|
Post by marioalien on Oct 3, 2014 10:24:58 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by skywalker on Oct 3, 2014 15:24:47 GMT -6
If those are sand dunes the object looks a lot bigger than ten inches. It's got to be several feet at least. It's too far away too see for sure what it is though. Why didn't the little rover dude drive over and take a look at it? Any time they see something really unusual like that they should take a closer look at it instead of just brushing it off as rock or a lens flare or whatever. There are all kinds of really cool things on that planet that need to be investigated.
|
|
|
Post by lois on Oct 5, 2014 18:35:21 GMT -6
I have no clue to what this object is. It does not look like a rock. Most all the other photos of odd things on Mars just look like rocks to me. I cannot see the two wheels in this photo. Will try and get another photo. Sorry this is a totally different object. How can one deny these are not wheels of some kind If they were not attached I would have more doubts. It could be ours.
|
|
|
Post by plutronus on Oct 5, 2014 19:52:52 GMT -6
"Michael at appx 10 inches (<size of his main unit? or just wishful thinking?>, wile Ramis's at 3 to 6 feet" (<now that's imagination>), heh heh, don't they check their spelling before sticking their big fat clod-hoppers into their main yak orfice? Personally from the low quality image which we all see here, I think it is very likely, since the artifact in the 'raw' photo is roughly the same color as everything else in the photo-field is likely to be made of the same material as everything else in the photo-field. But then there is something a bit pecu-liar...happening, the closeup, while woefully bloomed due to zooming beyond the photo's resolution limit, is that the object's color has changed somewhat?? Its beige in two photos and then metallic grayish in the bloomed photo? We see three different depictions of the artifact, one of which is identified as being 'raw', what ever that means? Its obvious that the photo interpreter of these depictions do not actually have the raw JPL images, simply because could not use photo in that form. RAW JPL images use non-standard custom non-public binary formats. Years ago I performed a JPL contract to design an interface for JPLs 14" optical disc archive system which was used to archive these type bulk images and I had access to the details of JPL's RAW image formats. They have bunches of them all mainly being high compression, low loss formats. So, 'Raw' in the context of this Mars artifact probably means the unaltered image before the 'weapon' image presenter zoomed and otherwise re-touched the image. I suspect that Rami also false colored the image, to visually enhance the objects outline as it is perceived by him. ...what do you all think? and sides...pre-WWI cannons looked like that, sortof. See WikiPedia for more proof! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howitzer#mediaviewer/File:105mm-Kroop-HowitzerBG-WWI.jpgYep, its true the photo-interpreters have discovered another Martian Canal!
|
|