NASA Mars conspiracy stuff: Some help needed please!

I still don't know how to respond to his argument about :
"If the red colour can be attributed to colouring due to atmospheric
reflection (e.g red dust in the air), then the diffuse atmospheric light
would have to be blue and not red (particles scattering red light in the
atmosphere would cause objects in the sunlight to appear blue, and NOT red)."
Click to expand...

Tell him to stop expecting the atmosphere on another planet to behave like the one on Earth. It is true that the Earth’s atmosphere preferentially scatters blue light (hence the blue color of the sky). Earth’s atmosphere in predominantly nitrogen and oxygen while the Martian atmosphere is primarily CO2. Different chemicals affect light in different ways. Also, the Martian atmosphere is much thinner than ours so there is much less scattering. Most of the sky color on Mars comes from reflection of light from dust in the atmosphere rather than scattering. Since the dust is reddish in color it reflects red light (the color of an object is based on which colors it reflects, not which it absorbs).

At least, that’s my take on it.
 
<QUOTE>Most of the sky color on Mars comes from reflection of light from dust rather than scattering. Since the dust is reddish in color it reflects red light. At least, that’s my take on it.</QUOTE>

I tried this on him too-

He said:
"For the image I sent you: If reflection off the sand is to be responsible
for the red colours in the image of the lander then there could of course be
no direct reflection from the Martian surface on the objects that are facing
directly upward (i.e. the JPL logo and wiring)."

But I understood that light (already scattered by an atmosphere) is going to be travelling in all directions, bouncing here and there, from further afield and close-up so the JPL logo and the wiring could still be altered this way.

It's hard to argue about what light (and molecules and gasse etc) will do if you haven't the authority to really KNOW, but I am sure that reality is more fuzzy and the red colour would spread all over the place.

That bouncing light would also paint the 'air' reddish between the camera's lense and the JPL logo + wiring, hence coulouring the light coming from them into the camera.

Is this bouncing light concept correct?
 
I altered my first reply after reading it to clarify that the flection is from dust in the atmosphere, not dust on the surface. The atmosphere of Mars is dustier than Earth's because there isn't much in the way of rain or similar percipitation to clear dust from the air that was thrown up by those occasional planet wide dust storms and more frequent local events. I hope that makes it clearer (or dustier if you perfer ;) ).
 
Lucianarchy said:


OK. Here's the deal.

Our origins go back to Mars.

Mars lost all its athmosphere and the water went underground.

Martians were aware of this impending disaster and had time to geneticaly alter the simian gene and reptilian gene. ITMT, the martians 'stored' their material bound 'souls' into holographic digital systems and assimilated themselves in various ways and methods throughout our evolution here on Earth. It's just that humans aren't ready to accept the implications of this and the world economy would suffer due to balances of power based on religuous doctrine. The best bit is the story is so unbelievable that it can remain a story quite easily.

Oh, and there are huge worms up there, geneticaly manufactured by the Martians in order to recycle the remaining 'silt'. There was a thread here, but alas, it has been removed.

http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/images/M0400291.html
http://www.ebtx.com/mars/marsfaun.htm
Click to expand...

I think I already saw a couple of movies and series episodes with such scripts... Couldn't the writers be a bit more creative?

"genetically alter the simian and reptilian gene"... For what? Reptiles evolved before mammals, and apes were not exactly the first mammals to evolve, therefore there was not a "simian gene" to alter on reptiles, even on the mamaliform ones back in the Permian or Triassic. Or you are saying that there were apes by that time? Or the martian altered the genes of reptiles from the Tertiary, at the same time they messed with some poor simian genetic pool? For wich reason? For fun? OK, what could we expect from a species that mutilates cattle...

Worse then that, Mars lost its atmosphere and water (if it really had one) billions of years ago, before here on Earth existed something more evolved than a jellyfish. There are no "reptile or simian genes" to alter on these creatures... And the martians would have to evolve from some procaryote-like beings to sentient martians in less then a billion years.

Please correct this on your movie script.
 
It sounds like you are prejudiced, rather than skeptical.

You admit you do not understand, yet you just want to "shoot" his argument.

That, is neither skeptical nor rational.

It is ◊◊◊◊◊.
Click to expand...

A fundamental principal of skepticism is to doubt extraordinary claims. In fact, I’d say a primary duty of the skeptic is to attempt to shoot down questionable arguments. In science, any new theory is subject to a concerted effort by other scientist to shoot it down. Only theories that survive this kind of intense scrutiny and skepticism are worthy of consideration and respect.

Personally I find it rather remarkable that NASA conspiracy theorists can believe that NASA is competent enough to send multi-million dollar robot probes to distant planets yet so incompetent that they would attempt a cover up by releasing images so poorly doctored that that the conspiracy theorists can easily detect the ruse using nothing more than Photoshop. I guess it just never occurs to them that just maybe it isn’t NASA that is incompetent.
 
Correa Neto said:


I think I already saw a couple of movies and series episodes with such scripts... Couldn't the writers be a bit more creative?

"genetically alter the simian and reptilian gene"... For what? Reptiles evolved before mammals, and apes were not exactly the first mammals to evolve, therefore there was not a "simian gene" to alter on reptiles, even on the mamaliform ones back in the Permian or Triassic. Or you are saying that there were apes by that time? Or the martian altered the genes of reptiles from the Tertiary, at the same time they messed with some poor simian genetic pool? For wich reason? For fun? OK, what could we expect from a species that mutilates cattle...

Worse then that, Mars lost its atmosphere and water (if it really had one) billions of years ago, before here on Earth existed something more evolved than a jellyfish. There are no "reptile or simian genes" to alter on these creatures... And the martians would have to evolve from some procaryote-like beings to sentient martians in less then a billion years.

Please correct this on your movie script.
Click to expand...

No, you don't understand.

The Martians set this place up. Earth. Home. After the dinosaurs sorted out the main bugging problems, then they had to go, genetic manipulation was the quickest. The 'missing link' in the story is when they took the a monkey and perked it up a little.
The rest, as they say, is history.
 
Two major factors affect the color balance in both photographs.

The photo taken at NASA/JPL is illuminated by artificial light. Unless the photograph has been color corrected, the color balance is not natural.

The photo taken on Mars was, well, taken on Mars. I don't see any "color targets" in the image, meaning a set of color chips for the purpose of balancing color. Sunlight is filtered through the dust-laden Martian atmosphere, reflected off the surrounding soil, etc.

Comparing one uncorrected image to another uncorrected image and crying "Conspiracy!" is idiotic, reprehensible, and downright stupid. Anything for a headline, I guess.
 
Well, I have to go to sleep and my weekend online time ends soon, so I thought I would post another email I was sent on this subject and then I will return when I can to see the debate.
(have fun!)
--------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt in my mind that NASA is involved in some very 'bad
astronomy'.

The 'original' NASA images and press release:
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/press/spirit/20040121a/Lander_Pan_Sol
16-A18R1_br2.jpg
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/press/spirit/20040121a/Lander_Pan_Sol
16-A18R1.jpg
<http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/press/spirit/20040121a/Lander_Pan_So
l16-A18R1_br2.jpg>
<http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/press/spirit/20040121a/Lander_Pan_So
l16-A18R1_br.jpg>
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/press/spirit/20040121a.html

Interesting, wouldn't you say, that NASA take so long (sometimes weeks) to
release their colour images (whilst their black & white ones are released
almost right away).

I highly recommend that you read these two articles:
http://www.enterprisemission.com/colors.htm
http://www.enterprisemission.com/colors2.htm

Interesting:
http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/Spirit/coverup.jpg

You might want to look at some of the other stuff here:
http://www.enterprisemission.com

Also of interest:
http://www.esa.int/export/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEM8ZB474OD_1.html

Interesting, too, would you not say, that NASA have never put web cams or
any other live feed on any of their spacecraft?
They have refused, outright, to broadcast any live feed from their Mars
probes. Hm, wonder why that could be?
It amazes me that people don't ask these kinds of questions. Why has NASA
not had any live feed from their Space Shuttles (except for a few very short
clips during dockings, etc, where not much can be seen anyway). What about
the 'International Space Station'? Where's our 24 hour live feed?

I'll have to show you some of the live feed sometime, that NASA do in fact
get from Space Shuttle missions!
Very interesting.

I find it interesting that NASA have continually stalled on releasing new
images of 'The Face' - often taking months and years to release images of
this area. They have also blatantly lied to the public and White House
about having images to 'disprove' the shape of the face, when in fact they
had none in their possession. They were forced to admit this (a few years
ago) by some professor (I'll have to find the info for you).

The Face on Mars:
http://the2001face.50megs.com/index.html
<BLOCKED::http://the2001face.50megs.com/index.html>
http://www.enterprisemission.com/paper_1/paper_1.php?page=paper1
<BLOCKED::http://www.enterprisemission.com/paper_1/paper_1.php?page=paper1>
http://www.planetarymysteries.com/egypt/sphinxmars.html
http://www.enterprisemission.com/catbox.htm
<BLOCKED::http://www.enterprisemission.com/catbox.htm>

Other 'geoglyphs' on Mars:
http://herotwins.hypermart.net/corn_god/Is_this_hand_shucked.htm
<BLOCKED::http://herotwins.hypermart.net/corn_god/Is_this_hand_shucked.htm>

NASA's last response for envestigating 'The Face' further:
http://www.enterprisemission.com/nasamars.html

A good resource from a NASA (or ex-NASA) employee:
<http://www.keithlaney.com/> http://www.keithlaney.com/

NASA are indeed playing games and they, and those who support them, are not
going to miss any opportunity to discredit people such as Hoagland.
 
There is no doubt in my mind that NASA is involved in some very 'bad astronomy'.
Click to expand...

I think we’ve identified the source of the trouble: his mind.

Interesting, wouldn't you say, that NASA take so long (sometimes weeks) to release their colour images (whilst their black & white ones are released almost right away).
Click to expand...

Let’s see. Black and white images require transmission of about 1/3 the data of a color image and no special processing to achieve a proper color balance. Now why would it possibly take longer to post color images?

I highly recommend that you read these two articles:
http://www.enterprisemission.com/colors.htm
http://www.enterprisemission.com/colors2.htm

Interesting:
http://www.enterprisemission.com/im...rit/coverup.jpg

You might want to look at some of the other stuff here:
http://www.enterprisemission.com
Click to expand...

Wade through four links from Enterprise Mission? Can I just jab my eyeballs with an ice pick instead? It would be less painful.

Also of interest:
http://www.esa.int/export/SPECIALS/...8ZB474OD_1.html
Click to expand...

Well, that’s a legitimate source anyway. Unfortunately, I didn’t see anything their that would support claims that NASA is involved in a Mars cover up.

Interesting, too, would you not say, that NASA have never put web cams or any other live feed on any of their spacecraft?
They have refused, outright, to broadcast any live feed from their Mars probes. Hm, wonder why that could be?
It amazes me that people don't ask these kinds of questions. Why has NASA not had any live feed from their Space Shuttles (except for a few very short clips during dockings, etc, where not much can be seen anyway). What about the 'International Space Station'? Where's our 24 hour live feed?

I'll have to show you some of the live feed sometime, that NASA do in fact get from Space Shuttle missions!
Very interesting.
Click to expand...

It is far more amazing to me that anyone would actually ask questions that stupid. So NASA didn’t put a web cam on the Mars rovers. Does this guy have any idea how difficult it is to retrieve data from a rover on Mars? Does he really think they would waste a communication channel to broadcast a web cam image from Mars? Would he know how to interpret live feed from Spirit if NASA did broadcast it? Is this guy really as stupid as he appears to be?

I find it interesting that NASA have continually stalled on releasing new images of 'The Face' - often taking months and years to release images of this area. They have also blatantly lied to the public and White House about having images to 'disprove' the shape of the face, when in fact they had none in their possession. They were forced to admit this (a few years ago) by some professor (I'll have to find the info for you).

The Face on Mars:
http://the2001face.50megs.com/index.html
http://www.enterprisemission.com/pa...php?page=paper1
http://www.planetarymysteries.com/egypt/sphinxmars.html
http://www.enterprisemission.com/catbox.htm
Click to expand...

Ok. I guess that answers my question. He is as stupid as he appears to be. A cat box? It’s a freaking hill! NASA has released at least 3 images of this hill and each one has shown more clearly than the last that it is exactly that. I can’t imagine why he thinks NASA has nothing better do than release more pictures of the same hill so Richard Hoagland can screw around with them in Photoshop until they bear some vague resemblance to his silly fantasies.

Other 'geoglyphs' on Mars:
http://herotwins.hypermart.net/corn...and_shucked.htm
Click to expand...

And I thought Jesus on a corn chip was silly. :D

NASA's last response for envestigating 'The Face' further:
http://www.enterprisemission.com/nasamars.html

A good resource from a NASA (or ex-NASA) employee:
http://www.keithlaney.com/

NASA are indeed playing games and they, and those who support them, are not going to miss any opportunity to discredit people such as Hoagland.
Click to expand...

I doubt NASA looses a lot of sleep worrying about discrediting Hoagland. The man does a good enough job of that all by himself.

I admire your dedication in trying to debate this guy, but I suspect you will find that you are trying to teach a pig to sing.
 
The degree of interest in space stuff wears off pretty damn quick. You might recall that the last Apollo Landings received scant coverage. To suggest that they use their resourses for the edification for a small segment of the population is irresponsible. A web cam would be useless, as I understand it, without all of the processing routines necessary to turn the data into images. Further there are power consumption considerations.

Ask this guy "why".
 
espritch said:


Personally I find it rather remarkable that NASA conspiracy theorists can believe that NASA is competent enough to send multi-million dollar robot probes to distant planets yet so incompetent that they would attempt a cover up by releasing images so poorly doctored that that the conspiracy theorists can easily detect the ruse using nothing more than Photoshop. I guess it just never occurs to them that just maybe it isn’t NASA that is incompetent.
Click to expand...

Aversion Therapy. If the truth is really 'Out There', it would be logical from a management pov to expose society to the situation gradually using safe methods.
 
Please, enterprise mission is one of the wackiest wackos around. The "eyes" on the face are laughable. The "artifacts" in the landing sites are below any comment.

I wrote this once, and I'll write again- who belive there's anything of unatural in all those pics never got out of a city! Never walked on any rocky landscape. You don't need to be a geologist to see that (and I am one)! A walk around any area with rocky outcrops is enough to debunk all those claims.

I'll make a prophecy! Someone (maybe Hoagland) will say that the fracture patterns on the outcrops near Opportunity (see top left of image on this link-> http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/mer2004/rover-images/jan-25-2004/captions/image-2.html) are not natural. They'll claim its artificial because the blocks have similar dimensions, there are straight lines and orthogonal faces, and all of these "as we all know", do not happen in nature... Now, where do I go to pick my 1 million dollars?

Lucianarchy said:


No, you don't understand.

The Martians set this place up. Earth. Home. After the dinosaurs sorted out the main bugging problems, then they had to go, genetic manipulation was the quickest. The 'missing link' in the story is when they took the a monkey and perked it up a little.
The rest, as they say, is history.
Click to expand...

These claims are very extraordinary. Is there any evidence backing such bold claims?

Sorry, but it does not sound logicall to me. What exactly you mean by "sorted out the main bugging problems"? Some fix in the world's ecosystem? Earth had several stable ecosystems for hundreds of million years before the appearance of the dinosaurs (if we consider the lifeforms that existed before the Ediacara or Burgess shale faunas, a couple of billion years or so), as well as after. And Earth's ecosystems were reorganized quite quickly after every large mass extinction event- a blink of an eye in terms of geological time. So, I see no reason at all for all these interventions. If it were just a question of taking the dinos away to allow a better chance of survival for the mammals, such advanced genetic engineering would not need 65 million years to obtain results... Pick a shrew and evolve it! See? Its all to tortuous and not practical.

And Mars lost its free-flowing water (if it had any) roughly 2 or 3 billion years ago. By that time, the most advanced creatures on Earth were jellyfishes. So, the martians stood there, waiting for hundreds and hundreds of million years untill the reptiles evolved, then another 65 million years untill apes evolved? It makes no sense.

So, after all the debugging they done the martians took the poor dinos away by sending a meteor to Earth? Messy martians... And what about all the other species that were also gone in this and other extinctions (mass extinctions or not)? Amonites, pterosaurs, mamaliform reptiles, trilobites, hallucigenia, mastodons, large marsupials, etc.?
 
Lucianarchy said:


Aversion Therapy. If the truth is really 'Out There', it would be logical from a management pov to expose society to the situation gradually using safe methods.
Click to expand...

Hmmm.... like people are exposed to the start of a war? or the A-Bomb? or quadruple bipasses or Starbucks Coffee? Please. There is no logic to what you say.
 
Lucianarchy said:


OK. Here's the deal.

Our origins go back to Mars.

Mars lost all its athmosphere and the water went underground.

Martians were aware of this impending disaster and had time to geneticaly alter the simian gene and reptilian gene. ITMT, the martians 'stored' their material bound 'souls' into holographic digital systems and assimilated themselves in various ways and methods throughout our evolution here on Earth. It's just that humans aren't ready to accept the implications of this and the world economy would suffer due to balances of power based on religuous doctrine. The best bit is the story is so unbelievable that it can remain a story quite easily.

Oh, and there are huge worms up there, geneticaly manufactured by the Martians in order to recycle the remaining 'silt'. There was a thread here, but alas, it has been removed.

http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/images/M0400291.html
http://www.ebtx.com/mars/marsfaun.htm
Click to expand...

Let's see, that's a strange amalgam of Mission to Mars starring Gary Sinise,Tim Robbins, and the fat kid from
didStand By Me, and Frank Herbert's Dune. Fascinating.

You are evidently not aware of the ebtx guy's next, uh, exposition on the subject of martian sandworms:

http://www.ebtx.com/mars/noworm.htm

did
 
When one takes a 14" or larger telescope and brings it to bear on Mars, one can clearly see that the entire planet is swathed in reds, oranges, and a couple of white ice caps. So this NASA conspiracy must also extend to the manufacturers of telescope mirrors, who design said mirrors to function perfectly normally when pointed anywhere else, but hide green spots when focused on Mars.
 
Don't forget about those circular landing pads on the surface, clearly seen in the pictures. Or are they merely fossilized crop circles?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom