Mi è capitato di leggere ogni sorta di sciocchezza ultimamente a riguardo ed in particolare i soliti commenti di pseudo-scienziati vetero-cicapini come l'astrofisica Di Pippo dell'ASI che col solito tono di scherno, molto in uso tra cicapini & ignoranti della materia, dava dell'imbecille a chi supponeva la possibilità che si trattasse di un artefatto e tirando in ballo la solita falsità riguardo Cydonia, omettendo anche lei che alla NASA hanno palesemente ritoccato (col PHOTOSHOP !!!! non scherzo !) ogni foto post-Viking della cosiddetta 'Face on Mars'.
Ma torniamo alla ricerca seria ed obbiettiva, vi mostro un articolo interessante da Mars Anomaly Research.
MARS ROVER STATUE OR PERSON?
Report #134
January 23, 2008
Joseph P. Skipper
J. P. Skipper can be contacted at:
[email protected]
The above first image is an evidence site that was brought to my attention by viewer Marcela Bravo on 1/10/2008. In the above wider area view at the official image resolution, we see a small figure pointed out with the red arrow that strongly suggests a person in a sitting or kneeling position on Mars.
This scene was captured by the Spirit Rover panoramic camera on Sol 1367 in the first four listed black and white raw science data images with the evidence in question in the bottom area of each image. This scene was then later incorporated as a part of a artificially colorized very wide view West Valley Panorama NASA Photojournal PIA10216 presentation image. It was apparently in the latter image that Marcela Bravo discovered this evidence on the left side or end of that wide panorama image and then brought that to my attention. As it turns out, this may be a solid and remarkable discovery.
In the above first image wider field of view, note the long thin horizontal line the right portion of which is pointed out by the green arrows. This demonstrates that this scene has been extracted from the PIA10216 panorama images that is a mosaic of earlier smaller science data images rather than the originating Sol 1367 raw data images. The reason that I've done this is to demonstrate that there is other important evidence at this site nearby to and germane to the presence of the upright figure evidence.
One set of associative evidence would be what appears to possibly be faintly seen graffiti letters and/or numbers on the ground pointed out by the blue arrows. Of particular note is the number "5" that the right blue arrow is pointing to. When considered alone, this evidence might be dismissed as chance configurations of light and darker tones on the ground but when considered as part of the larger site evidence, the chance factor tends to diminish and the evidence tends to become more significant and telling.
Yet more associative evidence is what appears to be a purposefully placed rock strewn path leading up to the figure object as pointed out and bracketed by the black arrows. This path is a little too directionally straight along its parallel sides and very uniform in its width leading right up to the figure object with the figure too dead centered to be a chance configuration and particularly when the figure evidence is taken into consideration.
The human tendency is to focus only on the more dramatic figure evidence but that would be wrong because it allows more closed minds to dismiss the figure evidence itself as an aberrant chance configuration of geological forms. However, the figure exists in a context of other supportive evidence, none of which should not be ignored, and it is the whole context of evidence that is important and telling.
The above second image provides an increased 150% zoom factor on the field of evidence. Unfortunately, the figure evidence is darker while the other associative evidence is much lighter. So, in order to maintain the definition on the important figure evidence, the other context evidence tends to be washed out with too light color lessening its detail. However, you can still make out the number "5" and the path reasonably clear enough.
In this view, unimpeded by any labeling that I might add into the scene, I want you to pay particular attention to the rock strewn path evidence. Note how it from left to right crosses relatively level ground with more or less straight parallel sides but then drops down a short slope going between large rock surfaces to the side while still maintaining its straight parallel sides and then slopes back up to the figure. Note that the figure is on the very edge of a slightly elevated rock face.
Someone went to some trouble to scratch out this straight path to this spot and layer it with small rocks. This suggests that this place is important to someone and likely intended as a place of repeat visits. Further, the path and graffiti are the kind of evidence that would not likely last long in the elements before being covered over and yet is easily visible to us here. This brings up the question of whether this evidence is of recent origin or not?
The above third image provides a 200% zoom factor on the evidence just before too much deterioration of the image quality begins to be a factor. Again the need to maintain the detail on the darker figure comes at the expense of washing out the detail on the lighter color evidence. Even so, the number "5" is still fairly clear as is the rocky path. Here I've bracketed the path with some thin red lines to try and help define it and its elevations between the rocks better.
I believe that the up slope right at the base of the figure has been subjected to some smudge treatments obscuring detail there and that this has also visually effected the very bottom of the figure. On the other hand, the figure is still relatively clear. As you can see, the figure is anatomically correct for a squatting, kneeling, sitting human or humanoid figure. Note that one side (the left) is facing the camera and slightly turned away to its left away from the camera looking and gesturing with its left arm/hand crossing over its body to its left into the depression area just beyond it. A faint light reflection on the body just under the left arm but above the hip/leg area suggests a full breast or perhaps just a lumpy fold in the clothing.
The total evidence suggests that this figure is either a statue or a person but the visual evidence alone cannot tell us which that might be. The defined path suggests that this spot is repeatedly visited. That tends to lean in favor of this being a statue or figurine commemorating this place as important to someone. On the other hand, it could just mean that this spot is important and some may come here to commune and this may be a real person here doing that at the time the image was taken just as others may do from time to time.
On the other hand, if this is a biological figure, it is a very small one, smaller even than the small human midget sizes we are familiar with here on Earth. That tends to lean Earth human perception towards this being a statue or figurine representing a more "full size" humanoid life form similar to us. However, that is an Earth perception based on Earth experience and this is a different world with different evolutionary paths and factors. Many factors enter into what determines size of any organic life form and we want to be careful about trying to impose any Earth based experience or assumptions of on a different world and its life forms.
Also, the fact that this figure is generally the same color as the surroundings might tend to lean some in favor of perceiving this being a statue or figurine. If so, this is not a legitimate evidence factor. This image has been subjected to artificial color blanketing the entire image. This makes for a visually more comfortable appearing image with better albeit imperfect realism relative to black and white imaging. Color tends to bring out more detail and is good from that point of view. However, just remember that the figure is also covered by this "artificial" color meaning that the color on the figure cannot be trusted.
Neither the evidence nor I can guarantee that this is either a person or a statue/figurine on Mars as opposed to natural geology. Even so, all of the evidence and its associative features along with some common sense very strongly suggests that this represents intelligent life of some kind on Mars as opposed to geology. However, you must decide for yourself.
DOCUMENTATION
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA10216: This link takes you to the NASA Photojournal location of the PIA10216 presentation wide panorama mosaic image. Note that there are two images available there. The first is a high resolution TIFF image of 133.4 MB and the second is JPEG image of 5.224 MB. Despite the tremendous difference in files sizes, the much smaller file size quicker loading JPEG image is just about as good as the TIFF image when it comes to this evidence. Note that the subject evidence presented here is all the way over on the left side of the image.
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all...CP2415L7M1.HTML: This link takes you to one of four Sol 1367 official science data available original panoramic camera images. However, remember that here the associative graffiti and full path evidence are insufficiently present in these images.
Joseph P. Skipper, Investigator
Fonte
http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidenc...e-or-person.htm
di cd con le immagini di marte. M causa trasloco non saprei dove trovarle ora. Però è un idea balzana. Le foto potrebbero essere state divulgate anche apposta e la risposta preconfezionata già pronta in base alle risposte dell opinione pubblica.
) col Photoshop (v. foto recenti della Face on Mars) e non mi stupirei se l'avessero rifatto per creare situazioni ad hoc che permettessero ai soliti tromboni dello scetticismo ad oltranza di tirare fuori le solite frasi di scherno, alimentando la disinformazione.