http://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/2016/12/three-mile-high-towers-found-on-mars.html
On British news, too. I wish they didn't have the misleading CGI presentation. Reminds me of an AM Radio station.
Some people do anything for 15 minutes of fame (and probably some ads money).
odd I seem to recall this image was from Antarctica years ago
(http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/80/590x/secondary/Mars-Towers-747761.jpg)
Quote from: zorgon on December 08, 2016, 02:55:18 AM
odd I seem to recall this image was from Antarctica years ago
(http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/80/590x/secondary/Mars-Towers-747761.jpg)
Does look awful familiar Z; pity they didn't post the coordinates from Google to go with the name...
Seeker
Quote from: the seeker on December 08, 2016, 03:39:57 AM
Does look awful familiar Z; pity they didn't post the coordinates from Google to go with the name...
Seeker
Seeker, this is a video by secureteam10 that does briefly give specific Mars Orbiter photo numbers during the video - and shows how to do that for some that probably don't even know that the real stuff is available on Google Mars too!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IC9GYRX7eNA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IC9GYRX7eNA)
Quote from: zorgon on December 08, 2016, 02:55:18 AM
odd I seem to recall this image was from Antarctica years ago
(http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/80/590x/secondary/Mars-Towers-747761.jpg)
No, that photo is from Mars, it's photo M00-01661 (http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/ab1_m04/images/M0001661.html) from Mars Global Surveyor's MOC camera.
I don't know where they got the "three miles high" idea, the original video (in Spanish) doesn't say a thing about the height of the "towers".
Also, we can know that height, as we do have all the necessary information, even shown in the original video. The official page shows several pieces of information, and one of those, called "Incidence angle", is the angle between the vertical at the location and Sun's position, so the Sun was 90º - 42.23º = 47.77º over the horizon. With that information, the image resolution (2.87 metres per pixel) and the length of the shadows (6 pixels) we can get a height of around 19 metres.
Also, we can see that the width of the shadows is not much different from the length, so they are not tower-like.
PS: while measuring the shadows I noticed that one of the "towers" is slightly higher and wider than the rest, by one pixel.
Quote from: ArMaP on December 08, 2016, 04:11:11 PM
I don't know where they got the "three miles high" idea, the original video (in Spanish) doesn't say a thing about the height of the "towers".
They pulled it out of their ass to sensationalize the story ::)
QuoteAlso, we can know that height, as we do have all the necessary information, even shown in the original video. The official page shows several pieces of information, and one of those, called "Incidence angle", is the angle between the vertical at the location and Sun's position, so the Sun was 90º - 42.23º = 47.77º over the horizon. With that information, the image resolution (2.87 metres per pixel) and the length of the shadows (6 pixels) we can get a height of around 19 metres.
Also, we can see that the width of the shadows is not much different from the length, so they are not tower-like.
So then the object itself is roughly a cube approximately 60'x60'x60'?
QuotePS: while measuring the shadows I noticed that one of the "towers" is slightly higher and wider than the rest, by one pixel.
Ok, can you post the image zoomed in a bit, Armap? Perhaps enough to see a bit more detail...
Seeker
Quote from: the seeker on December 08, 2016, 10:14:23 PM
So then the object itself is roughly a cube approximately 60'x60'x60'?
No, as the objects are longer than wide. You can see in the following images, resized to 390%, that the one on the left, for example, is 5 pixels (14 metres) wide and 7 pixels (20 metres) long.
(click for full size)
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/Marte_12.jpg) (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/Marte_12.jpg)
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/Marte_13.jpg) (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/Marte_13.jpg)
ok then they are rectangular...approximately 60' high by 42' by 63'... so can we ascertain if the edges are straight or not?
ok, I figured out how to enlarge it some more; it looks like straight edges on all three to me...
also appears the shadows are triangular in shape, indicating a peaked top on each one...
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/Marte_13.jpg)
what say you, Armap?
8)
Seeker
I think those things are the same as these, close to that area.
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/r0501819_1.jpg)
The above image was taken from photo R05-01819 (http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/r03_r09/images/R05/R0501819.html).
Quite possible, for they do bear a strong resemblance to each other; just seems weird that there is a series of little mini-buttes scattered across Mare Terrannus or whatever it's called...
8)
Seeker