Without question, although the artifacts appear to be quantization and error-propagation effects, less so than JPEG effects.

This is the same old image trotted out time and again by people who say there is artificial construction on Mars. They simply don't know how those images come to be.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Hello. It has been awhile since my last post.....

Here it goes.....I hope my image links are allowed. If not, visit my website. Look for the slide show Hale Crater. One more thing, there are no JPEG artifacts in these images.
http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_show.html
(www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_show.html)

First of all, this crater is covered in FOG.
http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Ha...raterHale1.jpg

Improved....
http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Ha...erHale110A.jpg

Inverted. There is a "city" with built structures....
http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Ha...erHale105A.jpg

http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Ha...rHale100E2.jpg

Note "A". A major feature. This is visible in the original online image.
http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Ha...rHale110LB.jpg

The reflected halves....Colors are original to the image.
http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Ha...Hale110C2A.jpg

There is an intelligence at work on Mars.

I am planning to publish a book based on my website. I am in the process of looking for literary agents.

First of all - why are you using a public outreach image as a basis for study? Why are you using a rendering, and artists impression, to do this work?

And most importantly, do you even know where the data is from?

Why have you not gone to the source data from the PDS? If not, why not?

Do you even know what the PDS is, what Orbit Number this is? If not, why not?

Have you gone to the Mars Global Data website to seek observations of the same area from other cameras onboard other spacecraft, such as MOC on MGS, THEMIS-VIS on Mars Odyssey, and CTX and HiRISE on MRO? If not, why not?

...and there it went.

so how is your post any different than spamming??

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

“First of all - why are you using a public outreach image as a basis for study? Why are you using a rendering, and artists impression, to do this work?”

This is an artist rendering of a crater and not a image taken by the Mars Express spacecraft????
An image supposedly taken by the HRSC????
http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Ha...raterHale1.jpg

What is it then????…..Advertising????

No. it is a valid image of crater Hale….Public outreach or not.

“And most importantly, do you even know where the data is from?”

Irrelevant.

“Do you even know what the PDS is, what Orbit Number this is? If not, why not?”

Do not need to know. Again, irrelevant.

“Have you gone to the Mars Global Data website to seek observations of the same area from other cameras onboard other spacecraft, such as MOC on MGS, THEMIS-VIS on Mars Odyssey, and CTX and HiRISE on MRO? If not, why not?”

Mars Global Data website: My only concern is the Mars Express image of Crater Hale.

MOC, MGS, THEMIS-VIS, Mars Odyssey - Images are poor to begin…poor resolution…..Again, my only concern is the Mars Express image of Crater Hale….and the revealing details it contains.

Explain this……
http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Ha...Hale110C2A.jpg

If the ESA is playing games with their (ours??) images, they have some explaining to do.

Again, my only concern is this image and nothing else…
http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Ha...raterHale1.jpg

I do not care about JPEG artifacts, orbit numbers, transmission rates, other images taken by different spacecraft, etc, etc.


"so how is your post any different than spamming??"

Not spamming. I posting relevant material in a topic covering crater Hale.

You should if you are going to make incredible claims such as that you are seeing cities or "intelligence at work" among the splodges.

On what basis do you claim the effects you think you see are not JPG artifacts?

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

Please go back to basics and figure out what HRSC is - how it takes its data - and how it is presented.

You are NOT looking at an image from Mars Express. You are looking at a 3D rendering of data returned by Mars Express.

As an example - here are renderings that I have made using similar datasets from the same camera.
http://www.dougellison.com/?p=69

Again - these are not images taken by Mars Express...these are renderings of data returned by Mars Express - they are an artistic product, not a science product.

To access both rendered perspective views, and science data, please start here

http://hrscview.fu-berlin.de/cgi-bin...page=entry.ion


IF you are so sure that what you see is evidence of civilisation - then WHY are you not looking for other images of the same site from other instruments on other spacecraft to confirm your finding - a finding that if confirmed would be the most monumental finding in human history? Why are you describing all sources of confirming data as 'irrelevant'

I am done here.

My last post in this topic.

Oh no KS42 hit by the stunning shock of reality....

Wow. You consider all processing issues and other sources of data irrelevant? Do you realize what that says about your argument?

(Yes, I know, you won't answer any questions here. Do you realize what that says about your argument?)

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

The mining site is a completely different picture. I mentioned it in passing as part of a comment. I have 150 pictures, some very clear, some not so clear. My point is that like the building I have placed on the site, which is very clear without my camera, without anything but zooming in is very interesting and how can it be added to a picture at ESA has been my question. Their are hundreds of objects that can be seen in just minutes, my use of a camera was to see detail in pictures like the building and what I found is that like using a magnifying lenses to a satellite picture like we use from CIA photo's for example, the detail of a picture can be much better. So I attempted to take that same view and actually zoom in with the camera and snap the picture which I now have pictures of incredible detail that is the best crop and drop of objects if that is the claim for the objects in this crater. IF these are not actual real buildings in Hale Crater, the amount of detailed, quality work, time involved has to be an incredible undertaking. Anyway, again until someone has gone and truly viewed the 300 pictures from Mars express and looked in detail at what my questions are about, I have no doubt everyone would be a skeptic as I was until I started finding actual buildings, pillars, architecture, understanding the shadows and sun refections etc..

I have been told at every site I go to that it has already been discussed yet no one has ever had answers to how these would get in a site like ESA's pictures, What is the significance of these because they are there? Anyway, sorry for the frustration, good luck with your site.

Anthony Riordan

Speaking of frustration, would you please look at the images in this link:

hale crater ESAs images

Do you seriously think there is a city in that river?

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Sometimes you can look at the clouds and see shapes that almost look like a dog smoking a pipe - does that mean there's a dog there?

Someone get him onto the patch!

Seriously though, there's a big difference between 'looks like' and 'is'. There's usually a big difference between someone claiming something looks like something and it actually doing so.

__________________
The left hand knows full well what the right hand is doing, but quietly ignores it.

With reference to a city in a river, what are you talking about? I have not referenced a city in a river.

A. Riordan

I believe Van Rijn is making a comparison of the image artifacts in the picture you presented to those seen in the images he linked to. The point being that these artifacts can and do pop up in photos of rivers among other things. This doesn't tell us that Atlantis is in a river bed in Queensland, Australia.

ETA: Sorry, north WEST, not east - Kimberleys or somewhere around there.

__________________
The left hand knows full well what the right hand is doing, but quietly ignores it.

I'm talking about this:

http://www.bautforum.com/attachments...images-ord.jpg

It's an example of an image on Earth with obvious image artifacts caused by automatic processing. It's an example I've linked to repeatedly in this thread, but so far you seem to have ignored.

I ask again: Do you seriously think there is a city in that river?

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Yes, exactly. Mars University, you say:

Yet there is a whole thread here discussing image artifacts and other examples of image artifacts. Why are you ignoring us?

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

There have been many (probably hundreds) of "someones" that include scientists, picture analysts and other very technical and dedicated fields that have gone through the original pictures with an extremely detailed eye.
Why have they not seen this?
Why do we need to duplicate thier effort?

Also, You have not answered my question in post 3.

No one? What is it you do not understand about compression artifacts.

Some time ago, Count Zero presented a very simple experiment that you can do on your own that demonstrates how MAJOR artifacts from seemingly nowhere appear in a compressed image.

Even though I knew about artifacts, I always thought they were somewhat subtle. That showed me how drastic they can be.

Give it a try yourself.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

THAT'S where it was! I tried looking for that post earlier this week.
Thanks NEO!

__________________
"Transport of the mails, transport of the human voice, transport of flickering pictures - in this century, as in others, our highest accomplishments still have the single aim of bringing men together." St. Exupery