BREAKING: Proof NASA/JPL Copy & Pasted Images at Gale Crater Curiosity Landing Site on Mars!

They can't have us seeing the remains of the ancients.

Originally posted by Arken
The PERFECT MURDER do not exist.

It does, they call it "accident" or "heart attack" or something else because it's not perceived as such.

Some years ago I made a thread with two photos, one of which had been altered by me with Photoshop (it was the first time I used Photoshop), and nobody was able to spot what I had changed, with some people pointing to things that were not altered or pointing to the photo that was not altered.

Originally posted by Arken
What kind of Agency is this? Billions of dollars for CGI, Cartoons and photoshopped images to feed the public entertainment?

From what I have seen, it's almost that, with "pretty pictures" for the ignorant masses that think that a photo with bright colours has more value than seven greyscale photos taken at different wavelengths, or with greyscale photos of the Moon superimposed on a colour original to make the Moon look completely grey.

I have seen many suspicious images on NASA (or related) scientific sites or pages, heavily manipulated.

I have seen some of those pointed by you, and to me they do not look manipulated.

Can I ask to replaced the images and see the "no" manipulated?

You can ask...

reply to post by DJW001

Thank you very much. I honestly think that if we consider that this is a computer simulation of data we can understand how some mistakes may occur.
Its just a simulation folks. I thought that even a few years ago when people were constantly linking the "Mars Civilization" video. I just don't see it off of the 3D computer generated images.
The real picture images however, have always fascinated me a little.



reply to post by AmatuerSkyWatcher

Thank you for the link. I look forward to reading this.

A quick and final question to you both that is only slightly off topic. How do you download the photos?
Whenever I go to the Mars.jpl.nasa.gov website I see the images, but there is no option to download. I know you can just right click and save image, but there use to be a download option right underneath the pictures. Is this only happening with me?

there are 3 sure things in life

death
taxes
any "proof" thread will be debunked by page 2

lol

reply to post by Rubicant13


Whats up with people and Phage? Is he the voice of reason and truth around here?

This is becoming ridiculous. Develop your own pair of balls and opinion.

reply to post by exponent

No. That is exactly wrong. You do not assume some data is an accurate representation without explicit information

One should never assume anything and seek the sources but having said this you can not state that data is not of scientific importance if not sourced, it also depends on the science we are talking not all sciences have the same requirements. Note also that all content (software or a publication) have editorial controls and legal obligations these without invoking moral obligations.

There is also the issue with presumable expectations, one expects a level of quality, openness, transparency and exactness of NASA. All values that NASA claims to uphold.

You do not assume some data is an accurate representation without explicit information. I can't believe you're even making this claim.

I wouldn't assume but I can understand how most people would, and I can't believe that you can not understand the problem of validation by association, especially when NASA is normally sold publicly as the shining beacon of human achievement...

Google search is not a scientific tool as they transform their input data in a secret way before outputting it.

I could point you to a lot of scientific paper based on Google search data. I think the issue we are having is on you definition of what scientific data is. All data that is not secretly manipulated is of scientific interest and can be defined as scientific data in specific contexts, like the issue with the software under discussion. What you seem to attempting to state is that scientific data is only data that had been acquired by a scientific instrument, I do not think that this is a proper classification but recognize that the on specific contexts it could be accepted and of course the level of quality and certification is not comparable...

The bottom line is simple, when there is a fail in communication one questions the message and then the source of the message. One does not put the blame in the receptor, even if ultimately the blame may be with him... But even then wouldn't the burden be of the emitter, to verify that the receptor was capable of understanding it?

Originally posted by iamusic

reply to post by DJW001

 

Thank you very much. I honestly think that if we consider that this is a computer simulation of data we can understand how some mistakes may occur.

It is not a computer simulation entirely it's a mixture, that's why the guy in one of the videos, matching up a Google image with 'Explore Mars' image, was so puzzled, the 'Explore Mars image had more features than the Google image, features that aren't there, at least in that particular place. The so-called mistakes are not mistakes, they are embellishments, and entirely unneeded or wanted. Hopefully the upcoming ' Mars Globe' will be a different affair. I see this as a manipulation, and perhaps just the tip of the iceberg, a whole new data management system, that could be used by outside sources like schools and universities blah blah, but still initially coming from NASA, talk about the matrix??

I never bought these were genuine photos anyways. the photos could be any place on earth, not even a large area, because you can't tell how big the area was they took photos of.

They could take a photo of an apple crumble and pass it off as Mars

Originally posted by thomas_
reply to post by Rubicant13

 

Whats up with people and Phage? Is he the voice of reason and truth around here?

This is becoming ridiculous. Develop your own pair of balls and opinion.

ArMap is the guy/girl to listen to about images for this thread, and he says what she thinks.

Originally posted by DJW001
For the benefit of people landing on this page without reading the entire thread, the YouTube videos are simply wrong when they claim these images are from Curiosity. They are not. They are clearly labeled as a CGI simulation of the landing site, put online months before the probe reached Mars. Several links have been posted to both raw and processed imagery of the landing site taken from orbit, despite the OP's claim that they are not available. Given that the claims made n the videos are false, this thread should have been moved to [HOAX].

It seems you have explained the situation well once again and once again most just
ignore you, me or phage and others, apart from a select few who are willing to actually open the links.


I haven't anything to say that you have not allready said here.

How does anybody know for proof positive that there's even a rover on Mars taking pics? We don't. This leads creedence to that fact. The fact we don't know where the hell these so called Mars pics are from. Could be a damn crater somewhere in Arizona or New Mexico or a sound stage in Hollywood.

How many millions of dollars of our tax money was spent for these manipulated pics of some rocks? What a damn waste of money. IMHO. Do we expect to find something of value to man on Mars? What does finding the evidence of pass life on Mars do for us now? Pretty much nothing at all. Except stir the all ready stinking pot of religious crap.

Maybe they find Jimmy Hoffa after all these years....Or maybe they find ROCKS and damn plenty of them.

When I was telling people this whole Mars curiosity was an anomaly from the beginning, some were laughing some thought I was a nut, still curious?

Originally posted by PurpleVortex
When I was telling people this whole Mars curiosity was an anomaly from the beginning, some were laughing some thought I was a nut, still curious?

Nah, I just think you don't read threads. Try it sometime.

Nah, I just think you don't read threads. Try it sometime.

I'm sorry, I only read threads that I feel are worth my time and haven't been debunked.

ETA: When I see Mars curiously threads, automatic face palm bro* go figure.

reply to post by PurpleVortex


That must be why this thread is in the hoax bin then eh?

Not getting at you, just interested in your psychology, so why do you feel the need to offer up your 'two pennies', if you're not going to bother to read the thread?

That must be why this thread is in the hoax bin then eh? Not getting at you, just interested in your psychology, so why do you feel the need to offer up your 'two pennies', if you're not going to bother to read the thread?

I just thought it would be cool to share my opinion on the rover, since day one when "it" landed I was cracking up and knew sooner or later "we" would notice their bad Photoshop skills. Short and sweet, I'm not buying it. Don't take it personal towards your thread, my beef is with the top dogs.

Originally posted by PurpleVortex
Don't take it personal towards your thread

I don't think I have ever been so insulted in my life.



As for the rest of your post, I don't have the inclination to reply, because I don't think you'll read what I have to say. So in this case, I abstain. Nothing personal.

Originally posted by PurpleVortex



I just thought it would be cool to share my opinion on the rover, since day one when "it" landed I was cracking up and knew sooner or later "we" would notice their bad Photoshop skills. Short and sweet, I'm not buying it. Don't take it personal towards your thread, my beef is with the top dogs.

If you look at the top
of the thread ...left hand side yep that's the one it says [HOAX] i do believe they do this for a reason
my freind. Thanks for playing

P.S

Read the links they can be quite interesting

Originally posted by PurpleVortex
When I was telling people this whole Mars curiosity was an anomaly from the beginning, some were laughing some thought I was a nut, still curious?

This is not about Curiosity rover, it's on Mars alright, it's about an educational tool being used, or rather misused on a NASA/JPL site, made as a precursor to the Curiosity landing. That is a bother, no matter how fancy the explanations/not so far are, there is no reason for the digital manipulation in what are relatively new images whatsoever, they are transferred patches, not clearing up a seam between two images. In my mind it is stupid, unnecessary, yet it was done, even before a successful landing by the MRL.