Since 2007, I have been discussing with a NASA 30 year employee, individuals from science and other UFO/Space sites about pictures from the European Space Agency. I do not understand how a billions dollar site can have pictures like have been found in Hale Crater and anyone can go look at and if you take your time can take pictures of incredible builidngs, water treatment site and many other buildings and odd buildings and structures as well. Now if this is not real, how does a Billion dollar program justify these pictures on their site? If they are real, how can society continue to ignore discussing these issues? My NASA guy had one major comment, he is not willing to bite the hand that feeds him and what good would it do to find out this anyway, are we going to go find Gold or something. This comment from a good family friend that referenced Werner von Braun more than answer my questions. Mr. Searles has worked on every shuttle design since the kick off of the programs and prior to that designed military helicopters for our great military complex. He today still is almost scared to talk about the shuttle findings in space, Mars or anything outside technology and the great leaps we made in the 70's. Anyway, my site, [Blog promotional link removed] has the primary building that is most recognizable to find and is Huge, est., 100,000 Sq' with connecting buildings making it much larger. Everyone can go to ESA.int web site, go to mars pics., page 35, Hale Crater western perspective view. Again just south of the mountain range is the builiding I labeled university of Mars. Now one more thought, do not comment until you have gone to the site and found what I am showing you on my site. I took a 35mm camera and after hundreds of hours of zooming in, decreasing contrast etc... using just my microsoft windows program that opened up when I went to the site. No playing with anything! No programs! nothng. Again I am not saying it is all real which would mean a city of thousands and thousands as well as an industrial area. I have put a bulk of pictures up on photobucket but my blog has the best picture and again, if it is not real, how does a BILLION dollar government and privately funded space program allow these pictures to be put into a site. They have not removed these pictures in more than a year and since then other builidngs, structures, a bridge system, mining locations have been found but no one will discuss this, WHY????? Again, only respond after you have either seen the picture or gone to ESA.int's site. By the way, when you go to NASA's hale crater, it is black and white, it is completely smooth like it is a soft sanded beach. Why would NASA fake their picture showing nothing and ESA leaves their pictures and a city is found?

Attached Thumbnails

     

Testing the feeback/ trackback - What Program Opened up to be able to find these pictures? Will any program work?

Why would ESA publish an incredible find like artificial structures without some great press release or press conference?
Especially when the world is looking at Mars for any tiny scrap of evidence of past or current life.

So; I'm not voting for myself, I am voting on behalf of the ESA since they would be ignoring an incredible story.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

Interesting how the ancient Martians chose to build buildings that look exactly like JPEG artefacts isn't it? Have you considered the possibility that maybe the reason NASA's images don't show them is because they don't really exist?

__________________
"Any Sufficiently Analyzed Magic is Indistinguishable from SCIENCE!" -Agatha Heterodyne

"Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it." -Florence Ambrose

Welcome to BAUT, Mars University!

Have you considered the following possibilities: Image artifacts and pareidolia?

Hale Crater has been discussed here before. Sorry to disappoint you, but these are well understood image compression effects. The spacecraft used lossy compression before transmission to Earth. See here:

hale crater ESAs images

See this post for compression artifacts in Earth images.

hale crater ESAs images

I doubt anyone will seriously argue that there is a city in a river.

Because most people aren't zooming in on the compression artifacts and are looking at the real Martian surface features.

__________________
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

Oh, could you explain what you mean here? On one hand, you say you're "zooming in, decreasing contrast etc." and using a 35mm camera (for what?) but then you say you aren't "playing with anything" and "No programs!"

This seems like an obvious contradiction: You are manipulating the contrast, rescaling the image, "etc." using a program. In what way aren't you "playing with anything"? How are you not using a program?

__________________
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

__________________
All Moderation in Purple
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

Those are some biased poll choices right there.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

I am a writer and director for an energy company and found this after listening to a European scientist ask similar questions. I went to the site and within minutes without using any special editing programs. My point was I just opened the site, zoomed in and darkened the picture and you could immediately see somthing major was there. So without being technically challenged by my use of terms which was meant to make the point that it is easy and nothing technical is needed to see everything I have found. If that is a major problem and keeps people from researching this and just opens up wise crack comments then I obviously selected a site without interested individuals that want to question our governments as to why they continue to either create false information or refuse to give real information.

I am again amazed at the inability to follow a simple direction, first go to the site and what I have posted is not only there, but simply clear as day without doing anything BUT, zooming, darkening etc... I truly am trying to find one group of intelligent interested individuals or group of people that will find what I found. If you believe zooming in on a picture can produce a building out of a rock then you are here to just contradict or cause problems. I put myself out by offering this type of information with the hope I can find even one individual that will go to the site, view the area first, find what I have found which is very easy was my point and then help me figure out why an incredibly wealthy space program would allow a city to be in their pictures. Again I did not say they were real, I am questioning how it could be allowed to remain in a site like the ESA who I find much more open than NASA.

I am once again finding people that speak before they even take a look for themselves. What is the problem with attempting to research something before sticking a foot in their mouth, this is incredibly ballsy for any company to ignore or place this type of information on their site. If it is a hoax, it is not me, it is someone at ESA or their is something there. If your just here to cut out of ignorance than most likely I am in the wrong site.

My use of a Camera was because if you go to the site, you can zoom in to a certain point then I found through just viewing the screen with a camera the clarity is incredible and that is why I also shared that. My intent on sharing this information is so others can see what is clearly there.

Anthony F Riordan

Please check out the rules of the site, Mars University. Politeness is a primary concern here, as is use of good langauge. If there are "****" in your post, you have broken the language rules, and should edit your post.

---

Now just me: if you zoom in on an image on a computer screen, then view that with a camera, then you are doing things to the image that will introduce artifacts.

What you are seeing are just that; image artifacts.

Those images are there, in public site, and without comment precisely because the things you claim to see (mining etc.) simply are not there.

__________________
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.

I fully looked through your site to see if my questions were answered. I again stated I saw many discussions starting in 2007 and again my question was and still is, why would a billions dollar program leave false pictures discrediting their pictures? Again, I did not say they were real for anyone that read my post. I also have reviewed more than 300 other posts from other sites and my point for entering this site was again to find educated or at least interested individuals and groups that would find real answers to why they are their and or why would they leave them there.

Again I also have said they are very possibly placed there so commenting without actually going there and looking for yourself means your comments are just ignorance because I have researched for hundreds of hours, I have hundreds of pictures and I am looking for some individuals interested in researching this further because I have heard enough FAKE stuff to last me a life time and by following who put them there and why they are still there may open up doors to getting other questions answered.

So I ask again, I am not a UFOlogist, I am not a photographer but I have had every picture viewed by a NASA employee and the pictures analyzed by an ARMY photographer and the problem is that their is no sign of placement into that crater with photo shop or something. So I decided again after researching this to find a web site that had interested researchers. I will say it again, if I found only ignorance I will move along.

I am shocked by how a question is ridiculed not for its content but because of the subject. What is the purpose of this site?

A Riordan

Attached Thumbnails

 

I was hoping for some people to go to the site, view it and have a discussion with me on why something like this could be allowed to happen or be ignored. So I obviously will enjoy your company from another venue. Again, this was researched with NASA, US ARMY, PHOTO shop professionals and others before I asked these questions. The pictures I posted are directly from the ESA web site. So the question remains, HOW can a company like ESA allow these type of pictures to discredit their other pictures? IF you commented without gong to the site and finding the pictures, viewing them before your comment, as I put in the poll, your true nature is to feel great power in ignorance and putting people down for trying to have a discussion. I hope your power trip feels good when your comments did not ever touch my questions nor were they capable of understanding reality. Good luck cutting on other good people especially if it makes you feel so powerful from behind your computer screen.

I have no problems with open honest discussions, utilizing other peoples expertise but not just cuts to put down a subject. I have indicated I know this is not a new subject but as also indicated, nothing has been added by outside individuals to the pictures downloaded from the ESA site. These structures are on the site at ESA,, their are more than 100 buildings, thier are other structures on no less than 5 other territories and someone has been very busy creating pictures for us to find from ESA on Mars or security has been breached, so what is more probable? No matter what scientific jargon is used, no matter what your professional opinion is of the ability of Mars Express pictures to view these objects from their orbit, non of that matters because the pictures are there and how they got there is the question I am asking. If you question the validity of the objects I post then you may as well not post because they are their. If you have an answer as to how they got their I would love the discussion.

I am not selling anything, my mentioning a book, my blog which all are of no interest accept for I had them as a note which I will avoid at all cost in the future. I am not looking for money or a following, I am trying to answer an incredible question. Thank you

The content has been discussed before.

hale crater ESAs images

And I will mention that it is 3 pages worth of discussion.


How are they false? And what are these false pictures discrediting?

How do we know they are professionals. You haven't given us any names. Just because you throw out some letters doesn't make your assumption any more valid.

Nothing is discrediting anything.

Photos of the same place, but taken with different equipment in different conditions and stored in different forms (two picutres may both be jpg, but may use different compression levels etc) happen to show different image artifacts when zoomed in and processed beyond a reasonable level. Woo hoo.

Sorry, but you can repeat your claim as often as you like; I for one don't think there's anything odd going on.

And yes, I've looked at your images.

__________________
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.

__________________
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.

Are you familiar with compression artifacts? Did you look at the examples of image artifacts in images of Earth features? Here's the post (written by another poster with attachements):

hale crater ESAs images

What is your opinion of those images?

__________________
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

I'm seeing the same compression artifacts in the attachments in your opening post that we've discussed in other threads. So unless you have something significantly different that you haven't mentioned, we (folks on this board) have gone over this before.

Why? Is it because I've pointed out problems with your idea?

__________________
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

Could someone show me artifacts anywhere on any planet that even look close to the ones in Hale Crater?? If this is such a common occurance then that should not be a problem. That might settle this once and for all.

Have you looked at the river image (from the post I've linked to a couple of times in thread)

http://www.bautforum.com/attachment....2&d=1241008422

__________________
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

Mars University - you seem incredulous that people are ignoring what you believe is there. First you must establish what is there, and it is all falling down right there.

You've jumped to an uninformed conclusion that it is part of some ancient civilisation. Then you've jumped to the conclusion that everybody else must concloude the same as you. Then you get angry that we are sitting idle or ignoring the "civilisation".

It's too many leaps. Sorry.

If you ask for an opinion on something it is just rude to dismiss the opinion given. You don't have to agree, but you've come out accusing people of wrong-doing as soon as they disagree with you.

1: "Do you think I'm handsome?"
2: "Not really, no"
3: "Well then you are obviously such and such"

It doesn't seem fair does it?

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

(Sorry, I had to get that out of my system )

I have looked at the ESA site, and at your adjusted images. I have a request: Since you know how much zoom, contrast decrease, etc. you applied, could you please do an experiment? Please apply the identical manipulations to this photograph and post the results. Consider this a "control" experiment.

Thanks in advance.

Rick

__________________
"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

Good Lord - Van Rijn, do you realise that you've found Atlantis?!!

__________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day." - Douglas Adams

"Certainly, in the topsy-turvy world of heavy rock, having a good solid piece of wood in your hand is often useful." - Ian Faith

Heh. Thanks, but that really should go to JonClarke - he found the image. I'm just stealing it. I was thinking of it as "River City" (not important, but my home town is one of many that calls itself "River City").

__________________
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

Atlantis is everywhere!

Reunion Island, off the coast of Spain, and beneath the Murray River at Renmark.

Jon

Attached Thumbnails

     

Are you referring to this?

http://esamultimedia.esa.int/images/...leCrater_H.jpg

If so, this is a heavily processed image to provide that "perspective." That processing also introduces image artifacts, along with compression artifacts.

Could you provide links to the NASA site image you're referring to? Unless this is the same processed image based on the same data from the same hardware on the same spacecraft, there's no reason to expect it would look the same. Have you considered that this might be a hint that you're looking at image artifacts and not something actually on Mars?

By the way, if you put links in your post, it will probably go in the moderation queue. Don't be surprised if it doesn't appear immediately.

__________________
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

Just a hint for others: It was obvious in hindsight, but in the Reunion Island image, I didn't immediately see "Atlantis" . . . until I zoomed in a little and looked at the darker areas of the image.

__________________
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

This looks like a low-res JPG texture mapped onto a high-res height-map. The JPG looks disappointingly crude on top of that beautiful height-map; if I'd made the image I'd have blurred the artifacts out, and just used the texture to give a bit of colour. But that's just a trick to make the image look a bit better- the ESA would probably prefer to avoid such a trick.

__________________
New Orion's Arm Site . The Starlark . Against a Diamond Sky (OA Novella Collection) . OA Flickr set

Exactly. Look at the peaks and slopes in the crater, which provide you with perfectly sharp horizons on features covered with blurry color detail...and of course, the edges of the square. No camera resolved those sharp edges, they're due to the computer rendering of the underlying geometry from a point of view where no camera ever existed. Turn down the texture resolution in a computer game with a 3D outdoor environment and you'll see the same effect.

There's probably tessellation artifacts to be found as well, from the height data being turned into a sheet of triangles...they'd be easier to spot if the image map wasn't so full of JPEG artifacts. And then the image was JPEG compressed for the web, so there's actually two overlaid sets of JPEG artifacts, one aligned to the image and the other aligned and projected onto the height field.

How exactly does this "discredit their other pictures"? Combining height data and overhead imagery to synthesize low-altitude views like this is obviously useful for publicity, and even has some scientific use...it could be of great help in understanding erosion features, for example. The quality could be a bit better, but most people don't notice the artifacts, and they've got higher priority things to work on. I do wish they'd include more information about the images, but their main audience doesn't care.