Mars Express Images - Revisited

yevaud · Feb 15, 2008

Long since debunked thoroughly here. It's simple wind sculpted terrain. Further, fairly recent images with better resolution than those have shown, proof-positive, that it's nothing. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Feb 16, 2008

WOW! ZOMGZ! ROCKS! Who'da thunk it? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

ks15 · Feb 16, 2008

Hello. At a resolution of 45 feet per pixel, You do not see rocks......Thats not going to happen....Maybe boulders???? Anyway, I have three more images that centers on the carving (Large) located lower right of the "Face". http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/More_Cydonia_Images/figure151.jpg http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/More_Cydonia_Images/figure162.jpg http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/More_Cydonia_Images/figure156.jpg

MeteorWayne · Feb 16, 2008

Love yer imagination <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Mee_n_Mac · Feb 16, 2008

I think I've failed the Rorschach test. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> -----------------------------------------------------Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, STOP ! </div>

ks15 · Feb 17, 2008

Hello. I went to the Hirise/MRO website and found their version of the "Face". MRO/Hirise version: http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_003234_2210 Mars Express version: http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/More_Cydonia_Images/figure148.jpg The Mars Express version is enlarged 2.5X, Filtered, contrast enhanced and thats it. The MRO version is severely distorted/flawed. It is initially shown upside down and the full image lacks detail. This is supposed to be a high resolution image??? No it is not. The Mars Express version shows more detail at much lower resolution than MRO/Hirise. However, The Mars Express version is NOISY. I have seen cleaner images at the same resolution as the Cydonia Images. Conclusion: This noise was deliberately introduced. The image ID's that I am working with are: SEMVHE8LURE and SEM6IE8LURE. Hows that for an ID......."LURE" Finally, Here is another image to study: http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Cydonia_Images/figure199.jpg http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Cydonia_Images/figure193.jpg

qso1 · Feb 17, 2008

KS15: The MRO version is severely distorted/flawed. It is initially shown upside down and the full image lacks detail. This is supposed to be a high resolution image??? No it is not. Me: That upside down thing, pretty pesky...how would one ever get the image to be right side up! Maybe flipping it in a paint program? No, too easy. As for resolution, it looks a lot higher resolution to me. Those last two you posted are full of jpeg artifacting indicating the low resolution which shows up in part as artifacting when enlarged. A study of those two images would be easier if you would link to the unenlarged originals. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

ks15 · Feb 17, 2008

Hello. JPEG artifacting???.....My awnser is NO. I have found a Mars Express image at a resolution of 15.3 meters/pixel versus 13.7 meters/pixel of the source originals I am using. The resolution is approximately the same. If anything, The 15.3 meter/pixel is slightly worse than 13.7meters. Link: http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=b&type=I&mission=Mars%20Express&single=y&start=179 Original: http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Cydonia_Images/figure265.jpg A section of original enlarge 2.5X (Typical of enlargements on my website): http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Cydonia_Images/figure264.jpg Where are the JPEG artifacts??...By all rights, The images on my website should be just as clear and noise free as this image. Maybe next time the Mars Express people will release a clean, clear image.

qso1 · Feb 18, 2008

Do you actually know what jpeg artifacting is? And don't take the question as an insult because I'm not trying to insult you. I just wanted to know if you knew what it was. I work with computer graphics on a daily basis and this type of artifacting is easy to spot. The first and second link you provided has no artifacts I can see and its not enlarged. When you enlarge images, the artifacts start to appear. Note the last link you provided that shows the hill enlarged. Pixelization is clearly evident in the deep gouged areas. Jpeg artifacts begin to appear as well. Not a lot of them, but they are the symettrical fuzzy vertical lines scattered throughout the image and do not appear in the original. Your images, the ones I have seen so far are extreme enlargements and subject to heavy jpeg artifacting and pixelization. Enlarged enough, you will see the very building blocks of data that form the image...the pixels. But at such close range, you loose resolution. For example, lets say you imaged the mars rover landing site and the original image is twice the resolution necessary to see the rover. You enlarge it perhaps thinking the rover will be visible. It won't because enlarging simply increases the size of the data that was possible to obtain. Try enlarging human faces and you'll see what I'm talking about. Enlarge areas like the eyes and see that at pixel level...the only vaguely resemble a human eye. Enlarging an image past a certain point does not reveal anything but the way images are made digitally. I hope this helps you gain a better understanding of the imaging process. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

qso1 · Feb 18, 2008

http://www.ebrowserbook.com/Sdc/Marspic1.jpg A link to the enlarged image which shows the jpeg artifacts (Yellow circles) and the beginnings of pixelization in the red square. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

ks15 · Feb 19, 2008

HUH????.........Did you even read my last post????? I do know what jpeg noise looks like. I suggest you re-read my last post again. I will no longer respond to anybody on this topic unless there is an intelligent reply.....

MeteorWayne · Feb 19, 2008

I guess that means we shouldn't reply to you, then <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

qso1 · Feb 19, 2008

Okay, heres what your last post said: "Hello. JPEG artifacting???.....My awnser is NO." Care to explain how I misread or did not read that? Especially after I showed you jpeg artifacts in an image barely blown up to anywhere near the level of your enlargements. I'll read your most recent reply to me: "I will no longer respond to anybody on this topic unless there is an intelligent reply....." Translated, this means you cannot repond with anything other than claims of people not reading your posts rather than have the intelligent discussion you say you want. This in itself weakens your case IMO. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

ks15 · Feb 19, 2008

Hello.....SO.....This is what debunking has come to... We are circling specks on clean images as a counter- argument which is no argument at all....... Extreme enlargements????......2 to 3 times is extreme????....You will have to read my post again... I have found a Mars Express image at a resolution of 15.3 meters/pixel versus 13.7 meters/pixel of the source originals I am using. The resolution is approximately the same. If anything, The 15.3 meter/pixel is slightly worse than 13.7meters. Link: http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=b&type=I&mission=Mars%20Express&single=y&start=179 Original: http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Cydonia_Images/figure265.jpg A section of original enlarge 2.5X (Typical of enlargements on my website): http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Cydonia_Images/figure264.jpg Where are the JPEG artifacts??...By all rights, The images on my website should be just as clear and noise free as this image. Maybe next time the Mars Express people will release a clean, clear image. Mars Express Image 1 Resolution 13.7 meters/pixel Enlarged 2.5X: http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Cydonia_Images/figure199.jpg Mars Express Image 2 Resoulution 15.3 meters/pixel Enlarged 2.5X http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Cydonia_Images/figure264.jpg I am qu

qso1 · Feb 19, 2008

Your last link is the image I'm referring to. It appears to me to be an extreme enlargement and 2 to 3 times can be extreme in a fairly low resolution image. KS15: Image 1 Resolution 13.7 meters/pixel Enlarged 2.5X: This is the image I referred to and its full of artifacts resulting from being enlarged. In an earlier post, I asked to see the original of this one which I have so far not seen unless its the original you posted in this post. In image 2, the enlarged image were discussing now, even you described the artifacts I pointed out as specks on clean images. And such specks are present in far greater numbers on your image 1 enlargement. As far as MGS vs Mars Express imagery, I doubt the Mars Express people are able to get any higher in resolution. In fact, if you compare the face images from both Mars Express and Viking missions, they are very similar which suggests to me that the resolution of MEs imaging system is comparable to that of Viking. MGS and MROs imaging systems are of higher resolution and as a result, less noisy data is present. But if you were to enlarge it significantly, you'd eventually reach pixelization and jpeg artifacting if the original is a jpeg. Heres the whole problem I have with ET constructs on Mars. Firstoff, the whole thing is the result of someone who instead of waiting till higher resolution imagery was available, literally jumped on the first image of the face and decided it was artificial. Even when this began, I would say we should wait till there is higher res imagery but no...Richard Hoagland had a book to write and the face on mars was elevated to practically cult status. I posted two images to better illustrate my point, they should speak for themselves. http://www.ebrowserbook.com/Sdc/Fom1.jpg http://www.ebrowserbook.com/Sdc/Fom2.jp</safety_wrapper <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

ks15 · Feb 19, 2008

Visit my website. http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_show.html Here is the original source: http://esamultimedia.esa.int/images/marsexpress/306-230906-3253-6-co2-Cydonia_H.jpg

qso1 · Feb 19, 2008

I just visited your site and I'll have to look at each of the images in which case I'll post probably tommorow on what I see. At first glance however, and using the last image as an example...it would be impossible for me to draw the conclusion that there is something artificial in that image. Nonetheless, I'll look at them in more detail. My two examples illustrate what I call the "Kilroy was here" example. Why do we not ever find images of artificial constructs that do not have to be blown up, explained to skeptics etc. Images that slap you with the undeniable evidence...Kilroy...or ET was here. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

qso1 · Feb 19, 2008

Almost forgot, thanks for providing the source image. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

bmaone23 · Feb 20, 2008

One of the things that I find interesting is the strong resemblance between the extreme cratered area just above the "Face" and Yucca Flats http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/Nevada_Test_Site_craters.jpg/745px-Nevada_Test_Site_craters.jpg

qso1 · Feb 20, 2008

First part of my looking at your images failed because the original is too large for my compusaur to handle. This was to have been a verification of magnification results designed to verify I got the same enlargements that you did. I continued without the magnification tests and found: The Mars Express image is substantially different than say, images from U.S. probes starting with coloration. The color seems off just a tad in Express imagery. Appearing to me to have a very slight goldish tint for lack of a better explanation. U.S. probe color images appear more natural looking. The contrasts between dark and light areas is more pronounced than Viking and MGS images of the same area. The features are the same and their spatial relationship is the same. That is, the FOM is situated the same position and distance as the alleged pyramid cluster. There is also a graininess not present in Viking and MGS images of this area. 13.7 meter resolution is 45 feet resolution or 45 feet is the smallest single element of detail visible in an unenlarged image. Not necessarily meaning you could see a tractor trailer because its 55 feet long. It means the smallest single pixel might be a tractor trailer. And if you know you are looking at a tractor trailer, you might recognize it as such. The features you point out are probably larger, but as you increase magnification, the details that normally would make the feature familiar to us get lost. These lost details become pixelization and jpeg artifacts in cases where jpegs are involved. Go to the URL below for image examinations. http://www.ebrowserbook.com/Sdc/Fom/pg001.htm First image: Comparison of the pyramid like feature to a Sightseebyspace.com image of the Pyramid at Giza. The Cydonia feature is five sided. Note the much cleaner pyramid at Giza which is in part due to the r <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

ks15 · Jun 19, 2008

Hello.It’s been sometime since my last post. I was not able to logon to Space.com after the changes. So, I gave up for awhile. Presently, My website explores Cydonia, Hebes Chasma, and Nepenthes Mensae regions of Mars.Website:http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_show.htmlAll 200+ images (Crops) are based on the following source images:http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=b&keyword=cydonia&single=y&start=4http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=b&keyword=cydonia&single=y&start=10http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEM565R03EF_1.htmlhttp://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEM4FHSZEFF_0.htmlIt is important to remember these are official scientific images. My website is based on these sources.The following examples show the so called “Face” at varying levels of processing and enlargements. Yellow arrows points to areas of interest. Note carving located lower right of the Face. North is to the right in all images. http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/AA58b.jpghttp://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/AA61.jpghttp://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/AA66.jpghttp://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/AA65.jpgThe next two images are enlarged 2.50Xhttp://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/AA72.jpghttp://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/AA73.jpgThe Face is designed to be mirrored. Both left and right half’s show two different faces when mirrored.http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/AA22a.jpghttp://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/AA30.jpghttp://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/AA32.jpgThis image shows the Face enlarged 1.50X http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/AA36.jpgThis is only a small sample. Review all slide shows on my website. It is a good study. Also, My website is a work in progress…..I will add more slide shows when more images become available.

bearack · Jun 20, 2008

I can at least appreciate your dedication!  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <img id="06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/6/14/06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" /> </div>

ks15 · Jun 22, 2008

In this post, I will compare the NASA/MRO version of the “Face” with the Mars Express version. As you can see, There is a major discrepancy between the two. The NASA/MRO version is shown left.One space agency is not telling the truth. http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Cydonia_Images/AA83.jpghttp://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Cydonia_Images/C63a.jpgThis first link is a Cydonia search. The Face is shown upright. Note poor quality of this image.http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/apotelesmata.php?q=cydonia&order=release_date&submit=SearchHowever, When clicked, The Face is shown upside down. Very unusual.http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_003234_2210The only reason for this flipping is to disorient the observer.This 3D Mars Express version is a false rendering of the Face. Both Michael Malin and George Neukum are both given credit for this image:http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=b&keyword=cydonia&single=y&start=3&size=bAt the same time, G. Neukum provides images showing the Face correctly:The following images are crops of the source originals.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/D13.jpghttp://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Face/AA61.jpgHere is the Mars Express link for all images relating to Cydonia:http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=b&keyword=cydonia&start=1Of all the images in this thumbnail page, Only two are legitimate:http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=b&keyword=cydonia&single=y&start=4http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=b&keyword=cydonia&single=y&start=10I find it remarkable how BOTH space agencies behave on the “Face”. This behavior applies to Mars in general.Website:http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_show.html

bearack · Jun 24, 2008

If anything, this image really looks like these were islands in a vast ocean.  Look at the edges of each platue.  Looks like erosion to me but I guess it could have occurred with wind as well.http://esamultimedia.esa.int/images/marsexpress/305-230906-3253-6-co1-Cydonia_H.jpg <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <img id="06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/6/14/06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" /> </div>

abq_farside · Jun 26, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>In this post, I will compare the NASA/MRO version of the “Face” with the Mars Express version. As you can see, There is a major discrepancy between the two. The NASA/MRO version is shown left.One space agency is not telling the truth. Posted by ks15</DIV> Never saw a huge discrepancy.  Other than the fact that one looked like false color and the other BW and most likely you see resolution differences.  Not sure what you mean by major discrepancy between the two. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Don't let who you are keep you from becoming who you want to be! </div>

Mars Express Images - Revisited

yevaud

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

ks15

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Mee_n_Mac

Guest

ks15

Guest

qso1

Guest

ks15

Guest

qso1

Guest

qso1

Guest

ks15

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

qso1

Guest

ks15

Guest

qso1

Guest

ks15

Guest

qso1

Guest

qso1

Guest

bmaone23

Guest

qso1

Guest

ks15

Guest

bearack

Guest

ks15

Guest

bearack

Guest

abq_farside

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page