Astronomy / Space NASA photo captures strange bright light coming out of Mars

Patrick_68000

Patrick_68000
The Martians exist --- http://www.chron.com/news/strange-w...t-coming-5382677.php?cmpid=hpts#photo-6131491

5298215.jpg


:eek:
 

Darren Grey

Darren Grey
"On Tuesday, Slate.com's Bad Astronomy blog suggested that a UFO conspiracy site might not be the best source of information for exploring serious planetary phenomena." - hah :)
 

Kawboy

Kawboy
It's moon light reflecting from marsh gasses, and shining on a weather balloon.


yes, the martians will be here... ... ... (wait for it) ... ... ...


SOON!
 

Perseus

Perseus
I was all excited there for a moment, thought we were privy to a Martian BBQ or something.
Shame the cosmic ray didn't make the effect further up the image because it looks convincing as a ground source event.
 

PacalB

PacalB
204494-5b1b4b38-bef8-11e3-ab5c-db8d2f3f624e.jpg


...

204133-53c5d61e-bef8-11e3-ab5c-db8d2f3f624e.jpg


The strange light, spotted in a photo taken by the rover’s right-hand navigation in a new study area known as the Kimberley, does not appear in pictures from the left-hand camera, suggesting the “light” is actually a speck of lost data, reports NBC. An imaging expert at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory says the blip appears to have been caused by a cosmic ray hit.
Click to expand...

Sorry but what complete and utter rubbish! If you notice the background, you'll see from the images Curiosity is moving. This artifact is stable on the midground horizon as Curiosity changes its vantage point. If this artifact was caused by a cosmic ray hit on the cameras CCD chip you'd not be getting it sit there in a stable way like that on the horizon, it would be moving off the horizon as Curiosity changed its vantage point. I'd say, it seems like someone's not tell us the full story here.
 

PacalB

PacalB
Darren Grey said:
Woohoo, conspiracy time! Tin foil hats all round, everyone!! :D :D :D

Love how you know more about cosmic ray velocity and photographic artifacts than the NASA guys, PacalB :p
Click to expand...

Hey, I'll wear a tin foil hat. I've no issue with that until someone comes up with a more viable explanation. :D

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-im...ncam/NLB_449700848EDR_F0301254NCAM00252M_.JPG

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-im...ncam/NRB_449700848EDR_F0301254NCAM00252M_.JPG

....

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-im...ncam/NRB_449790582EDR_F0310000NCAM00262M_.JPG

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-im...ncam/NLB_449790582EDR_F0310000NCAM00262M_.JPG

I would suggest you open these four images in a browser, line up the four tabs and cycle through them (a bit like flicking a picture book). You'll see that Curiosity is clearly moving and you will also see that this artifact appears twice on the horizon in relatively the same position but at different shooting angles (relative to the hill shadow in the background). So, we are talking at least two hits on the CCD for two images over minutes of Curiosity's transit time. Going by there story thats at least two hits on the CCD in different places but stemming from the same area on the horizon? (And increasing in size as Curiosity closes on it.) Come on, get real.

No, I'll keep my tin foil hat for now thank you very much ... and you, I'll give you the "Mr Gullible Cone Hat" for the time being. Better still, how about you describe to me/us what you are seeing there in those images and how we seeing are possible CCD artifacts? I'm all eyes and ears for your breakdown. :smilie: :p
 
Last edited:

Darren Grey

Darren Grey
PacalB said:
No, I'll keep my tin foil hat for now thank you very much ... and you, I'll give you the "Mr Gullible Cone Hat" for the time being. Better still, how about you describe to me/us what you are seeing there in those images and how we seeing are possible CCD artifacts? I'm all eyes and ears for your breakdown. :smilie: :p
Click to expand...

Thanks for the hat, it's very comfortable ;)

The images you link only confirm it further for me. If there was some persistent effect then you would see it in both of the last two photos, instead of just one of them. And if there are flashes from cosmic ray interference (or from some other random effect) then one would expect them to show up in more than just one photo. Furthermore if you zoom in on those images you really see just some blob of white, nothing that hints at any real effect from the environment. It certainly looks nothing like a "shine of light" like the article mentions - indeed, it betrays a dishonesty in that article since their close-up has clearly been edited to make it look more like a beam.

If they were trying to cover something up why would they release the photos at all? Why even tell the public we have a robot on Mars if there's some big secret hidden there? I find their explanation much more believable than any crack-pot theory you'd want to spin from this.
 

-o-

O
If NASA, or any other national space agency, did find evidence of advanced extraterrestrial life do you think they would publically announce it to the world, or would they engulf it in the usual cover of national security and deny all knowledge while they eternally study it.
 

Ayo

Ayo
-o- said:
If NASA, or any other national space agency, did find evidence of advanced extraterrestrial life do you think they would publically announce it to the world, or would they engulf it in the usual cover of national security and deny all knowledge while they eternally study it.
Click to expand...

They would release photos of it and tell us it was something else of course, that's what any sensible person trying to keep a secret would do, right?
 

Sanpaku

Sanpaku
It may be a curious venting of vapor / ice or localized atmospheric condensation, rather than a light source. What suspended particles would a light illuminate with such localized intensity given the relatively low dust conditions.

As it appears in at least two frames it should be trivial to triangulate a source. I wouldn't be surprised if JPL and the PI opted to spend a few days last week deviating from their traverse through "Kimberley point" to look more closely. It appears to be negotiable terrain.

The light/discharge observed on Sol 590 isn't persistent, as it wasn't observed on the high-res basemap of the locality from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter.
 

Ian Phillips

Volunteer Moderator
Ian Phillips
Those images are two pairs of photographs; both pairs being taken at the same time, from a left camera and a right camera. (the designation is given in the image name).

It is difficult to be definate (which opens enough space for a truckload of conspiracy theorists to drive into), but the pairs of photo's are taken from different positions and times.

In one set, the different angles of the camera could have caused the 'event' to be blocked from vision by the hill. In the other it is much more difficult to see if this could also be the case.

Also, I would have expected any damage caused to the camera/photo to be in the same position on the images (relative to the edges of the photo's), which doesn't appear to be the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom