Alien Anomalies

Timewarp · Dedicated to the truth

RE: What it SHOULD look like, the quality we SHOULD be getting.

thewatcher · Veteran Member

qmantoo wrote:

I suppose this thread was destined to turn out to be a further discussion about whether the image showed tiny people, statues or just soil.

I think for clarity, a lot of this should be moved and added to the original topic and then we can find it in the future. It is a little obscure out here and we wont be able to find the good stuff when we need to refer to it in the future.

Is that possible to do or a valid point?

I agree.. subject seems to jump.. The subject is the Ops image and the debate on structures withing field of view. Gmantoo & pirate ... I think u guys are getting into a good and often jumped over point. It may be hard to see but ur both right . Its just the boreing science of imagery behavior and the problems on viewing and understanding the very small.

For the record , I do agree there is something there.. just a problem with the image and possible distractions for such a small area.

\thanks

qmantoo · Teaching the truth

I suppose this thread was destined to turn out to be a further discussion about whether the image showed tiny people, statues or just soil.

I think for clarity, a lot of this should be moved and added to the original topic and then we can find it in the future. It is a little obscure out here and we wont be able to find the good stuff when we need to refer to it in the future.

Is that possible to do or a valid point?

gbull · Veteran Member

trying to keep in the center of this, what if they are just statues? a menagerie of sorts?

not living.

ICEMAN · Senior Member

Software_Pyrate wrote: Sorry Iceman...I can usually make out what you saying...but not this time
NanoCulture [Paperback]

N. Katherine Hayles (Editor), N.Katherine Hayles (Author)

Editorial Reviews

Product Description

"Nano" denotes a billionth; a nanometer is a billionth of a meter. New instrumentation and techniques have for the first time made possible materials research and engineering at this level, the scale of individual molecules and atoms.
Extraordinary visions of material abundance, unprecedented materials, and powerful engineering capabilities have marked the arrival of nanotechnology, as well as dystopian scenarios of self-replicating devices running amok and causing global catastrophe. Largely a future possibility rather than present actuality, nanotechnology has become a potent cultural signifier.

NanoCulture explores the ways in which nanotechnology interacts with, and itself becomes, a cultural construction. Topics include the co-construction of nanoscience and science fiction; the influence of risk assessment and nanotechnology on the shapes of narratives; intersections between nanoscience as a writing practice and experimental literature at the limits of fabrication; the Alice-in-Wonderland metaphor for nanotechnology; and the effects of mediation on nanotechnology and electronic literature.

NanoCulture is produced in collaboration with the nano art exhibit at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (December 2003-September 2004), created by an interdisciplinary team led by media artist Victoria Vesna and nanoscientist James Gimzewski. NanoCulture is richly illustrated with images from the nano exhibit, which also provides the basis for an ethnographic analysis of collaborative process and an exploration of changing concepts of museum space.

The dynamic uniting these diverse perspectives is boundary crossing: between art, science, and literature; cultural imaginaries, scientific facts, and technological possibilities; actual. virtual, and hybrid spaces; the science of fictions and the fictions of science; and utopian dreams, material constraints, and dystopian nightmares.

The first book-length study focus on cultural implications of nanotechnology, NanoCulture breaks new ground in showing the importance of the new technoscience to contemporary culture and of culture to the development, interpretation, and future of this technoscience.

Product Details

Paperback: 255 pages
Publisher: Intellect Ltd; illustrated edition edition (June 1, 2004)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1841501131
ISBN-13: 978-1841501130
Product Dimensions: 9 x 6.8 x 0.7 inches

Timewarp · Dedicated to the truth

Spirit - sol 2017.

I have taken the opportunity at this point in the thread of showing a selected view that displays compression artifacts all over the image. To illustrate how an image can be improved I selected a section of the image where there is an interesting rock.

Full image with compression artifacts showing.

Sample section showing compression artifacts.

Sample with compression artifacts removed.

Improvements to sample image.

Further enhancements to sample image.

Image colourized.

The blotches seen on the above image are not compression artifacts, but relate to the poor resolution of the surface detail. The process used has removed the compression artifacts but still maintains the integrity of the image content.
.
Image credit: NASA/JPL

Image reference:

http://marsrover.nasa.gov/gallery/all/2/p/2017/2P305425191EFFB1E5P2572L2M1.JPG

qmantoo · Teaching the truth

Do we know anyone in the universities that have the raw data? Anyone know any respectable scientists who study these things? Maybe we could get just one or two photographs of the original quality to really see what we are up against.

thewatcher · Veteran Member

Timewarp - You stated if im wrong?
As a matter of interest, there are no compression artifacts on the image shown above but unfortunately, there is plenty of heavy tampering

Nice try in getting around the elephant in the room but your gonna have to understand whats going on.. There is something anomalous about the in mage in question. thats a given. But what you think you see ( when dealing with the very small) mixed with that dreaded worrd , i'll shorten it, C A ,, gives up alot of patterning that the human brain craves for. The original Raw image could be anything from 50 - 150 MB. The images your looking at are a mear fraction of the original size. With larger structures, youve got some integrity to hang onto. When dealing with soil or other tiny formations your in a world of pain.

Maybe its the low gravity , maybe the soil is slightly magnetised and is reacting to the magbetic fields given off by the Rovers panels?? but i do agree that the anomalous formations are there. But these images are just too difficult for the mass market to objectively understand.

Im not going to, or hell, its your eyes and brain thats processes what you see. im telling you the mechanics of the image. If you still dont realize that Image Artifacts are sometimes results of image tampering then I guess you need to find that out yourself... someday. The science is freely available.. its wether you really want to get into what youre looking at. Taking images at face value really isnt healthy in this area of study. Thats what they expect us to do.

I say, find the same formations on a wider scale. Outline what you see . That#ll give a few viewers a fighting chance to decide for themselves.

Tampering is an all encompassing term. If there was heavy tampering on your subjects , believe me you wouldnt be seeing any detail. There is an unhealthy amount of Compression Artifacts in this image to deduct the small from the soil.

I hope you get a better picture. MarsRocks could maybe do an animated special. that usually shows the tampering changing rapidly, leaving the possible structure youre seeing stabilize. Maybe in the clear areas, where you think youre getting good resolution, reduce the size of the pixels. Blue filters are a good way to detect some more areas of tampering but of cousre you need to maintain somekind of structural integrity.

just a thought.

Cheers

Timewarp · Dedicated to the truth

The upper left quadrant of the first image posted in this thread by qmantoo is an example of the quality we should be viewing, but for some reason the people who handle the imaging before release into the public domain have felt it necessary to grossly interfere with the raw image data.

To thewatcher, I fully understand how the data is compressed before transmission back to this planet. What I maintain is that the quality of the images received by NASA/JPL or the receiving universities is far superior to what we can download from the various image catalogues. The science and educational institutions have access to more superior data therefore, they are able to view images of better quality. These are the images we should also be able to download and view.

I feel this issue of compression artifacts should be dealt with in another thread. What is of concern here is the degree of tampering that has been applied to this particular image. But why? The central part of the image, although degraded, is viewable enough to make out the detail of the content.

The following questions should be asked. Why was it necessary to hide valuable image data and what is concealed under the heavily tampered areas?

Software_Pyrate · Veteran Member

Well said thewatcher

qmantoo · Teaching the truth

However, putting the question of what is and what is not an artifact for a moment, doesn't this picture (the original released to the public, anyway) show a range of quality - from excellent (top left) to really pretty poor (middle, blocky stuff)?

If what I suspected is true, then there is an area of near perfect (I enlarged this approx 500x, and still no pixels at the top left) and this area of large square blocks(at approx 500x).

This would show the extent of the range of qualities that we are getting from NASA.

thewatcher · Veteran Member

Timewarp wrote:

As a matter of interest, there are no compression artifacts on the image shown above but unfortunately, there is plenty of heavy tampering. I believe I have found out the reason why the heavy tampering was applied. I will post my findings later as I am still working on the image.

Remember the original image is a genuine release by NASA/JPL, but if we were allowed to see the raw material as sent from Phoenix I am sure that what could be observed would show a lot more detail than we are allowed to see in the current release.

Compression Artifacts are one of many terms that is not completely understood by some...

The act of reducing an images, chue, saturation, intensity and mostly in this case size, unforunately leave the annoying consequence of quantization in lossy data. Most of the time one dosent notice this always but when you start to blow up the image then the cracks appear.

The RAW data you talk of is also compressed for transmission. So unfortunately Timewarp your wrong. This may help, as im not a huge fan of copying & pasting vast amount of text from elsewhere. Read here

Now with chosen a sector of your image, there are levels of very intensive (selective compression running horizontally) compression. Ive highlighted image to showing the (snowy effected) areas. Ive selected a portion just to highlight the problem, which extends across the area of interest. the compression artifacts are inherintly semi-transparent. Now this CAN, possibly give rise to difficulties in interpretation..

compression artitact.gif

There are areas of selective in intensity, so, yes there is a degree of tampering but the effort to sepperate the wheat from the chaff is tedious.

Now what youre seeing could be there but to show as proof to the general public and seasoned imaging processors, would be an up hill struggle ... because of? Image Artifacts / Tampering... You need to isolate what you see and bring it forward.

Of course the image above has been comressed again througg JPG, gif ,png,bitmap etc.. as are all images in various formats. Even submitting an image goes through various compressions and expansions .. A mine field to put it bluntly! So pointing out the very small is a very very difficult art -form, seeing that compressions dominate the same quantum zones.

Timewarp · Dedicated to the truth

As a matter of interest, there are no compression artifacts on the image shown above but unfortunately, there is plenty of heavy tampering. I believe I have found out the reason why the heavy tampering was applied. I will post my findings later as I am still working on the image.

Remember the original image is a genuine release by NASA/JPL, but if we were allowed to see the raw material as sent from Phoenix I am sure that what could be observed would show a lot more detail than we are allowed to see in the current release.

Software_Pyrate · Veteran Member

Sorry Iceman...I can usually make out what you saying...but not this time

ICEMAN · Senior Member

Has anytime ever been Dinosaur on earth is not excluded on March are some nano-men and nano-culture.

thewatcher · Veteran Member

SP... I can understand your frustrations .. some posts are difficult to swallow.. Just ignore it and locate something that interests you. A while ago the same disagreement broke out resulting in an holy arguement! LINK

Juts chill and have a cool beer.

PS.. I cant see anything either but im not going to force the case. Detail is just to riddled with compression artifacts.

Software_Pyrate · Veteran Member

Believe me, I will be the first to denounce my ignorance when I have been proven wrong.

I will eat my hat, take a pic of it, and make it my avatar.

But until then.....We should expend our energy on Excluding possibilities...Not Providing new ones.

Software_Pyrate · Veteran Member

Ok......lets assume there are "little people" for a minute.

All these structures and machines and rcoks with images on them i.e faces, animals,ect, :ets say they are all genuine and real.

Where are they? Aparently, going by what you have posted, the planet is infested with these little people. There should be at least one clear image of one some where..... How convenient that it fits into your plan that they are just "to small to see" yet you apparently u see everything else, zoomed in, down to the pixel.

No, this is not conclusive proof of little people....and you will get laughed out of any respectable scientific community trying to present this as proof.

Seriously, lets still yet play along,,,,. So Here we have an intelligant civilization....Ok....I'll buy that....but.....They aparently build everything out of ROCKS. Rock machines...Rock Cities....Rock structures....

I wonder if they eat Rock food?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Look...I want to "know" for a fact and be able to prove that life exsists else where as well as the next guy.

But these imiges are FAR from conclusive or definitive.
Actually lye more on the side of speculative.

Timewarp · Dedicated to the truth

ICEMAN, if you have a look at my post - 'Tiny figures found at Phoenix site' under the heading 'Interesting and alternative theories' you can see the same image as shown above with a true metric scale superimposed. Each division on the scale represents one millimeter.

The beings, or 'creatures' as you call them, are very small. The only reason that they can be seen in the image above is because 'MACRO FOCUS' was selected on the Robotic Arm Camera at a distance from the subject of approximately 11mm, otherwise the camera would not have been able to resolve the detail.

ICEMAN · Senior Member

Timewarp, How big do you think this creature will be considered in millimeters?

Timewarp · Dedicated to the truth

SP asked the question,

"Where is the conclusive evidence that there is 'little people' on Mars?"

I believe part of the answer can be found in the image posted above. It can also be found in their works of art. If you haven't noticed already the tiny people build their structures in the form of heads and/or faces. Many of the structures appear to be in the shape of animal heads and there are many instances where an object with the form of a dog's head can be observed. There are also many sculptures of heads and faces on rocks and cliff faces in the Meridiani Planum region.

If you notice a shape on a rock that has the appearance of a head and it has a large spherical lump on the frontal bone of the cranium, this is a good indication that what you have found is a face or head sculpture. The 'little people' are so small that you will not see them in any of the images, but what you will see are examples of their built structures and artwork as the cameras onboard the rovers are more than capable of resolving these features.

The second question SP asked relates to 'extensive towns and cities'.

The area where Phoenix landed is a fine example. The craft landed on a huge city. If the images returned by this mission are studied carefully there are many fine examples to be found of very small structures on the surface. There is plenty of object detail in the area which has been missed by visual researchers due to their tiny size, but the evidence is there if you know what to search for.

Spirit is currently stuck in an area called 'Troy' which is located in a valley between 'Home Plate' and 'Tsiokovsky Hill'. I have carried out some extensive research of this particular area called West valley and it would appear the rover was travelling in a southerly direction. A little further down the valley is a large town. In view of this the following question has to be asked.

Did the 'little people' set a trap for the rover to immobilize it and save their town from an impending disaster?

If you look closely at the terrain and cliff faces where Spirit is currently located you will find many fine examples of anomalies, objects, structures and sculptures that indicate a past and present life activity. Examination of some of the relics and larger objects reveal that the ancient martians were a lot taller than they are at present.

It has to be said that NASA, nor the mission teams, would have realized the existence of very tiny life-forms. The missions were sent to analyze the ground and deep ice for chemical composition and the rovers were sent to examine and analyze the geology. Looking for the existence of any form of intelligent activity was not part of their brief.

qmantoo · Teaching the truth

1) Were is the conclusive evidence that there is "little people" on Mars???

2) Where are these extensive towns and cities you are referring too? Any proof of that? Or just blocky could be anything images of rocks...

1) There isn't any.
2) in my head. No. Yes.

Software_Pyrate · Veteran Member

1) Were is the conclusive evidence that there is "little people" on Mars???

2) Where are these extensive towns and cities you are referring too? Any proof of that? Or just blocky could be anything images of rocks...

qmantoo · Teaching the truth

Ok, well I will say it since we are all skirting the issue.

NASA ARE KILLING THESE BEINGS in the name of our 'science'. It is just like aliens doing the experiments on us and we do the same thing to others who are not large enough or strong enough to stop us.

When I see the extensive towns and cities that the Phoenix has dug up, and I see the Rovers wheels running over all these areas I get mad at them for being so in-humane and uncaring.

But... then I suppose humans are like that and history shows that we are still savages whatever our level of technology. As a race, I am not sure we generally deserve to be 'rescued' by anyone.

This should make us all realise (if we did not before) that the people at the top and in control have no morals and do not have ours or anyone elses best interests at heart.

It is a scandal of gigantic proportions that is being ignored by the media and politicians alike.

gbull · Veteran Member

well it is transmitted back to earth. it can't be hard to pick it up somehow. can it? i don't know really.

radio waves, right? freq? or data stream? no clue what they use.

wishful thinking, i know, arp2!

AliensRPeople2 · Member

gbull..

"unadulterated data"? One can only hope... someday.................

ARP2

Chandre · Dedicated to the truth

Timewarp, welcome to the 'wild side'...as in wildy mad about the tampering being done on these images furious

Harry once said that looking at these images is like looking through a dirty window. The Watcher, Iceman and qmantoo have done a good job at showing it in various posts as has Skipper. I have highlighted it in my Asteroid Steins and PIA posts where you lterally look at the truth through holes in 'the protective layer' NASA applies to the image.

In fact to sum up what we are all doing here, I would say it is akin to peeping through keyholes and then creating pictures of the little bits we can see clearly. Its frustrating as all hell and makes you madder than a rattlesnake....BUT...if thats all they want to give us to work with lets show them just how much we can do with it.

The colour application in the more realistic mode you have clearly highlights a crouching humanoid figure for me. I find it deeply disturbing to look at and hope it is a statue of some sort and not a life form. My mind insists I have to question the scale as it cannot accept the size as real while my eyes argue otherwise.

I am currently examining and stressing over some images I have found and have asked for expert help from outside our circle. I will post my findings on that when I work up the courage and have some reassurance that my mind has not crossed to the dark side. It may strengthen your theory as well.

Timewarp · Dedicated to the truth

I eat the comments I made in another thread about tampering!

Due to the interest generated by this particular image I thought I would have a more in-depth look at it. I am very annoyed and feel that we have been deceived by the image handlers at NASA/JPL or whoever has access to the original images before their release into the public domain.

The image, lg_7851, was captured by the Robotic Arm Camera (RAC). The image resolution is 30 microns per pixel and the distance from the camera front lens to the plate is 11mm. The illumination was generated by white LED's and according to NASA the colours should be the same as we see on Earth.

qmantoo is quite correct in saying that if jpeg compression artifacts were present they should appear over the whole image. In this image it is clear to see that there are no compression artifacts. Therefore, the imperfections seen in the image have to be the result of something else.

I have reworked this image to produce what I feel is somewhere near the correct colour rendition. There is evidence of severe tampering and feel that people like us and other interested parties are being denied access to the original scientific data. Whoever did the tampering didn't do a very good job of covering up whatever needed to be removed from the viewing public.

The material showing on the plate is not 'fluffy red soil particles' as described by NASA. The overall colour of the original image shows that it has been 'doctored' to create the impression that the material is just a soil sample. The problem here is that the soil on Mars is not the colour being displayed in the original.

Also, there are many heads and faces embedded in the 'material'. In fact, there are two very tiny human-looking figures showing in the image that can be easily recognized along with the head of what appears to be a 'gorilla'. One of the figures is in a crouching position, the other is in a slouched sitting position.

Please have a close look at the reworked image and take note of the transition between the areas of severe tampering and the true data. Some of the original detail can be seen underneath the areas of tampering.

Timewarp · Dedicated to the truth

ICEMAN, I have to agree with you that there is a photographic abnormality on the image. I believe this is just a case of 'bleed over'. Notice that the top of the small plate is relective and shows up as white in the image. Each side of feature in question is white. The feature itself is light brown. The other highlighted features in this image do not seem to suffer the same abnormality. I think this is because they are a darker shade of brown.

Anyway, I have posted two images below. The first is the 1024 original and the second is the original with an ellipse around some of the other features that cross over the top of the plate.

I have made no other adjustments to the image except to add an ellipse to the features in question.

Image 1. Original.

Image 2. Original showing other features that cross over the top of the plate.

Image credit: NASA/JPL/University of Arizona

gbull · Veteran Member

yes!

has anyone figured out how to intercept transmissions from there? unadulterated data?

qmantoo · Teaching the truth

The point is....what must the true un-altered photo look like if at that magnification, there are no pixels visible. It must be fantastic.

gbull · Veteran Member

interesting find.

ICEMAN · Senior Member

This is perhaps an Algae

ICEMAN · Senior Member

qmantoo · Teaching the truth

We are all familiar with Timewarps thread about tiny figures found at the Phoenix site
and I was examining it to see if I could identify any of the 'organic material'/bodies that were being talked about.

However, in the course of that examination it struck me that I had blown up the picture at least 500x - until there was nothing but 'pixels' in the part of the picture where I was supposed to be looking. In another part it was completely smooth. See below. Now what should I make of that? 500x at least and completely smooth non-pixellated photograph.

Now, that suggests to me that there is indeed a lot of tampering because a compressed jpg should have compression artifacts all over it, shouldn't it? It looks as if there are artificial pixels showing up in the bottom right of this picture, and in the top left it is as nasa get it.

What do you think?