Location of discovery: Mars
Source: http://www.esa.int/ESA
Yes this is a year old, but if we do not learn from the past, we will be forced to repeat it. Here the person took regular Mars photos from the ESA and used a photo program to adjust the color, contrast, saturation and so on until we can see the ancient surface of Mars as it once was. I have also seen this many times and it is not a result of pixilation which some may assume it the cause on first glance. What you are looking at is the ancient foundation areas that structures were once built upon. They use this technique for identifying ancient temples and buried tombs in Egypt, they also used similar techniques to find lost Nazca lines and cities in Peru. ESA photo index has been mostly ignored and really deserves some serious attention by UFO researches. SCW
I think this is really kool., alot of archaeologist use this to find hidden structures.
ReplyDeletehi - wanted to answer this with examples of non-mars images and other examples of close-up ones of mars - next to the original TIFF files and the JPEGS used in the google earth / mars / moon programs and your examples...
ReplyDeleteits simply jpeg compression anomalies that you are bringing to light by changing the colour values and exposing where the image-compression has made similar colours the same to make files smaller for web and internet use.
those images with anomalies are then mapped onto the surface of mars and mapped over the terrain to follow its curves...
...you can do the same on an image taken of a piece of paper saved as a lossy-jpeg
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/jnac-brainstem/public/jpeg-compression-anomolies.jpg
...here's another of a random image of mars - a close-up of a rock and surrounding dirt in the right, you have the uncompressed TIFF image taken of the surface - and on the left - the JPEG that has been saved to make the file size smaller (by throwing away information on colours that are very similar next to each other but which the eye cannot discern). I've then changed the colour values of the image to bring out and show the compression anomalies. on the left - smack bang in the middle almost - is a square. its not on the original because the original has all its colour information - the jpeg on the left is showing the same checker boarding effects inherent to jpeg compression.
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/jnac-brainstem/public/side-by-side-jpg-and-tiff.jpg
heres one of a portion the grand canyon
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/jnac-brainstem/public/compression-anomolies-grand-canyon-example.jpg
here are a couple on jpeg images of paintings
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/jnac-brainstem/public/nymph-compression-anomolies-2.jpg
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/jnac-brainstem/public/nymph-compression-anomolies.jpg
...the google earth images follow contours (they don't look flat and follow the terrain) - this is because the flat (like my image examples) images with the compression artefacts already there, are mapped onto the surface topography of the mars (or google earth - try it in google earth on areas of dessert or fields too - does the same as would google moon and even the google sky program on a non-black area) - and so have the appearance of following the terrain.
the issue is compounded on your example with google beacause you are looking at a compressed image of the planet as you zoom - which is itself already made of successive images that are also already compressed.
to prove this - find an area of mars you see this artifact on - then use the NASA or ESA websites to find the original imagery; you will specifically need the TIFF versions of the images of that area - not the jpegs.
These "TIFF" format versions of the images are of a format where you get all the dots of colour and none of the compression anomalies.
Then try the same thing.
All the images used on the mars globe are available in their original format from the above sites (ESA or NASA).
You will get similar results to my first example when using uncompressed versions of the same areas and the geometric anomalies will disappear.
A very good argument and I do see your point. That is why this video is being taken less seriously than most. The quality is lost, the evidence it presents is much lower. Thank you for your in depth analysis. SCW
DeleteI was at Goddard NASA base when this original download came in. It was in the form of 20 plus strips of film which had to be aligned and overlapped to form a single picture of the crater.
ReplyDeleteThe girl doing the composition let me watch as she made minor adjustments to the various film strips that had been accumulated from many days of overflights of the crater.
It was extremely high resolution and one could easily see the many buildings (and many different types of building types. I noted that they would easily fit right here on earth with a couple of exceptions. There were roads but NO vehicles and no sidewalks. Buildings all (most) had one or two rows of windows on at least the side facing the road. A few of the buildings were out of proportion and were more like 1 1/2 story height of the others while maintaining the 2 story limit.
On the periphery were what looked like fields with a road and irrigation ditch like structures (?). The road that ran through the central area and wound (as far as I could determine) the entire circumference of the crater (? not all was visible because of the mountain ridge in the center). That road continued on the left and crossed to the craters edge and then looked liked it climbed the left crater wall. I could see portions of the road and other portions where the road would have been but was protected by cuts in the wall that obscured the road itself. Once at the top it disappeared because no film was taken of outside the rim itself.
There were two faces carved in the center mountain region. One of a young woman in some sort of headdress and a more ancient (?) male depiction toward the center of the crater (mountain region).
When the woman who was finished with the overlays of the film strips, she took a few master pictures of the composite and then proceed to spray paint out the city itself. Despite her spray technique, it works fine to fool our eyes but not a camera resolution enhancer.
NASA would not be happy to know that the photo they released to the public could so easily be manipulated to produce the city they wanted to rub out... or did they actually anticipate that some of us could figure out what to do to get the picture clear enough to make sense of what is really on the surface of Hale Crater?