Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Need expert advice ? Mars Rover Photo's  (Read 14567 times)
Fluid1959
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #20 on: January 17, 2004, 01:33:19 AM »
ReplyReply

If you find this type of chatter offensive I appoligize,, but I'm only interested in the truth.... Not just what others may perceive as the truth, or for that matter what others may feel I perceive to be true.
Logged
Fluid1959
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #21 on: January 21, 2004, 09:14:55 AM »
ReplyReply

First I would like to say. I take the stand that the scientist at NASA are

victims as well.

Secondly I don't feel I'm being supported here with my findings.

Third I have been deeply affected by what I found (material not suitable for

children)




Pretty Barren if ya ask me!

But I did find a few things of interest Like a few more edits here and there!




Most of this Tif is fiction created by NASA...But don't take my word for it

These arrows indicate types of areas to look for edits .
Any area that has a darker or lighter color is an edit
Any area that appears like a dirt mound is an edit
Any time an object looks half covered with dust ..it's an edit



Put your saftey belts on and your trays in the upright position and prepare,

for we are now leaving KANSAS









http://www.longislandlan.com/alienbattle.tif

I didnt even display any structures.

All above from tif below

20.6 mb TIF

http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/tiff/PIA05102.tif

I will now go back to previous tifs now that I know what I,m Looking for..



I consider New TIF to be quite Interesting, to say the least.

Welcome to the real world
Logged
Fluid1959
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #22 on: January 18, 2004, 06:31:09 PM »
ReplyReply

I went back to read my posts to see where my attitude might be causing a problem. I presented a digital panaroramic Landscape photograph taken of the mars surface, And only asked that people with better understanding of digital photgraphy help to enlighten  me.

Maybe I was wrong in my assessment of this forum. But I assumed
If these photo's were edited the people sharing this forum might have some insight. But I guess that was just a leap. Because no one here knows anything about digital landscape photgraphy.
Logged
David Mantripp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 688


WWW
« Reply #23 on: January 19, 2004, 07:59:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Hey, I cloned a power line pylon out of a shot yesterday!  That must PROVE their is INTELLIGUNT LIFE  in Switzerland and that the PIGS are Cuvering it up to protect the Rosicrushans at the Woerld Economic Forum!!!!!  Weeeee-ooooooweeeeeeeee!!!!!!!
Logged

--
David Mantripp
http://www.snowhenge.net
b.e.wilson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 104


WWW
« Reply #24 on: January 20, 2004, 04:10:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Fluid,

I thought you said you weren't going to post here anymore.

The second, seemingly 'right-ward' shadow is the left-ward shadow of a second rock abbutting the large rock in front and to the right. Rather obvious, really. I'm curious why this didn't occur to you?

Time for this thread to die.
Logged

mbridgers
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


« Reply #25 on: January 21, 2004, 12:06:25 PM »
ReplyReply

I guess the rover is using Wi-Fi at the Starbucks to transmit the pictures back.

If it were southern Mars, there'd be a Waffle House there too!
Logged
Howard Smith
Guest
« Reply #26 on: January 21, 2004, 05:11:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Amen Hank.  But is it art?  Or did we spend a few hundred million on junk?  Or maybe there was life on Mars.  Or is life on Mars.  Maye that's what the Masai were talking about.  I have no clue.
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #27 on: January 22, 2004, 06:00:16 PM »
ReplyReply

I haven't laughed so much since watching the first episode of South Park and saw the 50-foot satellite dish unfold from Cartman's umm, hindquarters.
Logged

Hank
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 679


« Reply #28 on: January 24, 2004, 09:48:46 AM »
ReplyReply

It's really as basic as ham and eggs:  All in a day's work for the chicken, but a lifetime commitment for the pig.
Logged
Hank
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 679


« Reply #29 on: January 23, 2004, 03:34:51 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm really not all that surprised either, given the belt tightening that has been going on at NASA.  In space, a $100 million venture is only as sound as the cheapest onboard part.  That explains some of the high costs involved-  Your whole mission can fail if a 50 cent connector tanks, so spend as much as it takes to get the best from top to bottom.  Lots of multi-million dollar junk heaps floating in space as monuments to low-bid contracting.  Hope that isn't the case this time, but there are lots of precedents.
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #30 on: January 24, 2004, 02:36:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
for we are now leaving KANSAS

You've left Kansas lonnng ago...

LOL, this is rich
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #31 on: January 17, 2004, 09:55:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Dude, you've been smoking some interesting stuff. Yes, all these images are "edited"; they are composites of images from the twin 1 megapixel camera array on the rover poorly blended together with some noticeable lines and seams. As for the tracks, I would think it should be pretty obvious that they were made by the rover itself, unless you are seriously proposing that life on mars includes cog wheels. Sell your tinfoil hat and use the proceeds to buy a clue.
Logged

Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #32 on: January 18, 2004, 11:13:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Perhaps I was a little curt with Fluid, but here is why:

1. Fluid's original post (which has since been edited to remove the comments) mentioned seeing tracks in a 3-D NASA image which was linked to in the post, with the not-so-subtle implication that the tracks were made by a lifeform and that the edits were probably an attempt to disguise the tracks and/or cover up evidence of alien life on Mars. Hence my (admittedly rather snide) comments about alien conspiracy theories and cog wheel life forms.

2. Fluid then posts a "scientific analysis" of the image claiming that variations in average luminosity of different parts of the image is "astounding" and somehow meaningful. Never mind the fact that this is true of all images that are not a single solid color. The only thing "astounding" about the analysis is the expectation on Fluid's part that it has any relevance to anything.

3. Fluid's original question/theory completely overlooked the blatantly obvious fact that the image(s) in question are stitched composites from the rover's twin 1 megapixel cameras, and the seams are not blended together very well. This does not constitute a "smoking gun" proving any kind of NASA cover-up.

Since this forum is about landscape photography (with a heavy emphasis on digital) and not NASA cover-ups regarding the existence of alien life (which isn't supported by the evidence presented anyway), I took the liberty of concluding that Fluid is/was a crackpot with a NASA conspiracy theory agenda. I don't believe that is an unreasonable conclusion to draw from the original version of Fluid's postings, and I wasn't very tactful about saying so. I apologize for my lack of tact.

Some parting thoughts (and I'll try to be as tactful as possible):

1. Claiming alien conspiracies/cover-ups is a good way to get dismissed as a crackpot in most venues populated by rational, reasonable people who understand the principles of logic, especially when the evidence offered to support such claims does no such thing.

2. The images in question are stitched composites, most likely assembled by low-level civil service people in NASA who have a lot of more important things to do than stitch together PR images for the press and the public and don't have the luxury of polishing each finished image into a masterwork of perfection.

3. Posting meaningless analyses and claiming they are scientific is not an effective means to bolster one's credibility. Especially when one is claiming the analyses are evidence proving the existence of alien life is being covered up.
Logged

Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #33 on: January 20, 2004, 05:37:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Let me get out of here before some of you start thinking for yourselfs.. Called remove head from butt technique.. De-Wienke manuever....
From you, I will accept that as a great compliment.

"Proud to be a charter member of the half-vast right-wing conspiracy..."
Logged

Guest
« Reply #34 on: January 22, 2004, 04:29:31 PM »
ReplyReply

I thought about deleting it, but there's so little humour about these days that I thought I'd leave it up for a while.

We need a good whacho conspiracy theory every now and then.

Michael
Logged
Jeff Donald
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« Reply #35 on: January 23, 2004, 05:52:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Opps, NASA has lost contact with Rover overnight.
Logged
Paul Sumi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1217


« Reply #36 on: January 24, 2004, 11:13:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, the famed English astronomer, said, "Not only is the universe stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine."

However, I am positive that is NOT the case here.
Logged

Fluid1959
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #37 on: January 17, 2004, 02:12:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Dude, you've been smoking some interesting stuff. Yes, all these images are "edited"; they are composites of images from the twin 1 megapixel camera array on the rover poorly blended together with some noticeable lines and seams. As for the tracks, I would think it should be pretty obvious that they were made by the rover itself, unless you are seriously proposing that life on mars includes cog wheels. Sell your tinfoil hat and use the proceeds to buy a clue.
I see your both rude and vision impaired. And neither are requirements for this thread!
Logged
Digi-T
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 149


« Reply #38 on: January 18, 2004, 10:18:31 PM »
ReplyReply

I guess I just don't like being labeled an idiot who peruses these forums. Name calling simply won't get you very far. It also appeared to be a topic more about conspiracy and government cover ups than anything else. Then you insult us again by saying that nobody here knows anything about digital landcape photography. These exchanges happen on here from time to time and usually because we take things too personally. You don't need to go away but you should keep your insults to a minimum.

T
Logged
pmkierst
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


« Reply #39 on: January 20, 2004, 09:28:03 PM »
ReplyReply

####, I am still looking for intelligent life on earth. Find me some evidence of that before we go looking at mars photos...
Logged

Paul K.
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad