Photo Tampering - Victoria Crater - Cape St. Vincent

[rdunk]

We often mention suspicion of photo tampering by NASA et.al., and one of the most obvious places for that having been done in Mars is on Cape St, Vincent. When we look at the "face wall" of Cape Vincent, we can still see the ancient Egyptian looking statue, and several other obvious anomalies, but still, the entire wall of this cape appears to have been tampered with.

For the most part, it has been done in a way that makes the wall look as if it has been "textured". The "texture" is lined to make it appear somewhat natural, but in my opinion, that is what shows it to be so "unnatural". I am no photo expert, nor am I a geologist, but to me this just does not look right.

So, I am making this OP for the purpose of bringing to light what is the reality, or lack thereof, in these Mars rover photos.

I am going to start with a piece that I believe to be evidence of such tampering, and all are invited to add any such items and thoughts you have relative to the tampering here. I do have other pieces that I will post separately too.

This first item is something I just saw recently, while looking at this cape again. In a magnification of a high quality photo of the forward cliff, in a particular place, I saw for the first time, texturing lines above/unattached to a rock face. It seems that however this tampering is applied, in this instant, it went a little awry. The texturing is formed over the leading edge of a vertical drop, but we can see the vertical edge under the texturing as it goes downward. The vertical, edge is white, and it is obvious. And the texturing lines "above/unattached" to the vertical edge are also obvious.

It is also  interesting to note that the other two capes that can also be seen in the photo, just to the  backside of Cape St. Vincent, have no similar "texturing lines" covering their rock faces.. ?

So all of you can take a look it too, I will post a link to the full photo of the Cape.. Because attachments are disabled on PRC, I cannot post my screenshots of the tampering evidence. But I will give you a link to these in a post I have made elsewhere. In the screenshots, I do identify the specific photo location of the "tampering evidence", and on the other, I show the actual evidence.

You will need to magnify the "full photo" substantially to see the detail of the "evidence", whereas the screenshot shows it directly.

The full photo - http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/tiff/PIA10210.tif

The links to my other recent posts/thread on this, for your view of the screenshot pics.

http://alienanomalies.activeboard.com/t53432771/photo-tampering-victoria-crater-cape-st-vincent/

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread942645/pg1#pid16292683

[ArMaP]

I think I understand what you mean, but I have to look at the real photos, that large image is "superresolution" version, made with several photos of the same area to try to make a higher resolution version.

That's why we can see some strange spots all over the image, they show places where there was some difference between the photos used.

[rdunk]

ArMaP, I will look forward to what you find! As I have said at times, most all of us just go by what we can see, or don't see, in the NASA photos.

[rdunk]

Ok, the next piece of tampering evidence I am posting is in a more visible place on Cape Vincent, and it is also pretty obvious, when one actually takes the time to "see it". It is in an area above the Egyptian, and is in the "walkway" that is easy to see. There are actually two pieces of evidence here, and I will specifically point out each of these in a screenshot.

One of the pieces of evidence shows that the "tampered-texturing" extends over/out-into a part of a large opening - it has the look of an arched door-like opening. This opening is in the wall on the left of this walkway, and one can see the texturing as it extends over a part of this opening.

The other piece of evidence is texturing over a rock face - - - - and there seems to be no rock there, just the texturing. The texturing seems to have been put into the open air, maybe to hide something else?? This tampering piece is at the opposite end of the walkway. It is a piece of "dark texturing", is about the width of the walkway, and we can see the "straight-edges of it across the top, and down its right side. But it is pretty obvious that this texturing is just put there, as we can see the rocky areas below and to the rear of it.

What do you think?

For member convience, I will post again a link to the full Rover Opportunity photo, and a screenshot with decription locators. (to see the screenshots relatve to this reply, please go to either of the noted links in the OP)

http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/tiff/PIA10210.tif

[NYNick]

Good day to all!  This is my first post here after sitting on the sidelines for quite a while and before I go on, I just want to say how much I enjoy PRC and the knowledge imparted by all its members.  It's great to be included in such company!

Rdunk, I see what you mean by the texturing of this image.  As I was looking at this, I also noticed that there are several areas on this image that show some very interesting features.  If you look at the upper left hand quadrant of image where there is a huge bolder sitting on the upper edge of the "cliff", there appear to be (in my eyes) three rocks that look like monuments or heads.  (Maybe I'm nuts?)  These "heads" from left to right I would describe as follows:  The leftmost one juts out over the "cliff" so you just see its profile.  (Don't laugh: The best description I can muster is that it actually looks like the dog-like head of the Goa'uld from Stargate.)  The middle "monument or head" looks almost exactly like what you would see on Easter Island minus the body.  The one on the right looks like a Cyclops or maybe a face with a bonelike structure starting at the nose and going to the forehead (depending on how you look at it).

Most interesting of all: If you zoom in on the area between the left and the middle monument, on the ground, there is some sort of "seal or logo" with some type of lettering and/or symbols on it.  I find it very strange that someone would go through the trouble of tampering with this image only to leave something like that in plain sight.
Moving over to the "walk way".  I see the doorway you discussed and I also see three locations on that walkway that are tampered with.  I could go on and on with the amount of information on this image.  But that's it for the moment. 

What are your thoughts?
(Sorry, I couldn't provide a marked up image for you to go by.  I hope my descriptions help!)

Peace,
-Nick

[rdunk]

Hey NYNick, welcome to the discussions here! Just "looking" can be fun, but joining into the the conversations here can be more "funner"!

Thanks for your comments Nick! Yes, there is just a lot of "stuff" on this cape. Certainly there are various geeeeennnnnuuuuiiiinnnnne (genuine) anomalies here and likely many not yet noticed. And there are numerous photos of this Cape from Rover Opportunity, each with some differences relative to what we can see, because of viewing angle, sunlight position/shadows, etc..

You mention some interesting things too. I will take a look to see if I can find what you are describing, and get back to you.

I can only assume that you are aware of the Egyptian statue there, on the face of the cliff? And also a "pot-bellied" sitting figure statue up above the Egyptian, near the top?  As I said, lot of stuff here!!

[ArMaP]

Do you still see the same things in the photos from different filters?

These are the radiometrically corrected images, they look much better than the raw images.

Filter L2 (753 nm)


Filter L5 (535 nm)


Filter L6 (482 nm)


Filter L7 (432 nm)


What about in a colour version?

And, just because I like to do it, what about in an anaglyph?
(unfortunately, the "right eye" image doesn't show all)


If I understood what you were saying, I think the images from the other filters may give a slightly different idea.

PS: the original cape St. Vincent is in Portugal, I went there once.

[rdunk]

PS: the original cape St. Vincent is in Portugal, I went there once.

Actually, I had wondered where the name St Vincent came from, but I have not taken the time to look it up. Well, i did just look it up. and there are St/Saint Vincent's all over the world!

Thanks for the pics ArMaP, but, Rover took most of these photos from such a distance, it is really hard to see any real cliff detail without magnification. And, this type of posted pic is difficult to magnify in a thread post.

However, even at a distance one can still see the tampering detailed above, relative to the "walkway".

There is just so much obfuscation on this cape, as well as on some others, I may be digging around in this stuff for a long time!! We do need to get the truth of the tampering matter into the open public.

[ArMaP]

If they wanted to hide something in the image we wouldn't to be able to notice it or they wouldn't even publish it, as we don't have any way of knowing what photos are taken by the rovers. 

[NYNick]

http://s1300.photobucket.com/user/Nickastro/media/3622482f-3b7e-4722-b50e-fc3054ddbf76_zpsfb09cd80.jpg.html?state=copy


See red arrow for location of "monument/heads" I mentioned.


-Nick

[ArMaP]

See red arrow for location of "monument/heads" I mentioned.

I see what you mean, as it looks symmetrical, but I think that it's just another rock.

[NYNick]

ArMaP,
There are three, each wildly different symmetrical "rocks".  Did you notice the "characters/symbols" bordered within the partially oval (on the one end, rectangular on the other) boundary that lies beyond the shadow of the middle "rock"?  That can't be natural.  There are what seem to be letters(U), dots, and if turned sideways it almost depicts an elongated battle shield.  Also, taking those letters, dots, lines in the image as one entity within that border, it looks like a "being" of some sort pictured there(even when turned upside down).

Do you see this?  or Maybe the boys at NASA are having fun with us? 

-N

[ArMaP]

There are three, each wildly different symmetrical "rocks".

Three? I can only see two.

Did you notice the "characters/symbols" bordered within the partially oval (on the one end, rectangular on the other) boundary that lies beyond the shadow of the middle "rock"?  That can't be natural.

Do you mean that area to the left (from out point of view) of the bigger rock?


No, it's not natural, it's a result of the image being created by a superresolution algorithm. The differences between the photos used can result in a artificial higher resolution image, but they also result in many artefacts, like this one. Another common artefacts are those groups of light grey dots that appear in several places.

This is what that area looks in the 16 photos that were used to make the superresolution image.


You can see that sometimes there are some brighter pixels on that area and that the shadows change. All of those things affected the creation of the final image.