"Best Red Planet Diorama ever!" Topic

Proverbs 26:4

Or, in Internet parlance, "Don't feed the s."

Trapondur: I sincerely urge you to seek psychological help. There is nothing untoward in those photos. They are not fakes. Your theory for why NASA would make innocuous fakes of something makes no logical sense. Seriously man, everyone else who is reading this thread comes away thinking you are crazy.

I'm still thinking this is just a wind-up.

That said, Poe's law.

First, these photos do show something. I remind you of the Crusade-like nature of the "image" drawn here from Mars. And there were crazier images even. There must be a "target group" for that.

Trapondur, when I look at the clouds I sometimes see strange shapes. When I was a child I used to look at the curtains and frighten myself when I saw faces in them (even though they had a perfectly innocent pattern).

Yougsters have quite vivid imaginations and insufficient experience with which to moderate what they 'think' they see.

I still have a vivid imagination (why I still – as an adult – play wargames, I guess, especially SF ones). I'm as big a fan of conspiracy theory as the next guy but, seriously, you hve to do a couple of things.

First off, watch this video link

It's about moon landings but it's still very relevant.

Second, ask yourself what you think NASA – or anyone else – would gain by doing what you say they have done. You have made no justification for this whatsoever. NASA – struggling to retain credibility in a world of shrinking budgets where other people are launching crews into space (the Russians, the Chinese and – soon – private enterprise*). So what would their motivation be for faking the shots from Mars? Shots of, er…, the ground. Some rocks…

Lastly, ask yourself why you are posting this on a wargames forum with a duplicitous 'vaguely wargaming related' posting title.

Surely there are other, tin-foil-hat, grassy-knoll forums you could post this on and have a bigger, more appreciative and (dare I say it) less critical audience?

Unless this is a wind up by you Trapondur.

Which I strongly suspect.

John T

* You do accept that stuff's all real, right? What with amatures being able to actually track them in space and everything…

** And you do need to ask yourself because several people have already asked you and you have avoided answering the question

John Treadaway 04 Mar 2013 3:55 a.m. PST:

Surely there are other, tin-foil-hat, grassy-knoll forums you could post this on and have a bigger, more appreciative and (dare I say it) less critical audience?

For the really ambitious NASA hoax proponents, there's always this:
link

Just in case there is an ambitious hoax proponent reading this, of course. Obviously no originality points can be expected for claiming NASA has released badly doctored pictures in an attempt to cover up the fact that there are artificial structures (presumably of alien origin) on Mars, Moon or whathavewe… But then again, there's always a possibility (even if remote) that a particular set of photos is the actual smoking gun even if Hoagland and various other consipiracy theorists haven't managed to come with one during the decades they've been at it.

…a camera mounted at over 6ft. high, while rotatable and tiltable, can not be lowered in its height, can take such photos

Umm, high definition telephoto lens?

Or are you operating under the impression that they would spend several billions of pounds/dollars sending a several billion pound/dollar machine up there with a happy snap disposable?

However, they made two mistakes. "Wonderful" ones, even, as neither of them can be explained away.

Really? Let's have a go, as I'm pretty good with photoshop (aka 18 years design experience).

First, note how the "screwholes" in the handle are differently shaped. I think the feller photoshopping this got carried away with how to do the shadow in the screwholes, so he augmented to the right, putting a little extra ridge there, which obviously isn't there in the SOL 106 picture. (Of course, I could be totally wrong, and these are simply two different rovers -- err, no wait, that doesn't make nonsense …)

Yep… you could be totally wrong. Even an amateur would be able to rubber stamp an identical point between two images.

Second, they botched the photoshopping, because they forgot the little space between the brush head tools, through which in the original photo you could naturally see the background, whereas in the fake SOL-137 photo, there is perfect white.

It's the effect on the digital camera caused by the atmosphere being thinner, thus less sunlight is filtered/diffused so you get flaring into the lens. The much stronger light will cause stronger shadow distortions as well, hence the appearance of a different shape.

Note that there is no white part there on the rover, nor is there a metallic part that could reflect that intensely. Nor are these dead pixels. It simply is them doing a sloppy job.

Try looking at a black table against a white window frame, with the sun shining through. You will find the white window frame is black, and the black table it white.

Try this one…

"Every event has an infinite number of causes so why pick one rather than another? There are many ways a sword might find itself in a field…"

YouTube link

More shocking is the large dinosaur footprint you missed…

When I was a child I used to look at the curtains and frighten myself when I saw faces in them (even though they had a perfectly innocent pattern).

So, it wasn't just me who did that !

The ability of the human brain to create a pattern where no pattern actually exists is a fascinating phenomanum – there's various theories as to what causes it, mostly early survival mechanisms (basically – you need to be able to pick out the tiger stalkinmg you through the long grass).

Used to have the same fun with colour blindness tests – you know, look at the spot see the number 5 if you're "normal".

I used to have conversations like this –

"Ok, 20thmaine, can you see a number here?"

"Yes !"

"Ok, what is it ?"

"23 !"

"No, 23 isn't on this card"

"Err….yes it is….I can see it"

"No this card has 45 on it"

"Err…no, it doesn't. Really, it's 23. I can see it."

"No you can't, it's not there"

"Errr……how can I phrase this without being insulting…..?"

tnjrp – thanks for that link, am now happily reading Richard Feynman's FBI record !

Not seen the sword in a field before Geoff.
Good link!

Interesting thread.

Reminds me of another forum, dealing with lightsabers and RL dueling with LED sabers, a forumite just declared he was the living avatar of the Red Power Ranger and that he wants to be a female MLP.

Much like this thread is related to gaming, it also had nothing to do with the forum in question.

Back on topic…where is the over view shot of this great martian terrain board/diorama?

Lol!!!!!

Seriously man, everyone else who is reading this thread comes away thinking you are crazy.

Now that's a little broad, don't you think? I'm sure many people think he's just winding people up. It's at least as plausible as actual dementia.

Perhaps we should start a poll and see which viewpoint is most widely held?

I have been to Mars and seen no such features…

While I am happy ignoring attacks at me personally, no matter how threadbare, please leave Carl Sagan out of this.

What NASA is doing here is the perfect antithesis to Sagan's way.

Carl Sagan was a popularizer of science, a man educating the layman masses by giving them no-nonsens understanding and insight. A man who understood the sciences' obligation to enlightenment of even those not directly part of or active in them.

He was NOT a pulp-trivializer of science, giving them Jesus on a martian pogo-stick. NOT a man who thought of scientists as a self-contained caste only existing for itself and one another, NOT conceding not even the least amount of intellect to the layperson.

Gee, how many years he could have shaved off his SETI-work, had he just had the brilliant idea of simply pulling a picture of a live martian out of his rectum …

I'm repeating what I said before, namely that I don't know why this is done, nor do I claim to. As essentially it doesn't matter at all, why.

I just gave a random thought on that, as I consider more than such a rather severe waste of time. Especially as half of that field might lead into US-American interior politics, which mean nothing to me as a European.
(So let us waste some more time here):

It could be for a million reasons.

Maybe it was intended as a marketing ploy.
Maybe one of their janitors felt underpaid, and decided to sneak into their server rooms, loading up these fake images.
Maybe they "meant well". (And there'd be assumptive thinking on their behalf)
Maybe the poor righteous NASA scientists are in the clutches of javelin98's secret organisations, helmed by Elvis himself, out of a UFO behind the moon, and these ridiculously bad images are their cry for help.
Maybe they simply didn't have the guts to admit defeat, maybe the mission failed months ago, and they dared not or were not allowed to announce that.

Whatever it is, the WHY does not really matter. (To me, anyway.)

Fact is that for months, and even officially communicated outwards to the world media, NASA is obviously lying through their teeth.

They are, at the very, very, very, very least forging, nay: fabricating scientific findings/results. That's not kosher scientific work. That's not what Sagan would have done.

And, GeoffQRF:

The technical specifications of the mast camera (all the parts of the entire rover, actually) can also be found at their website:

link

If those were "zoomed" (I take it, that is what you meant by "high definition telephoto") these globular sand grains would be the size of a tennis ball at least, some pictures like that of a basketball.
And even that only in the roughly 20% where the angle of the shot is not simply outright ridiculous.
But of course, you know that.

Generally, I would like to ask people here to look into more of these photographs at their website, with terrain-building expertise.

Duh, that's because it's not on *Mars*, it's a *diorama* here on Earth! Pay closer attention, BTC!

Although, did he ever say where the diorama is? Maybe NASA built it on Mars, to look like Mars, but not *exactly* like Mars, to REALLY mess with our heads.

Or maybe it's a diorama of Mars, inside a larger diorama of Earth, isnide an even larger diorama of Mars.

People, it's turtles all the way down!

The technical specifications of the mast camera (all the parts of the entire rover, actually) can also be found at their website

So they can.

Curiosity's "neck and head" (mast) carries seven of Curiosity's seventeen camera "eyes." Cameras on Curiosity's mast provide a view similar to what a nearly seven-foot-tall basketball player would see on Mars.

That help?

If those were "zoomed" (I take it, that is what you meant by "high definition telephoto") these globular sand grains would be the size of a tennis ball at least, some pictures like that of a basketball.

You need to use a camera more often.

at least we haven't had any martians photo-bombing yet or mooning the camera :-)

They edited those images out of the public feed, surfer. As we all know, Disney's 1957 animated documentary was based on footage from the original, Super Ultra Top Secret Illuminati-funded Mars mission:

YouTube link

When I was on Mars, I also met Carl Sagan.

Wow, I hope you appreciate that once in a life-time event.

If those were "zoomed" (I take it, that is what you meant by "high definition telephoto") these globular sand grains would be the size of a tennis ball at least, some pictures like that of a basketball.

Now if only I had camera like that I wouldn't have trashed my eyes on a petrographic microscope…

Wow, I hope you appreciate that once in a life-time event.

Billthecat didn't say he only met him once. Maybe he met him going and coming.

:)

jpattern2, Carl Sagan is to people with brains what Chuck Norris is to people like you. And just as Chuck has no need to ever meet people twice, neither would Sagan, I presume.

So your entire line of arguing is erroneous. :)

Besides, I didn't drag Sagan into this, it was 20thmain on the first page.

your entire line of arguing is erroneous.

Irony, thou art a vicious little minx.

Of course, Carl Sagan is now deceased, yet you continue to refer to him in the present tense. What do you know that we don't??

Uuh ….

That some people (like billthecat and jpattern2, and not to forget you of course) should maybe try to think a little more analytically.

My part in this is over since I gave the proof of the images being fake, and NASA obviously having shot truth and science point blank in the face.

I just love BTC's paranoid idea of anybody having tried to secretly establish contact with me. I'll say this again: I'm just a little nerd.

And even though I could imagine some of you nigh on want to see me dead, you'd still have to come up with a logical explanation for that wish yet.

Contrary to your rather odd worldview, I am not to be accused of anything. NASA is.

Me not even of obstruction of justice, as I made these facts public here, as soon as I had them together.

But I'll entertain the likes of you three for as long as you find fun in it.

And, while we're on it:

17-DD-T678-H---8. 990_76SDK-KJ-W2.

My part in this is over

Whew!

jpattern2, Carl Sagan is to people with brains what Chuck Norris is to people like you.

I'd report you to Bill for a personal attack, but I can't tell whether that was supposed to be an insult or a compliment. I agree that Norris has me beat on muscles and money, but I have him beat on looks and acting ability. :)

Trapondur 06 Mar 2013 10:02 a.m. PST:

My part in this is over since I gave the proof of the images being fake

"Proof"?

For one, proof is for mathematics and logic. For another, you haven't even given half-decent evidence.

but I have him beat on looks and acting ability.

To be fair though, so does my favourite side of the sofa.

:D

Hahahahaha!

That some people… should maybe try to think a little more analytically.

The irony of this statement is staggering.

Dang it! The Arean Nix Olympus Lodge of the Hermetic Order of the Illuminated Free (with deposit-return bottle) Mason Odd Fellows has jammed the stifle button!
They've found me!

Did all of you miss the sign at the front entry to the Zoo saying "Do not feed the animals"?

What is the sound of a Huey coming in for a landing?

Wacko Wacko Wacko Wacko….

VR
James Mattes

Uhh, James, those are the black helicopters--make sure your tinfoil hat is on straight--the orbiting mind-control lasers evaded the space rocks that the Spiders from Mars are using to soften up ol'Earth prior to the invasion!

Did all of you miss the sign at the front entry to the Zoo saying "Do not feed the animals"?

But, mama, that's where the fun is.

:)

Besides, I didn't drag Sagan into this, it was 20thmain on the first page.

I did, I did indeed. I invoked Carl's name ironically – because he was so good at deflating conspiracy theories such as this. Thus – even with my knowing full well that he is in fact dead (and not on Mars as some claim) – I asked "where's Carl Sagan when you need him?".

At least some of us understood your little poke, 20thmaine.

That was fun. is it all over now?

And is the "moon landing conspiracy" still going strong? I ask as the last Beeb (sorry, BBC tv) show I saw had views of the moon rover and its tracks, which looked kind of cool. Not as cool as a full on conspiracy of course, but enough for me :-)

Carl Sagan is not dead, he just moved to Mars.

Wasn't it Aristotle who was convinced that rodents spontaneously generated from piles of old rags and such? The proof was there: if you left a pile of old clothes and rags in a pile outside, eventually you would have rodents appear. That was called proof.

Or not. He couldn't consider other explanations, they didn't occur to him.

Marc the plastics fan 15 Mar 2013 10:09 a.m. PST

And is the "moon landing conspiracy" still going strong?

A few moon hoaxers do crop up here and there once in a while. I don't think it's in vogue currently tho. It's simply been too long since the last Apollo flight.

I love this thread! Go on, Trapondur, start another one……

Dude…! You have no idea the powers that you are meddling with!

I see things in the ceiling tiles when I stare at them a long time too.

As an employee of a company that makes ceiling tiles I can tell you that we do put words and phrases in the patterns just to see if anyone notices. Sometime you just have to connect the right dots.

Yes, but why does it have to be "buy more ceiling tiles" every time?

Such a shame I joined this too late.

I was really confused. I thought that nasa had done an awesome april fools prank with the rover photos. I kept looking at the pictures and seeing nothing.

I am disappoint.

I see that he says he is from "Austria", but I think that's a typo, and he's actually from Australia. The reason for his posting this is that he's angry about Games Workshop's prices down-under, so he's venting against the great NASA-GW Space Exploration Conspiracy!

If Trapondur is from OZ then he definitely has a few 'roos loose in the top paddock….