Just picked these images from another site to share them here. Thought people here would like to give them a good looking over ;)
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/marsanomalies3_zpsf45b9621.jpg) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/marsanomalies3_zpsf45b9621.jpg.html)
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/PIA17931_zps18d02cef.jpg) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/PIA17931_zps18d02cef.jpg.html)
Link to image: http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA17931.jpg
I watched the discussion over at you know where about these..
Same old; "its a statue", "it's a rock".
Somebody needs to fly up there and actually check it out.. Any volunteers? ;D
Quote from: Sinny on February 22, 2014, 12:55:29 PM
I watched the discussion over at you know where about these..
Same old; "its a statue", "it's a rock".
At least it is on the ground. This gotta be one of the best to figure out. Wow, creapy martian.
Deuem
A lot of the other rocks scatter around the object could relate to the rest of the 'statue' like the torso and legs. If this 'statue' was blown apart from some great force then the rest of it could have landed some distance from the head piece or right by it.
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/1422_zpsbba45a45.jpg) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/1422_zpsbba45a45.jpg.html)
Quote from: Flux on February 22, 2014, 07:21:15 PM
A lot of the other rocks scatter around the object could relate to the rest of the 'statue' like the torso and legs. If this 'statue' was blown apart from some great force then the rest of it could have landed some distance from the head piece or right by it.
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/1422_zpsbba45a45.jpg) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/1422_zpsbba45a45.jpg.html)
I agree, I have looked a little further into the image a while back and there are some question marks to be placed there. 8)
Mars is the man o war and looking at images of it, looks as though a war was fought there because there sure is a lot of material strewn around fractured like an energy weapon shattered it. I see signs of energy weapon blast on mars moon phobos and our own moon.
This image came from Zorgon long ago when we participated on tango spookz and OM forum. I seen a helmet with a body laid down next to it like some fallen defender of mars, or maybe a foreign illegal alien soldier from off planet. I gif imaged the scene so others could see the detail that I saw hidden in the image.
(http://s28.postimg.org/6pxi8zyq5/marsbones1.gif)
The images do look as though a face is there and that face looks to be an elongated skull type. Perhaps not to friendly as the mirrored reflection forming both side of the face appear not to friendly.
There are a lot of clean flat surfaces on some of the rocks as though they have been cut. Some parts of the photo appear to have blur applied to it where it doesn't match other areas? Maybe just a heat haze effect?
Quote from: Flux on February 22, 2014, 08:34:57 PM
There are a lot of clean flat surfaces on some of the rocks as though they have been cut. Some parts of the photo appear to have blur applied to it where it does match another area? Maybe just a heat haze effect?
Agree, noticed the same about the blurred areas. Weird.?!?!
There are just to many rocks which just do not fit the picture, its only hard to tell why exactly. :P
Quote from: Flux on February 22, 2014, 08:34:57 PM
There are a lot of clean flat surfaces on some of the rocks as though they have been cut.
The way it breaks is one of the characteristics of rocks, with different types of rock breaking in different ways.
QuoteSome parts of the photo appear to have blur applied to it where it does match other areas?
Could you point to a specific part?
QuoteMaybe just a heat haze effect?
Not very likely, temperatures on Mars are too low for that and the atmosphere is too thin.
PS: are the blurred areas on the large image?
Quote from: ArMaP on February 22, 2014, 09:00:02 PM
PS: are the blurred areas on the large image?
yes, somewhere in the middle. Have no comp to show you know :(. Its pretty obvious to see imo when knowing where to look.
Yeah I agree with the breaking of a rock that you sometimes can get a clean break but normally I can find the other piece of the rock laying next to it.
Blurred areas are on the larger landscape photo. Ground appears blurred left of the large rock in the middle, large rock to the right with a slope and one face appears blurred (more noticeable on the smaller rock just above it). May want to view the full image again to compare the surrounding area.
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Zoomed_zps21073a09.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Zoomed_zps21073a09.png.html)
Quote from: Lunica on February 22, 2014, 09:17:04 PM
yes, somewhere in the middle.
I see it, thanks. :)
It looks like they used lower resolution images in some areas to make the panorama. I will try to make my own version to see what happens. :D
Quote from: Flux on February 22, 2014, 08:34:57 PM
There are a lot of clean flat surfaces on some of the rocks as though they have been cut. Some parts of the photo appear to have blur applied to it where it doesn't match other areas? Maybe just a heat haze effect?
Yes, in going over the entire pic, I saw several pieces that I though appeared to have been shadowed. And that was before I read your comment. I will go back later and screenshot them and post here.
One of the things I wondered about was what has the appearance of a foundational wall on the edged of the slope on the upper right of the photo. The wall runs horizontally to a point of jutting out from the slope, and then makes a 90 degree turn to the right, and goes to the right for a distance. I will make a pic of that too.
I got in on this photo as closely as possible. I say that there is evidence that the whole front area is a coverup of the closer objects in this image.
After you posted that I had a look around the front area. You can see some vertical blur lines from the bottom of the image through to the sandy area where the rocks start. Is that where they are splicing in the multiple photos or cut and paste to cover an area?
Quote from: Flux on February 22, 2014, 05:15:55 AM
Just picked these images from another site to share them here. Thought people here would like to give them a good looking over ;)
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/marsanomalies3_zpsf45b9621.jpg) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/marsanomalies3_zpsf45b9621.jpg.html)
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/PIA17931_zps18d02cef.jpg) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/PIA17931_zps18d02cef.jpg.html)
Link to image: http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA17931.jpg
Flux, look at the 10 o'clock position of the red circle; appears to be another face on top of that black rock...
seeker
That very well could be. Sort of laying back with it's nose pointing up wards.
That image has been played around with say the brightness or contrast so it's bringing in some artifacts but it's still in the Nasa photo.
After making my own panorama I could see that the blurred area corresponds to (at least) two photos that are slightly out of focus, photo 0528ML2087010000E1_DXXX and photo 0528ML2087011000E1_DXXX.
You can see my version of the panorama and a "colour stretched" version below (click for full size).
(http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r66/armap/0528ML2085001000E3_DXXX_stitch-x.jpg) (http://www.4shared.com/download/LDa3AINJba/0528ML2085001000E3_DXXX_stitch.jpg)
(http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r66/armap/0528ML2085001000E3_DXXX_stitch2-x.jpg) (http://www.4shared.com/download/vuaXC-fKce/0528ML2085001000E3_DXXX_stitch.jpg)
Thanks ArMaP for those versions:)
Ok, now lets take a big stretch.... :P
What would be the story ? 8)
(http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z333/Lunica-Pegasus/Mars/imagemars_zps3dab8c14.jpg) (http://s1184.photobucket.com/user/Lunica-Pegasus/media/Mars/imagemars_zps3dab8c14.jpg.html)
(http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z333/Lunica-Pegasus/Mars/imagemars1_zpsc70ff56c.jpg) (http://s1184.photobucket.com/user/Lunica-Pegasus/media/Mars/imagemars1_zpsc70ff56c.jpg.html)
So, there was this plateau, some severe earthquakes in the last 25.000 years ago, and you get what we see? ::) :P ;D
lets dig some around, and we get this?
(http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z333/Lunica-Pegasus/Mars/acropolis_zpse3f9e020.jpg) (http://s1184.photobucket.com/user/Lunica-Pegasus/media/Mars/acropolis_zpse3f9e020.jpg.html)
Well, thats way to far fetched . I know :)
Quote from: Lunica on February 23, 2014, 07:45:38 PM
Ok, now lets take a big stretch.... :P
What would be the story ? 8)
(http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z333/Lunica-Pegasus/Mars/imagemars_zps3dab8c14.jpg) (http://s1184.photobucket.com/user/Lunica-Pegasus/media/Mars/imagemars_zps3dab8c14.jpg.html)
(http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z333/Lunica-Pegasus/Mars/imagemars1_zpsc70ff56c.jpg) (http://s1184.photobucket.com/user/Lunica-Pegasus/media/Mars/imagemars1_zpsc70ff56c.jpg.html)
So, there was this plateau, some severe earthquakes in the last 25.000 years ago, and you get what we see? ::) :P ;D
I don't think that's the result of earthquakes (marsquakes?), as an earthquake strong enough to break the ground would leave other signs. To me, everything points to water erosion, the path the rover is following looks like the result of the draining of a large amount of water, moving in the direction of the mountain in the centre of the crater.
I hope that they find more layers closer to the mountain. :)
Nice work Armap.
Interesting work Lunica. It's best to bring it to peoples attention regardless so it may spur others to commenting or finding other features ;)
One thing I forgot to mention is there is an inscription on the face of one large rock in the middle by the blurred area. Can't circle the rock here at work but the rock is on the 3rd overlay/tile from the right side just zoom in an you'll see it on the face.
Here's My workover.
Yellow is indicating what I think was added
Pink is areas I processed a bit
Blue is commentary/pointing out things
(http://www.4shared.com/download/vImCu_jYce/Mars_With_Commentary.png)
Quote from: Amaterasu on February 24, 2014, 05:58:19 PM
Blue is commentary/pointing out things
It's more green than blue, but that's OK. :P
As for the comments, I know it's useless to point that, if they wanted to hide any thing, nobody would be able to notice it, but I will do it just the same. ;D
And yes, sand made of different sized particles behaves and moves in different ways, you can even see that on a beach.
Quote from: ArMaP on February 24, 2014, 08:56:25 PM
It's more green than blue, but that's OK. :P
As for the comments, I know it's useless to point that, if they wanted to hide any thing, nobody would be able to notice it, but I will do it just the same. ;D
And if They wanted to create controversy, They would add flaws. Divide & conquer.
QuoteAnd yes, sand made of different sized particles behaves and moves in different ways, you can even see that on a beach.
Agreed, ArMaP, but the edges here are classic pasteover and too straight. There are other areas I did not address which look like smudge tool, cloning, blurring, and other Photoshop tools.
Also consider that the intelligence They credit Us with is extremely low. "Meh. No One will notice, and I have a bazillion more of these to do..."
I say the front of the image is shopped in.
Quote from: Amaterasu on February 24, 2014, 09:14:29 PM
Also consider that the intelligence They credit Us with is extremely low.
How do you know that?
Quote"Meh. No One will notice, and I have a bazillion more of these to do..."
Does that mean that nobody checks the result? Do you really believe that?
QuoteI say the front of the image is shopped in.
Everything in that panorama is edited, if you look at the original photos, at the photos from the different cameras, at the photos of all the different Sols from all those cameras, you would see that things have always looked like that in all photos from all cameras in all the Sols it appears in.
PS: The fact that you know that some things can be done in Photoshop doesn't mean that they do it.
Quote from: ArMaP on February 24, 2014, 09:32:06 PM
How do you know that?
LOL! Well, ArMaP, I ponder things like Sandy Hook that are VERY sloppy and I have to think one of two things is at play here: They WANT to be caught, OR... They think enough of Us are stupid enough to buy what They sell.
More divide & conquer? You bet. But I will also guess that They bank (literally and figuratively) on the expectation that enough of Us are not thinking enough to see the issues - either by refusal to investigate or refusal to believe.
[shrug] That is what the data I have collected suggest is the highest probability. By a very good margin. Believe as Your data have shown You. If You see a conflict in Our data, show Me Yours.
QuoteDoes that mean that nobody checks the result? Do you really believe that?
How did You get from not caring about all the details in the images (doing it "close enough for government work," as My dad always said) to the idea that no One checks the details? Or, I guess, that I was saying that no One would check. A shill tactic, love, best avoided.
Obviously, ArMaP, We ARE checking the details. We are also marginalized, or haven't You noticed? It's not that no One will check results, but They are cocksure that They can control the information. "Those whacky 'life on [fill in Your favorite glob of matter big enough to support life]' folks. What a bunch of kooks! Don't spend Your valuable time looking and reading! Here's something much more important: Justin Bieber is arrested for drunk driving!"
QuoteEverything in that panorama is edited, if you look at the original photos, at the photos from the different cameras, at the photos of all the different Sols from all those cameras, you would see that things have always looked like that in all photos from all cameras in all the Sols it appears in.
ArMaP, do You really need Me to spell this out? Really? Ok. The areas I indicated were deliberately covered up with additions from, likely, another set of pics of some other place. I have looked at a lot of these panoramas and know what to expect. I am not saying that the front could not represent something One might expect in any of the pictures They have collected, but that They likely took a different set to make that to cover what's really there.
QuotePS: The fact that you know that some things can be done in Photoshop doesn't mean that they do it.
No, but the finding of the artifacts that I do not see in unretouched photographs that are common on PS work, lends very high probability to the possibility that They DO. [smile]
Quote from: Amaterasu on February 24, 2014, 11:13:46 PM
LOL! Well, ArMaP, I ponder things like Sandy Hook that are VERY sloppy and I have to think one of two things is at play here: They WANT to be caught, OR... They think enough of Us are stupid enough to buy what They sell.
Or people think that they are smarter than they are.
QuoteHow did You get from not caring about all the details in the images (doing it "close enough for government work," as My dad always said) to the idea that no One checks the details? Or, I guess, that I was saying that no One would check. A shill tactic, love, best avoided.
If someone is doing a work before something is published, doesn't that work get checked after being done? If you were in charge of the people making the changes would you ignore your work and let things pass (while the people doing the work made a bad job of it) without checking?
In the company where I work we did, some years ago, several scanning jobs, and the people that were doing the scanning verified the resulting images, but those images were checked by other people to see if everything was as it should be, as we had some quality rules to follow. Why any "evidence hiding" done by the all-powerful PTB would ignore that basic rule?
QuoteObviously, ArMaP, We ARE checking the details.
That's not what I was talking about, see above.
QuoteWe are also marginalized, or haven't You noticed?
I see more self marginalizing than anything else.
QuoteThe areas I indicated were deliberately covered up with additions from, likely, another set of pics of some other place. I have looked at a lot of these panoramas and know what to expect.
I have been looking at these photos for a long time and I have been making some panoramas myself, I know what to expect, I know how things are done and I can make them.
QuoteI am not saying that the front could not represent something One might expect in any of the pictures They have collected, but that They likely took a different set to make that to cover what's really there.
For that to work they would have needed to change all the photos from all the cameras from all the different Sols that show any of the altered areas, so they matched from camera to camera, from Sol to Sol, from point of view to point of view.
QuoteNo, but the finding of the artifacts that I do not see in unretouched photographs that are common on PS work, lends very high probability to the possibility that They DO. [smile]
Sorry, I don't understand the underlined part.
Quote from: ArMaP on February 25, 2014, 12:04:53 AM
If someone is doing a work before something is published, doesn't that work get checked after being done? If you were in charge of the people making the changes would you ignore your work and let things pass (while the people doing the work made a bad job of it) without checking?
Do You really think that the People in charge have the time to go over the images with the scrutiny We give them? Or do You think that They give them once-overs, to see that all obvious stuff is removed? I'm betting on the latter.
QuoteIn the company where I work we did, some years ago, several scanning jobs, and the people that were doing the scanning verified the resulting images, but those images were checked by other people to see if everything was as it should be, as we had some quality rules to follow. Why any "evidence hiding" done by the all-powerful PTB would ignore that basic rule?
I'm sure They do check - and often have judgment calls - "Can We pass that off as natural?" But in a place that has money riding on good work, versus a place that is trying to deceive, the standards are different. The deceivers are only motivated to produce "good enough," as opposed to excellence.
QuoteI see more self marginalizing than anything else.
[scratching head] Ok. [shrug]
QuoteI have been looking at these photos for a long time and I have been making some panoramas myself, I know what to expect, I know how things are done and I can make them.
Fair enough.
QuoteFor that to work they would have needed to change all the photos from all the cameras from all the different Sols that show any of the altered areas, so they matched from camera to camera, from Sol to Sol, from point of view to point of view.
And I say that if They have a series of pics from another place but done at the same times, same direction, that suited the coverup need, it wouldn't be that difficult to use a construct from them. Bet if I had the original images in both such sets, I could hand them back such that a composite panorama could be made. But also, I could create a cover made from one panorama and apply it to the other, if the originals were not available publicly.
The "matching" is less important in the uninterrupted sand, anyway.
QuoteSorry, I don't understand the underlined part.
Rephrase: That I am finding PS artifacts, things I do not see in unretouched photos, gives the high probability that They do tamper with images.
Quote from: Amaterasu on February 25, 2014, 12:50:35 AM
Do You really think that the People in charge have the time to go over the images with the scrutiny We give them? Or do You think that They give them once-overs, to see that all obvious stuff is removed? I'm betting on the latter.
I suppose it depends on their honesty: if they are there for doing some kind of job they should do it the best they can. At least that's how I do it.
QuoteAnd I say that if They have a series of pics from another place but done at the same times, same direction, that suited the coverup need, it wouldn't be that difficult to use a construct from them.
That's a big "if".
QuoteRephrase: That I am finding PS artifacts, things I do not see in unretouched photos, gives the high probability that They do tamper with images.
Thanks, that I understand. :)
I understand but I disagree, what PS artefacts did you find?
Couple of things I've come across while looking over the photo:
The rock that has some kind of inscription on it.
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Rock_zps4c223ca0.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Rock_zps4c223ca0.png.html)
A shell? Looks a bit out of place where it sits.
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Shell_zps567f2bae.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Shell_zps567f2bae.png.html)
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Shellzoomed_zps97282c95.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Shellzoomed_zps97282c95.png.html)
And a fossilized hand sock puppet or some ET's arm? :D
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Arm_zps82c028af.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Arm_zps82c028af.png.html)
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Armzoomed_zps5018cf46.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Armzoomed_zps5018cf46.png.html)
Quote from: ArMaP on February 25, 2014, 12:57:29 AM
I suppose it depends on their honesty: if they are there for doing some kind of job they should do it the best they can. At least that's how I do it.
In a situation where the job is hiding things, I can hardly expect Them to be interested in "doing the best." They do "good enough." And the People in charge do not have the time to look with the scrutiny that Their underlings are giving the images. If They have 10 underlings scrutinizing the images, and each does 10 pics a day, the One in charge would have to look at 100 images a day. No way They can do that and expect to have time to do anything else - including eating, sleeping, and handling Mother Nature.
Yes, ArMaP, in a world run on personal integrity (like TAP), doing the BEST job is expected. In a world run on planned obsolescence and deceit, "good enough" is all the effort We can expect.
QuoteThat's a big "if".
Given that all They have to do is match shadowing, not so big. If They have an image taken with the sun in opposite position, They can reverse the images to match the shadows... I'm saying They have millions of photos to choose from. Why such a big "if?"
QuoteI understand but I disagree, what PS artefacts did you find?
In the image below: look at the edge of the sand area. See how it's not sharp but has a fuzzy and consistently so edge? Artifact. Compare it to the edge in the lower right where the sand changes angles. Not fuzzy at all. This I never see in unretouched photos.
Also, the grains there are big. Suddenly, it jumps to much finer sand. Though You say that it can be explained by "types of sand," I say not.
(http://dc398.4shared.com/img/0-Jp3FV6ce/s3/1446a37c620/Mars_PS_Artifacts.png)
Quote from: Flux on February 25, 2014, 03:49:16 AM
A shell? Looks a bit out of place where it sits.
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Shell_zps567f2bae.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Shell_zps567f2bae.png.html)
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Shellzoomed_zps97282c95.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Shellzoomed_zps97282c95.png.html)
To me it looks like the same kind of rock as the one on the top right, only with a different shape.
Quote from: Amaterasu on February 25, 2014, 06:28:04 PM
Yes, ArMaP, in a world run on personal integrity (like TAP), doing the BEST job is expected. In a world run on planned obsolescence and deceit, "good enough" is all the effort We can expect.
I don't work that way.
QuoteGiven that all They have to do is match shadowing, not so big.
Match shadows, lights and perspective (something that I have noticed most people do not understand), for (I think) 6 different cameras. It's a big if.
QuoteIn the image below: look at the edge of the sand area.
Which one? ???
QuoteSee how it's not sharp but has a fuzzy and consistently so edge?
If I know which one you are talking about, maybe. :)
QuoteAlso, the grains there are big. Suddenly, it jumps to much finer sand. Though You say that it can be explained by "types of sand," I say not.
That's interesting, what kind of experience do you have with sand?
Quote from: Amaterasu on February 25, 2014, 06:28:04 PM
In the image below: look at the edge of the sand area. See how it's not sharp but has a fuzzy and consistently so edge? Artifact. Compare it to the edge in the lower right where the sand changes angles. Not fuzzy at all. This I never see in unretouched photos.
Also, the grains there are big. Suddenly, it jumps to much finer sand. Though You say that it can be explained by "types of sand," I say not.
No artifiact, it's wind effect on sand. The fine sand is lightest and blown off until it drops behind a ridge and the wind strength can't hold it any longer and it accumulates on that side of the ridge. You'll end up with the exposed ridge side having larger heavier grains, and the protected wind side with lighter smaller finer windblown grains. The pictures you have provide an excellent example of that. Mother Nature at work.
The closer ridge which you say is not fuzzy - it's in better focus. The further ridge you say is fuzzy - look at it compaired to the closer ridge - it's less in focus in regards to everything.
Quote from: ArMaP on February 25, 2014, 08:28:27 PM
To me it looks like the same kind of rock as the one on the top right, only with a different shape.
Yeah possible it is. I do see a little trail behind the shell/rock that looks like it's been sliding down the hill (more the flat bit of rock it sits on is sliding).
Also how about that sock puppet? May have been it's last performance?
Quote from: ArMaP on February 25, 2014, 08:34:55 PM
I don't work that way.
So? We are not discussing You. We are discussing guys whose job it is to crank through many images and hide evidence of life off planet. The way You work is irrelevant.
QuoteMatch shadows, lights and perspective (something that I have noticed most people do not understand), for (I think) 6 different cameras. It's a big if.
I understand. I say I could find this suitable sand bar thingy and use it to cover info in another set of images.
QuoteWhich one? ???
I posted an image with a yellow line along the edge where the sand was added. Refer to that one.
QuoteIf I know which one you are talking about, maybe. :)
See above.
QuoteThat's interesting, what kind of experience do you have with sand?
About as much as with any other photo.
Quote from: Amaterasu on February 25, 2014, 11:26:25 PM
The way You work is irrelevant.
It's not irrelevant to me, as I cannot know how someone that doesn't think like me can act.
QuoteI posted an image with a yellow line along the edge where the sand was added. Refer to that one.
Thanks, I will. :)
QuoteAbout as much as with any other photo.
I was talking about sand in real life, as in sand in you hands, under you feet, etc.
Edit: I looked at the image with the yellow lines and don't understand what I should look at, is it the edge that was covered with the yellow line, the "border" between the finer and the coarser sand? ???
Ok I've been reading about different sands etc and how they can be affected by winds etc so I grabbed some random Mars photos and placed them on here.
This photo shows larger type sand grains close to the camera and then there are a lot finer sand gains further back so I gather the rocks up front have stopped the 'flow' of the larger grains traveling back? Flow meaning 'winds' affecting the sand.
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Marssandexample_zpscb631bb7.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Marssandexample_zpscb631bb7.png.html)
Regarding the discussion of some odd ball stuff in the original Nasa photo I grabbed another random image to run by the members on here. In this image there are some stones in the top of the photo and a bit in from the left with odd shadows. The other odd bit is the gray flat looking rock right side above half way up the photo. Sorry can't mark it at work at the moment. Possible other parts of the photo have some odd bits but don't have time at the moment to go over it.
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Somethingodd_zps5027c6f2.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Somethingodd_zps5027c6f2.png.html)
Quote from: Flux on February 26, 2014, 01:40:53 AM
This photo shows larger type sand grains close to the camera and then there are a lot finer sand gains further back so I gather the rocks up front have stopped the 'flow' of the larger grains traveling back? Flow meaning 'winds' affecting the sand.
I think it's the opposite, the rocks trap the finer sand that is blown by the wind, while the areas without rock lose that finer sand, taken by the wind.
My opinion is influenced by the way the finer sand appears to be "arranged" around the rocks.
As for the odd shadows, I don't understand what you are referring to.
Quote from: ArMaP on February 26, 2014, 12:49:45 AM
It's not irrelevant to me, as I cannot know how someone that doesn't think like me can act.
Not good at putting Yourself into Others' shoes, eh? That may explain a thing or two. Thankfully, that is one of My talents.
QuoteI was talking about sand in real life, as in sand in you hands, under you feet, etc.
I grew up on the beaches of San Diego, and lived in the desert sands of Las Vegas for nearly a decade. Does that count?
QuoteEdit: I looked at the image with the yellow lines and don't understand what I should look at, is it the edge that was covered with the yellow line, the "border" between the finer and the coarser sand? ???
Yup.
Quote from: ArMaP on February 26, 2014, 01:46:27 AM
I think it's the opposite, the rocks trap the finer sand that is blown by the wind, while the areas without rock lose that finer sand, taken by the wind.
My opinion is influenced by the way the finer sand appears to be "arranged" around the rocks.
As for the odd shadows, I don't understand what you are referring to.
Can you mark out the 'arranged' areas of sand Armap because I'm trying to wrap my brain around all this for better understanding.
Odd shadows under the 2 rocks left side just under the horizon line I think that points it out a bit better than my last attempt (damn being stuck at work :))
Flux, On the blow up of the rock photo above, if you let your mind wander and stare at it like a goat a different picture comes out. it looks like some type of Mars Bunny with a dogs face. The rock is hair and you can see a big ear on the right and the left is flopped down, The eyes are there and then a dogs nose coming to 2 nostrels in black. Looks all cozy balled up sitting in the sun getting warm.
Most heavy sand that I know of has been pushed to where it is and not blown. Unless there is a very strong wind the sand usually sits on or near the ground and gets broomed along till it hits something and piles up. I have even been in several real sand storm and the stuff that is whipping around is not the stuff that is on the ground but the lighter stuff that is light enough to get caught in the wind.
The real heavy sand, like construction sand is very difficult to get in the air and keep it there. With the atmosphere on Mars being so light I would expect only the fine powered sand to achieve flight. So any river bed would be stripped of the fine particals over time and show the heavy ones. The hills should be covered by dust sand or powder sand. I would think that without water tumbling rocks the process of making sand there has almost stoped compared to Earth.
As I see it both sand and dirt are items that are made by a live planet. Water and worms doing their jobs. They are not natural to the planet when it was formed into molten rock. How rock powder such as is on the moon is still a question for me compared to Mars or Earth.
Deuem
Thanks Deuem for explaining this in great detail but.... how about my sock puppet? :)
Ok so getting back to the subject the heavier sand (in the first image) closest to the screen has been pushed toward the larger rocks causing them to sort 'bank' up along that 'edge' we see in the photo while smaller air born sand 'flows' into the back ground.
Yah!
I like the Sock Puppet and I have studied it a bit. It does look like an arm that has broken off or maybe pealed off. It looks like the shoulder section is in the air and I am looking for a means of supporting it in the air, hence the pealed section must be underground. That's a first take.
Deuem
Poor sock. Must been a failed mission.
I'm now looking more at the larger arranged sands around the rocks closest to the screen seeing and studying how they are formed around the rocks.
Flux, in that last random pic slightly above dead center is what looks like a bowling pin or a bottle of some sort...
seeker
Hah! Cool :)
The object is laying on it's side and is covered by a couple of patches of sand.
Quote from: Amaterasu on February 26, 2014, 01:52:54 AM
Not good at putting Yourself into Others' shoes, eh?
Yes, how can I pretend to know what other people think and feel? :)
QuoteI grew up on the beaches of San Diego, and lived in the desert sands of Las Vegas for nearly a decade. Does that count?
Yes, that's the kind of information I wanted to know. Apparently, we have different understandings of how sand behaves. :)
Quote from: Flux on February 26, 2014, 04:17:10 AM
Hah! Cool :)
The object is laying on it's side and is covered by a couple of patches of sand.
Yup. 8) I think one of the reasons for the odd shadows in this one has to do with the time intervals between the shots; look at the sky and you can see stitch lines and a lot of variation in the clouds...different times, different days, we need a different NASA...
seeker
Quote from: Flux on February 26, 2014, 01:40:53 AM
This photo shows larger type sand grains close to the camera and then there are a lot finer sand gains further back so I gather the rocks up front have stopped the 'flow' of the larger grains traveling back? Flow meaning 'winds' affecting the sand.
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Marssandexample_zpscb631bb7.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Marssandexample_zpscb631bb7.png.html)
That looks like a Viking panorama, I will look for the original images.
QuoteRegarding the discussion of some odd ball stuff in the original Nasa photo I grabbed another random image to run by the members on here. In this image there are some stones in the top of the photo and a bit in from the left with odd shadows. The other odd bit is the gray flat looking rock right side above half way up the photo. Sorry can't mark it at work at the moment. Possible other parts of the photo have some odd bits but don't have time at the moment to go over it.
(http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l595/FluxNz/Somethingodd_zps5027c6f2.png) (http://s1125.photobucket.com/user/FluxNz/media/Somethingodd_zps5027c6f2.png.html)
This one looks like a Curiosity panorama, but I'm not sure, do you have an image ID?
I was looking over those random images, Flux, and I say the second one is shopped. Something was covered up, like the sand image. There is something metallic that was not covered in the circle I show below:
(http://dc529.4shared.com/download/tVF4lrMpce/Mars_Fakery_Drawn.png?lgfp=1000)
The yellow line denotes where a piece of one image was used to cover part of another.
I just googled the images and grabbed the ones that best suited the discussion. No data/image ID on them.
Quote from: the seeker on February 26, 2014, 10:34:24 AM
Yup. 8) I think one of the reasons for the odd shadows in this one has to do with the time intervals between the shots; look at the sky and you can see stitch lines and a lot of variation in the clouds...different times, different days, we need a different NASA...
seeker
Hmmm... didn't give that a thought about time intervals. With these photos they are not so wide as the very first image I posted with the statue in it so I was thinking it was a single photo?
I have two things to say about the photos posted by Flux:
1 - I was wrong about both photos, they are from Mars Pathfinder, a mission I always forget. :-[
2 - This time Amaterasu is right, that image was altered. :)
One interesting thing is that I cannot find the altered image, only the original (for the upper part), so knowing where Flux got that image would be nice, so we can see who is altering photos.
I Googled 'Mars landscapes' under images and had to scroll through a lot of pages then clicked the image, from there it gives you the larger version of the image so I just right clicked and grab it from there. Didn't visit the site website or take note of it at the time.
I did come across the upper photo while searching so once you know what your looking for you can pick it but I can't find an image for the lower section?
So what about the other photo for tampering?
Quote from: ArMaP on February 26, 2014, 09:36:00 PM
I have two things to say about the photos posted by Flux:
1 - I was wrong about both photos, they are from Mars Pathfinder, a mission I always forget. :-[
2 - This time Amaterasu is right, that image was altered. :)
One interesting thing is that I cannot find the altered image, only the original (for the upper part), so knowing where Flux got that image would be nice, so we can see who is altering photos.
I am going to have this enlarged to billboard size and give it to Amy.
Wow, this a first to see. At least you were man enough to put it in print.
A golden bar for you. 299 to 300
deuem
Quote from: deuem on February 27, 2014, 11:09:30 AM
I am going to have this enlarged to billboard size and give it to Amy.
;D
QuoteWow, this a first to see. At least you were man enough to put it in print.
I always do that, if I knew that something was wrong and didn't tell other people then I would be making things worse, as I would be helping a wrong idea to be spread instead of the truth.
QuoteA golden bar for you. 299 to 300
Thanks. :)
Thank You, ArMaP and Deuem. [smile]