NASA says Mars discovery isn't 'earthshaking' after all

Maybe they will announce that they have achieved their foremost mission and have improved muslim world relations. That would be something for the history books.

"NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his "foremost" mission as the head of America's space exploration agency is to improve relations with the Muslim world."

Wait, I might have read that on the onion.

reply to post by Trillium

Well I'm incredibly convinced NASA is hiding something because of these

Those composited images are not from NASA. They are from an early version of the Clementine image browser from the US Navy. The image retrieval system had problems. Of course, Skipper ignores anything of better quality.

If this was a publicity stunt, why would NASA wait to make the announcement and not just make the announcement. There is something going on here that needs further studies before it can be announced. Even if it is a rock of some kind this could still be shocking news e.g. Coal or (my personal favourite conspiracy ) - the shiny / glazed rock that appeared in the photos has the right ratio composition for Limestone - showing that there was abundant life many years ago.

Why not to trust NASA - well they have been firing rockets to the moon for decades but it was only recently (2009) that the Indian Lunar Mission that discovered water on the moon (okay some say the Soviets discovered this in 1976 - but it certainly was not a NASA announcement even though they would have crossed the areas, measured it, analysed it and probably even seen the ice cream vans parked nearby ). Only two months after the discovery NASA co-incidentally had a lunar satellite all ready to crash into the moon to see how much water?

reply to post by delusion


Well, when McKinnon (I believe that was his name) hacked into NASA computers he found a list of "Off World Officers" and ship names that aren't here on Earth

NASA would need to be privy to at least some of the traffic up there for the safety of their ISS "tree house".

And no, the Air Force isn't the one with the UFO's -- it's the Navy.

reply to post by templar knight

If this was a publicity stunt, why would NASA wait to make the announcement and not just make the announcement.

If this was a publicity stunt why would NASA wait until the scheduled Fall AGU meeting to present any findings? Why can't people get it through their heads that there was no "NASA announcement"? There was a single comment from a scientist being interviewed by NPR. That was it.

Why not to trust NASA - well they have been firing rockets to the moon for decades but it was only recently (2009) that the Indian Lunar Mission that discovered water on the moon

How many rockets has NASA "fired to the Moon"? How many had the capability of detecting very low concentrations of water? You know that NASA was riding on Chandrayaan, right? You know that the Navy's Clementine found hints of water back in 1994 right?

Only two months after the discovery NASA co-incidentally had a lunar satellite all ready to crash into the moon to see how much water?

You really think that the LCROSS mission was a spur of the moment thing? An article from 2006:
www.space.com...

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Trillium

 

Well I'm incredibly convinced NASA is hiding something because of these

Those composited images are not from NASA. They are from an early version of the Clementine image browser from the US Navy. The image retrieval system had problems. Of course, Skipper ignores anything of better quality.

Ha BS moon picture are airbush make over

and this one

www.redicecreations.com...
even I could do a better job with my program (Corel PaintShop Photo Pro X3)
your like NASA Never a straight answer

Well, aside from all the websites repeating Donna's story as proof of coverups, I also found this interesting message board discussion which asks some very good questions about the claims...

cosmoquest.org...

She has testified that:

She saw a space photograph with a UFO on it, and a technician was airbrushing it out prior to public release.

...

I cannot believe the first item, the only one of the four to which she was a direct witness, because she described the photograph as showing trees and their shadows, which allowed her to determine the low altitude of the white circle she saw (and which she described as "a metallic disk") from its shadow on the ground. From what I know of NASA space photography, I believe it was impossible then or now for NASA to produce Earth surface images with sufficient detail to show a tree and its shadow. A vigorous search by several ufo buffs recently for such pictures in NASA's archives (the photo was described as being prepared for public sale) failed to locate any.

Plus some other interesting points.

I don't think anything pointed to as proof isn't explainable as jumping to conclusions based on a poor understanding of how the imaging technology works, or an eagerness to prove alien activity at any cost regardless of truth.
When an image is used as claim of a cover-up, it's important to research the background to the image, not just accept soemone's claim.

reply to post by Trillium

Ha BS moon picture are airbush make over

No they aren't...and again those images were not even from NASA.

and this one

Which is not an original image:

Cassini takes color pictures by snapping three sequential photos through red, green, and blue filters. In the time that separated the three frames, Dione moved, so if I did a simple color composite I would be able to make Titan look right, but not Dione; or Dione look right, but not Titan. So I aligned Dione, cut it out, and then aligned Titan, and then had to account for the missing bits of shadow where the bits of Dione had been in two of the three channels.

www.planetary.org...

You can see the raw image here:
saturn.jpl.nasa.gov...

Originally posted by delusion
Well, aside from all the websites repeating Donna's story as proof of coverups, I also found this interesting message board discussion which asks some very good questions about the claims...

cosmoquest.org...

She has testified that:

She saw a space photograph with a UFO on it, and a technician was airbrushing it out prior to public release.

...

I cannot believe the first item, the only one of the four to which she was a direct witness, because she described the photograph as showing trees and their shadows, which allowed her to determine the low altitude of the white circle she saw (and which she described as "a metallic disk") from its shadow on the ground. From what I know of NASA space photography, I believe it was impossible then or now for NASA to produce Earth surface images with sufficient detail to show a tree and its shadow. A vigorous search by several ufo buffs recently for such pictures in NASA's archives (the photo was described as being prepared for public sale) failed to locate any.

Plus some other interesting points.

I don't think anything pointed to as proof isn't explainable as jumping to conclusions based on a poor understanding of how the imaging technology works, or an eagerness to prove alien activity at any cost regardless of truth.
When an image is used as claim of a cover-up, it's important to research the background to the image, not just accept soemone's claim.

Well you explain to me the reason to airbush something out.

I do not know what was airbrush out but why was there a need to airbush out ( SOMETHING )
So by the fact that they did airbrush it mean they lieing. Or you need to get new glasse

Originally posted by Trillium
I do not know what was airbrush out but why was there a need to airbush out ( SOMETHING )
So by the fact that they did airbrush it mean they lieing. Or you need to get new glasse

Did you even read the article that you linked to? It says quite clearly what the person at NASA was doing, and it wasn't using magic markers to colour over a UFO.

reply to post by Trillium

Well you explain to me the reason to airbush something out.

See above.

Off Topic Post. I was gonna chime in. But as I keep reading the pages. It was way more fun to watch Slayer69 & Phage go tit for tat. My monies on Slayer 69. He has a better way of coming across in his threads. The ability to speak to all. Where as Phage is more toward a specific group. Nothing against either of you, I enjoy watching you two's banter. As stated, a tit for tat.

The rover will however find something in it's mission. It will have too or the funding will dry up faster than that elusive Martian water.

Originally posted by Trillium


Well you explain to me the reason to airbush something out.
...
I do not know what was airbrush out but why was there a need to airbush out ( SOMETHING )
So by the fact that they did airbrush it mean they lieing. Or you need to get new glasse

I was going to mention that, but I see it's been covered already. It was stated on the link itself what the reason for that was. How could you miss that?
(basically, the shot was a composite, and had to be altered to allow for the movement of the moon between shots.)

reply to post by openyourmind1262

Where as Phage is more toward a specific group.

Whereas Phage was replying to Slayer. That's pretty damned specific alright.

reply to post by Phage


You need to switch your avatar back to the "shocked" Phage. I don't think the "Hang glider Phage" is doing the trick

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
reply to post by Renegade2283

 

Military spending does include space exploration. We're just not privy to the ships the Navy has up there. Granted, most of the stuff that the Navy flies around is operated on budgets we don't know about.

I'm sure that NASA employees read ATS.

If a NASA employee is reading this, I wish I could slap the living # out of you for hiding stuff that you have access too. I dare you to leak something or push for others in your department to say "to hell with this!" and just let us know.

NASA isn't relevant anymore anway , so why worry about your jobs so much? You could be the change this world needs, and be forever remembered in the history books as the one that broke the silence.

If you're scared about being killed, what is your life compared to the massive good for the other 7 billion people on this planet? You should be ashamed of yourself, NASA employee.

Well, the graph clearly separates "Military" and "Space and Science". Sure a good chunk of NASA's funding is for military purposes and that would still be in the "space and science" category. However, that just ads credence to my point, that NASA deserves more funding for space exploration, and not for military purposes.

Your presumption that NASA isn't relevant anymore is based on their current funding. Just look at what JPL did with the measly 2.5 billion. Now imagine what could be done with say 250 billion, should be able to land a small town on Mars. This is pathetic how we are dispersing our money these days.

Also, this has nothing to do with jobs, much more about the exploration of other worlds. As Neil Armstrong once said: "Out there lies human destiny", and I want to peruse that destiny.

Seems like NASA is still threading you guys along with false hopes of finding something "ASTOUNDING" then pulling it back ot keep you interested. YOu kids keep dreaming.

Originally posted by openyourmind1262
The rover will however find something in it's mission. It will have too or the funding will dry up faster than that elusive Martian water.

I don't think NASA is "obliged" to find anything, even if they don't "find something" (or whatever be contrary to the notion of life on Mars) it will be gained knowledge as opposed to "we don't know".

The mission so far was a big success (as far as I can judge, seeing how many Mars missions failed in the past) - funding might dry out for all kinds of reasons, but NOT because NASA didn't find something "spectacular" on Mars.

On a general note, I entirely enjoy those debates which always start out with the intention to be at least halfway "scientific"...eg. "What might that discovery be?".... seeing it's always a guarantee to ALSO draw the nutcases with their "NASA airbrushed" etc. input. Sigh. Having a halfway sane debate on ATS these days is almost as difficult as going to whorehouse and argue with the "employees" there about the benefits of virginity... But...then it's a conspiracy site...so....well...

reply to post by Phage

Why can't people get it through their heads that there was no "NASA announcement"? There was a single comment from a scientist being interviewed by NPR. That was it.

Well then that NASA scientist shouldn't be making statements to the press. Most large companies I've worked for, have all employees direct any press questions to the local branch HR department to get in touch with the press liaison. I'm guessing the scientist was hyped up for the incoming analysis.
Never the less, it will be interesting to see what they have found.

As the OP stated, could they be downplaying what they have found? I'm sure they could, we can't even get a straight answer on Benghazi from this administration.

Originally posted by Jason88

I tend to agree with thought 2, but who knows anymore.

i agree to because scientist's can get a huge woody over something the average joe wouldn't care one way or the other about, mainly because we have no clue whatever it is could possibly pertain to BUT why drag out what their find is? this is exactly how "conspiracy theories" get started!!! no matter what field no one should say anything until they're ready to explain and elaborate on their findings. everyday life is hard enough to get through without added the stress of these kinds of announcements. it's like the news.. "life threatening pandemic found in your neighborhood, exposure is fatal, time is critical as you will die in seconds after exposure, find out more when we return at 11pm." HA humanity is best at cutting off it's nose to spite it's face!!