of it would be un-reasonable. You can view the images online at your viewing pleasure, just not on the NASA website for EVERY image as this is both unreasonable and ridiclious. Just because you have to manually do something to get what you want, does not mean they are hiding something. It would be impossible to get to if they wanted it hidden, they wouldent play a little game of cat and mouse where you edit a url and you get the 'prize'.


You seem to be obsessed with Nasa itself SPECIFICALLY releasing the images.

Let me ask, if you see an image in a magazine, would you care were it came from? You would accept that the image was taken by a independent photographer and given to a third party source (the magazine).

The images were taken by NASA, a independent orginization, and released to third party sources, a.k.a websites/newspapers etc. Nasa have better things to do than fret over images being released specifically on their website on a constant basis, especially when the images are avaliable in all there glory on the big wide web and beyond. View the images from third party sources and appriciate the images that Nasa have provided rather than nitpicking the ones that arent there which you can view through other mediums with relative ease (as me and others do so)

Wait, so you are continuing to post because you want a answer to a question nobody here is able to answer, or ever will be, because the very question itself is both implausible and subject to your interpretation, with you refusing to accept any other interpretations.. sic 'Why do I have to manually do something to a Image to make it look better.. odd, why would I need to do that?'

Why are you asking us why you have to change an url to view a image? Or click on a thumbnail to attain a higher resolution?

P.S - What response do you expect to get from Nasa? Yes we have been delibrately uploading images onto our website in a low resolution, even though you can easily upgrade the resolution manually and we later uploaded them in high resoltuion. Yes we have been delibrately uploading images in thumbnails.. even though you can click on the image for it to go full screen.. yes we have been delibrately holding back images from our website, even though you can view these images on the world wide web with ease, oh wait thats not good enough for you.. has to be from our website.. ah well, we dont care

I can recognise WW2 helmet, and may be two observers. But there may be are some that is known only to NASA and they dont want we to know. Next time they will not release images without inspecting them first...

Originally posted by OnionHead
reply to post by Frankenchrist

 

haha, a we garden gnome, or a small headed dude with a night cap on, either way the rover has clearly drove over his nose

and we have a finger too...does this mean its a broken statue around rover and it has discovered ruins of ancient civilization? /sarcasm

Impaired I appreciate the work you have done, making the gigapan and command line hacking to do it. My best advice to you is to keep your head down, and just continue with your work on your stitching hobby; and learn a little detachment.

I haven't been to this thread in maybe a week; and the content of it is unfortunately suffering, for paying too much attention to things not relating to the content of your post. As far as I am concerned the post is about stitching together the highest resolution, most complete gigapan image...

Sure, there were a few odd things going on; I personally don't see a need for thumbnails and low resolution pictures and the high resolution photos all lumped together at the JPL NASA site, myself. Perhaps, the person that has the job designing the navigation and uploading the pictures is unqualified to do the task, perhaps they got their job from pulling strings, or the most qualified applicant was passed over because of affirmative action, or a no competition disability hire? Who knows, I personally don't grasp a conclusion no matter how logical it seems because the hypothetical's are so vast you'd need the drake equation to try and count all the possibilities.

The last several pages has been a departure from what I had hoped to find here. Keep in mind, that you could make 40 profiles on ATS if you have 40 different email addresses...bearing that in mind the swim suited female spammed on the other thread, could have come from anyone with access to a computer including yourself, who knows? I certainly don't, and it has little to no importance compared to what you have provided as content, to readers here at ATS, so that can cause jealously over silly things such as stars and flags, can make some people here crazy. Perhaps If you had better sleep and a skin layer called detachment, it would have went better.

Posters not staying on topic would normally be modded out, I am not surprised that a lot of it wasn't; as I've lurked here for a long time, and have seen how things operate, either you're in the click or you're not, and if you wanna be in it; expect to go through the pecking order and kiss a lot of tail. You've been here long enough to see and know that I am sure.

Bearing that in mind; let me offer you one last piece of advice: Never argue with an idiot; they will only drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience.

That being said, I look forward to your future stitching; if you care to share it.

Thats fine, im very appreciative of him trying to get the best quality images/dossiers from the curiosity expedition, infact I encourage that. There great.

What I dont appriciate is the misleading title suggesting they are 'taking things down', his inability to understand WHY Nasa has not posted every photo it has avaliable to it so far, even when the photo he is looking for is on a third party website he demands to know WHY it is not on the NASA website, even when the photo is completely non-descript and it would be a utterly pointless excercise posting an image that has been replicated and posted 100's of times on the world wide web. This isnt even scratching the surface.. with his 'Why do I have to manually make a photo high resoltuion!!' 'Why is this photo in a thumbnail!!' (Keep in mind at a latter date these images appear in the highest resolution and the thumbnail become clickable and resizable on Nasas website). I dont understand it, maybey im the one thats failing to see what hes getting at?

Thanks, BigBrotherDarkness. I appreciate it and I know what you mean.

And a response from NASA - Dr. Vasavada:

Vasavada, Ashwin R (3223)

Nice movie!

Without getting into the politics around here, let me just say that the release of images to the public is not controlled by the science team, or even the MSL project. It is done by another part of JPL. If you would like to complain about that, perhaps respond to the Curiosity twitter feed or other items on the web site. All I can say is that I wish it was better.

For the sol 3 panorama in particular, it took us a while to get the final frames down on the ground. Furthermore, we've now taken the images to complete the top of Mt. Sharp but they are not down from the spacecraft yet. Once they are down, we'll be releasing a full panorama.

Ashwin

--
Dr. Ashwin R. Vasavada
MSL Deputy Project Scientist
LRO Diviner Co-Investigator

It's nice to hear they are aware of the public's dissatisfaction with the lack of good organization of released data. Though it sounds like if we want it to be any different we'll have to protest it to be easier to navigate. I guess they have gotten used to the public disinterest over the years, so the sites holding mission data haven't really needed to be user friendly.

Impaired; have you considered donating your stitching efforts to NASA? It sounds like they would be very appreciative of the help, not only that but you might get to be lucky enough to get sent the pictures hot off the presses from Mars to stitch together...no need to hunt, hack and wonder whats happening with the image handlers.
Perhaps they'd welcome this to aid transparency to their programs.

Originally posted by BigBrotherDarkness
It's nice to hear they are aware of the public's dissatisfaction with the lack of good organization of released data. Though it sounds like if we want it to be any different we'll have to protest it to be easier to navigate. I guess they have gotten used to the public disinterest over the years, so the sites holding mission data haven't really needed to be user friendly.

Impaired; have you considered donating your stitching efforts to NASA? It sounds like they would be very appreciative of the help, not only that but you might get to be lucky enough to get sent the pictures hot off the presses from Mars to stitch together...no need to hunt, hack and wonder whats happening with the image handlers.
Perhaps they'd welcome this to aid transparency to their programs.

The donating already happens on Unmanned Spaceflight.com. There are even NASA scientists posting, but it's tightly moderated and I'm not a scientist so I'm scared to engage.

And they have people who do better jobs than me. I was just one of the many contributing - which is strongly encouraged. Great site.

reply to post by impaired


I think you've done a great job on the panorama.

I have also tried to access #79 without any luck. It would appear JPL know there should be an image there as they have placed a link back to the 'raw' page when the hi-res image link is clicked. I remember that initially both links were provided to high and low-resolution images but all they have done is changed the image selection procedure. The hi-res images are on the site, but not image #79.

From viewing the hi-res images very closely I think Curiosity has touched down on a huge city of the millimeter-sized 'Sand People'. If you observe some of the larger-looking rocks you may spot what would appear to be some really good artistic representations to be seen if you're prepared to spend some time searching for them.

The 'finger' anomaly is a very interesting achaeological artifact. It's possible that in ancient times it may have been attached to a statue prior to the 'Great Flood'.

Again, well done with the panorama. I look forward to viewing more of your work.

reply to post by arianna


Not more of you tiny sand people on this thread please stop the BS arianna!

reply to post by arianna


Impaired, do you accept your accusation of NASA removing original images they have posted and lowering the resolution of images they have posted is a incorrect assumption, specifically when referring to your OP. You claimed that a wikipedian had seen a high resolution image on the NASA website, used it on wikipedia and linked an url underneath the posted image on wikipedia, that url leading to the claimed source of the image. You state that since the url underneath the picture once clicked on lead to a image which did not match the high resolution image posted on NASA's website, the source image that the wikipedian saw must of been tampered with in some way after he posted the image and left the source link, and thus this constitues as proof that NASA is lowering the resolution of images and impairing them from the public eye. However, it was later shown that the url posted underneath the image on wikipedia, the claimed url source, was a incorrect url, in that it led to a photo on NASA's website which was NOT the original source url of the image posted on wikipedia, and the correct original source url of the image was avaliable on NASAs website the entire time. In conclusion, the high resolution image was always avaliable for viewing on the NASA website via the correct url, thus proving that NASA NEVER tampered with the original high resoluton, high visibility image, but that someone had mistakenly or delibrately (hmh..) posted an incorrect url which lead to a lower resoluton, impaired image.

So, can you admit you were wrong in this particular case? You have stated you will admit you were wrong if proven so and ,unless you can form a rebuttal to my claims, you are indeed wrong in reference to your OP. Check page 9/10 for seperate sources who agree with me... in that you have taken a simple typo error in a wiki url and twisted it into something it never was. No doubt you will ignore me.



P.S - Haha, Im going to assume thats a purely humour based post rather than suggesting a tiny race who have little neuron capacity due to their diminutive size possesses an extreme intelligence to the point where they have their own culture and sculp their own art on the barren landscapes of mars. An amusing thought non the less

reply to post by therovers

This the the only time I am going to interact with you on this board, because you have many troll like tendencies. That being said the information I am about to divulge, will probably just be ignored by you, hopefully, you'll drop these troll tendencies. If someone believes there are tiny sand people they have every right to believe that just as you have every right to not believe that. But ridiculing and berating them is, not a debate it is a personal attack.

The images can be tampered with through the use of the HTML5 blur, found in almost every browser. If you go to any NASA image and right click and select inspect element; you can see context of how blur is being used. I personally have not programmed in HTML since the days of myspace, so what the blur code is actually set to or doing in regard to the NASA photos I don't know. Perhaps there is an HTML coder here that could tell us, I am not saying NASA is taking advantage to the blur command to intentionally blur photos but they absolutely can. Example of blur in use: Anytime a user changes focus from the original image, it can trigger a blur event script.

So until an HTML coding guru shows up to decipher the HTML5 coding used by NASA in it's elements; you're just attacking the OP and berating other posters.

Source examples of blur in use, definitions etc:

css-plus.com...

www.blackpawn.com...

http://_javascript.info/tutorial/focus-blur (ATS keeps adding an underscore between / and J; I cannot fix this link)

www.w3schools.com...

Originally posted by therovers
reply to post by arianna

 

P.S - Haha, Im going to assume thats a purely humour based post rather than suggesting a tiny race who have little neuron capacity due to their diminutive size possesses an extreme intelligence to the point where they have their own culture and sculp their own art on the barren landscapes of mars. An amusing thought non the less

Then maybe yourself or some other knowledgeable person could explain why the high-resolution images all of a sudden have a mesh overlay, especially on the very close views of the surface?

reply to post by arianna

You are talking about the mastcam images? Those aren't really "very close views" and no high resolution images have been made available. I don't know why the subframe images are monochrome (that may have something to do with the "grid") but the thumbnails are not. Perhaps when the full resolution images are available they will also be full color.

If you want "very close views" you should use the chemcam images. I'm sure you will be able to find plenty of huge tiny cities in them.

There are a lot of images going around that are questionable.

Originally posted by therovers
reply to post by arianna

 

Impaired, do you accept your accusation of NASA removing original images they have posted and lowering the resolution of images they have posted is a incorrect assumption, specifically when referring to your OP. You claimed that a wikipedian had seen a high resolution image on the NASA website, used it on wikipedia and linked an url underneath the posted image on wikipedia, that url leading to the claimed source of the image. You state that since the url underneath the picture once clicked on lead to a image which did not match the high resolution image posted on NASA's website, the source image that the wikipedian saw must of been tampered with in some way after he posted the image and left the source link, and thus this constitues as proof that NASA is lowering the resolution of images and impairing them from the public eye. However, it was later shown that the url posted underneath the image on wikipedia, the claimed url source, was a incorrect url, in that it led to a photo on NASA's website which was NOT the original source url of the image posted on wikipedia, and the correct original source url of the image was avaliable on NASAs website the entire time. In conclusion, the high resolution image was always avaliable for viewing on the NASA website via the correct url, thus proving that NASA NEVER tampered with the original high resoluton, high visibility image, but that someone had mistakenly or delibrately (hmh..) posted an incorrect url which lead to a lower resoluton, impaired image.

So, can you admit you were wrong in this particular case? You have stated you will admit you were wrong if proven so and ,unless you can form a rebuttal to my claims, you are indeed wrong in reference to your OP. Check page 9/10 for seperate sources who agree with me... in that you have taken a simple typo error in a wiki url and twisted it into something it never was. No doubt you will ignore me.



P.S - Haha, Im going to assume thats a purely humour based post rather than suggesting a tiny race who have little neuron capacity due to their diminutive size possesses an extreme intelligence to the point where they have their own culture and sculp their own art on the barren landscapes of mars. An amusing thought non the less

edit on 25-8-2012 by therovers because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-8-2012 by therovers because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-8-2012 by therovers because: (no reason given)

I believe it's safe to say I was wrong. Sure. But it didn't seem like it as it was going on. And what's the deal with your tenacity? You bet I won't respond? What's your deal?

At this point I don't even care. All I wanted were the images, and now I know how to get them. Simple as that. Now everyone's happy.

And no offense to the poster about the "rice-men". I appreciate your support and all, but that's just ludicrous and hysterical at the same time. They're rocks. Hopefully with some fossils/evidence of past life somewhere around.

But therovers definitely has a troll-like feeling to him.