Phoenix Mars Probe Succeeds!

[fitzbew88]

At this point I'd settle for crappy, off-colour but never-the-less unaltered photos.

I can't recall where I read it (take it with a grain of salt), but I seem to remember reading that the Voyager cameras only recorded in shades of gray, and that the "gorgeous" color photos we oohed and ahhd over were entirely(!) contrived!

It's kind've funny, if it's true.

 

[fitzbew88]

You are incorrect about the distance not making any difference, please google "inverse square law."

...which can be compensated for with the proper equipment...

My own feeling is, I don't want anything "compensated for". I would like to see it as if I am standing on the surface, with naught but the plastic in my helmet between my eyes and the horizon.

I wonder why this seems to be so important to us.

 

[CapnG]

I wonder why this seems to be so important to us.

Because no truth is TRUTH until it is a human truth...

 

[Rick Deckard]

Someone has made a nefarious allegation that's insulting to thousands of scientists and engineers world-wide. (Not only Americans.) It's destructive to the space program, and destructive to science in general. It's offensive, and only allowed to permeate because no one bothers to argue. Well, today I drew a line.

Do I hear violins? How does my 'nefarious allegation' insult Americans? Asking questions is destructive to science?

I guessing you're still at school. Grow up.

 

[Rick Deckard]

I can't recall where I read it (take it with a grain of salt), but I seem to remember reading that the Voyager cameras only recorded in shades of gray, and that the "gorgeous" color photos we oohed and ahhd over were entirely(!) contrived!

It's kind've funny, if it's true.

Just goes to show how little you know about this subject - the Mars rover pics are entirely created this way.

The rovers have 6 cameras each tuned to a particular wavelength - 3 in the visible spectrum (RGB) and three in the invisible spectrum (IR, UV and one other) - the images produced from each camera are gray-scale intensity images for that particular wave-length that are then combined by NASA labs to produce a colour image. EXCEPT, that instead of using the true RED camera for the colour images, NASA insist on using the IR camera - this will always give an inaccurate colour image because the IR signal has no business being there - it's INVISIBLE to the human eye so they have to 'shift' it from the invisible spectrum to the visible spectrum (your monitor doesn't reproduce IR light). Either way, the intensity signal for the IR camera will not be equivalent to the Red signal.

Here's a starter article if you're interested - Link.

 

[fitzbew88]

Do I hear violins? How does my 'nefarious allegation' insult Americans? Asking questions is destructive to science?

If you can't see the difference between an accusation and a question, consider the fact that you might not belong here.

If you don't think that accusing someone of deception without any grounds whatsoever is insulting, consider the fact that you might not belong here.

 

[fitzbew88]

I can't recall where I read it (take it with a grain of salt), but I seem to remember reading that the Voyager cameras only recorded in shades of gray, and that the "gorgeous" color photos we oohed and ahhd over were entirely(!) contrived!

It's kind've funny, if it's true.

Just goes to show how little you know about this subject - the Mars rover pics are entirely created this way.

Funny thing, I said "Voyager" but meant "Viking".

But it's not really relevant. This thread has evolved into a discussion about your allegation that NASA is manipulating images from Mars to hide the fact that Mars is "teeming with life" and "earth-like".

And I repeat my challenge to you: prove it or shut up.

This is not curious out-of-the-box inquiry, it's borderline defamation to the scientists and engineers actually doing the work instead of mindlessly spilling out conspiracy theories on paranormal forums.

Really, you should prove it or shut up, and if you can't prove it you should consider apologizing -- it's hurtful.

I do understand why you would like to re-focus the thread on obscure camera engineering but no thanks.

 

[Rick Deckard]

And I repeat my challenge to you: prove it or shut up.

Nice straw man there - if I could prove that NASA were faking photos a) I wouldn't be posting it here b) I'd be dead by end of the month.

This is not curious out-of-the-box inquiry, it's borderline defamation to the scientists and engineers actually doing the work instead of mindlessly spilling out conspiracy theories on paranormal forums.

Are you aware that these forums are for the discussion of 'fringe' ideas including conspiracies?

I do understand why you would like to re-focus the thread on obscure camera engineering but no thanks.

Typical - dodge the issue when you know it's not going your way. BTW, YOU made the comment about how the Viking images were created and I merely pointed out that the rover images were created in the same way, so you can't accuse me of steering the topic on to what you call 'obscure' camera engineering (it's actually about simple image manipulation, but you seem unable or unwilling to grasp that).


I really do find your attitude perplexing - I made a few casual remarks about the possibility of simple life on Mars and the about the curious way that NASA appear to making the photo's 'redder' and off you go on your little rant about how NASA is 'whiter than white' and shouting 'blasphemy' at anyone who might actually question their motives...

...there's some bias in that. So, what's your connection? You have a relative in NASA (I can't imagine they'd employ someone like you)? I could understand the bias if that is the case - people often let emotion get in the way of doubt.

 

[Rob]

... if I could prove that NASA were faking photos a) I wouldn't be posting it here b) I'd be dead by end of the month.

I'll pay for your flight to Houston.

 

[BrandonD]

You can't drop into the debate and say "...colors that had been removed from the images were the colors green and blue. This would specifically make the mars photos look more red and lifeless..." and then play the poor misunderstood guy.

I truly believe that NASA is not manipulating images to hide the fact that Mars is "earth-like" and "teeming" with life, and I do support NASA (although I am not sure I can say "through and through").

Someone has made a nefarious allegation that's insulting to thousands of scientists and engineers world-wide. (Not only Americans.) It's destructive to the space program, and destructive to science in general. It's offensive, and only allowed to permeate because no one bothers to argue. Well, today I drew a line.

Stop and take a deep breath. I'm not insulting our precious NASA employees, or America, or the victims of September 11. I'm making an observation. You've managed to completely misunderstand my quote (that one you keep repeating ad nauseam).

The colors blue and green missing from a nature photo makes them look specifically waterless and lifeless, IN MY OPINION. This is not a scientifically quantifiable statement, it is a statement of opinion (a widely held opinion). So if you disagree then we have differing opinions. Let it go.

 

[fitzbew88]

And I repeat my challenge to you: prove it or shut up.

Nice straw man there - if I could prove that NASA were faking photos a) I wouldn't be posting it here b) I'd be dead by end of the month.

It sounds like you are saying you can't prove it. Then why in God's name are you saying it? In the off-chance that it might be true? Can you not see the damage you're doing? Do you realize NASA is just composed of human beings?

Are you saying that the government will kill you for revealing the truth?

Do you realize how this sounds?

Are you aware that these forums are for the discussion of 'fringe' ideas including conspiracies?

Well, if the community (and our leaders) have deliberately decided to try and focus on the quality of the show and let the forums go wherever they wish --- no matter what --- then how could I protest? But I would suggest that it needs to be an overt decision.

My fear is that the while the show itself is moving the quality of debate forward, the forums are backsliding us.

I do understand why you would like to re-focus the thread on obscure camera engineering but no thanks.

Typical - dodge the issue when you know it's not going your way. BTW, YOU made the comment about how the Viking images were created and I merely pointed out that the rover images were created in the same way, so you can't accuse me of steering the topic on to what you call 'obscure' camera engineering (it's actually about simple image manipulation, but you seem unable or unwilling to grasp that).

I don't really understand this at all. To me, it's not about image manipulation at all, but your allegations of *why* the images are being manipulated. Have we disconnected somewhere?

I really do find your attitude perplexing - I made a few casual remarks about the possibility of simple life on Mars and the about the curious way that NASA appear to making the photo's 'redder' and off you go on your little rant about how NASA is 'whiter than white' and shouting 'blasphemy' at anyone who might actually question their motives...

This is just not true. This is what you said:

"NASA haven't yet decided how much 'red' they're gonna add to the pictures...

...the surface of Mars looks very 'Earth-like' - brown dirt and blue sky - NASA doesn't like that, so they make it all look a lot redder; more 'alien' and therefore *appearing* to be less likely to support life.

IMO, Mars is teeming with life of one form or another (probably simple plants and bacteria below the surface). Eventually, NASA might admit it to us."

There is nothing casual about this. It is basically an unfounded allegation that the people at NASA are obstructing science and lying to us. Can you not see that this is destructive?

 

[Ron Collins]

I didnt know that this would turn into an image analyst's battle royal. I guess I am still naive when it comes to the NASA Mars image manipulation conspiracy. I guess I just do not understand what it is they are "hiding". I've seen Hoaglands website (God that is a navigational nightmare, its like circumnavigating the globe with a mini compass from a box of cereal.) but it is an unintelligible cluster of bad conjecture and poor engineering analysis. I would love it if someone could bullet point the major tenets of the conspiracy. Or at least show me a site that wasnt designed by a monkey with ADD.

 

[Rick Deckard]

I'll pay for your flight to Houston.

You love me really.

 

[Rick Deckard]

It sounds like you are saying you can't prove it. Then why in God's name are you saying it? In the off-chance that it might be true? Can you not see the damage you're doing?

What damage?

Are you saying that the government will kill you for revealing the truth?

Do you realize how this sounds?

Are you saying Governments don't kill people with secrets? Do you know how this sounds?

There is nothing casual about this. It is basically an unfounded allegation that the people at NASA are obstructing science and lying to us. Can you not see that this is destructive?

No, I can't and it was entirely casual. How is this destructive? Are you trying to oppress me? Can I not express an opinion? Do you support fascism?

 

[fitzbew88]

I would love it if someone could bullet point the major tenets of the conspiracy.

Well, the thread has ballooned somewhat from how it started, but no one has provided any evidence of a conspiracy.

There's no doubt that images "recorded" on the Martian surface are manipulated/processed before we get to view them. There seem to be valid reasons for this, mainly the fact that the cameras and environments involved are exponentially different than what we are accustomed to.

What has infuriated me is the baseless claim that NASA is manipulating images to hide the fact that Mars is "teeming" with life and "earth-like". Although the poster is trying to hide behind his right to an "opinion", this is not an opinion at all. It's an allegation of corruption and worse. It's basically a hurtful comment made for fun, with an unfounded expectation that there would be no ramifications.

The fact that the poster thinks that the gov't would kill him for proving such an allegation is just icing on the cake.

 

[Rob]

I'll pay for your flight to Houston.

You love me really.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EtMAjE-NQTk&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EtMAjE-NQTk&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

[Rick Deckard]

What has infuriated me is the baseless claim that NASA is manipulating images to hide the fact that Mars is "teeming" with life and "earth-like". Although the poster is trying to hide behind his right to an "opinion", this is not an opinion at all. It's an allegation of corruption and worse. It's basically a hurtful comment made for fun, with an unfounded expectation that there would be no ramifications.

The fact that the poster thinks that the gov't would kill him for proving such an allegation is just icing on the cake.

He means me, but just can't bring himself to say it.

 

[fitzbew88]

It sounds like you are saying you can't prove it. Then why in God's name are you saying it? In the off-chance that it might be true? Can you not see the damage you're doing?

What damage?

Now, Rick, all other things aside, let me make sure we are on the same page: Are you asking me explain the damage resulting from unfounded allegations of deceit and corruption?

Are you saying that the government will kill you for revealing the truth?

Do you realize how this sounds?

Are you saying Governments don't kill people with secrets? Do you know how this sounds?

Yes, I am saying that the government doesn't kill NASA conspiracy theorists. And to me, that sounds quite reasonable and rational.

There is nothing casual about this. It is basically an unfounded allegation that the people at NASA are obstructing science and lying to us. Can you not see that this is destructive?

No, I can't and it was entirely casual. How is this destructive? Are you trying to oppress me? Can I not express an opinion? Do you support fascism?

I guess what I would like for you to do is ask yourself "Is this really true? How do I know that it is?" before posting and if you find yourself struggling to answer these questions --- don't post.

It might also be prudent to you to visit an attorney (or your parents) and try to reach some kind've determination of the difference between an "opinion" and an "allegation/accusation".

So, my answers to your questions are: 1) See above. 2) No. 3) Yes. 4) No.

 

[Rick Deckard]

Now, Rick, all other things aside, let me make sure we are on the same page: Are you asking me explain the damage resulting from unfounded allegations of deceit and corruption?

You are saying that an individual can make a post on a 'paranormal' discussion forum and damage the reputation of an organisation like NASA. What planet are you on? Is it Mars?

Yes, I am saying that the government doesn't kill NASA conspiracy theorists. And to me, that sounds quite reasonable and rational.

I noticed you put 'NASA' in with 'Government' to strengthen your argument - I call that misdirection. Not very subtle though.

It might also be prudent to you to visit an attorney (or your parents) and try to reach some kind've determination of the difference between an "opinion" and an "allegation/accusation".

So, I can't express an opinion unless I can prove it in a court of law.

Sounds like Fascism to me.

 

[Rick Deckard]

I guess what I would like for you to do is ask yourself "Is this really true? How do I know that it is?" before posting and if you find yourself struggling to answer these questions --- don't post.

I ask myself that question all the time - it's obvious that you don't and that's the difference between you and me. You don't question those in authority and that's dangerous. The apathetic deserve all the crap that the Government and the media feed them 24 by 7.

Well done for bringing it to my attention.