It is mostly an artefact of image processing. It might be a rocky outcrop, or just a patch or lighter coloured sand. The squary-ness is what is called 'pixelation' and is a result of trying to magnify an image beyond its true resolution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixelation
That anyone would report it without realising this suggests a really low standard of reporting.
This guy must be the type that has no problems when CSI zooms in on the reflection of a bumper to see the reflection on a store window which shows the killer.
Amazing how you can take 12 pixels of an image, a miniscule white blip on a giant planet, and presume that those pixels are an exact and accurate representation of what is on the surface of Mars.
Originally posted by forkedknight Amazing how you can take 12 pixels of an image, a miniscule white blip on a giant planet, and presume that those pixels are an exact and accurate representation of what is on the surface of Mars.
And yet, you can make a seven-letter password un-"hack"-able by typing really quickly.
It is ridiculous what these media numbskulls will believe when it comes to computers. It would be amusing if the general public wasn't so likely to believe that journalists know what they're talking about.
Originally posted by menace71 Looks man made but obviously someone could of placed (Hacked) that image in there somehow and also it could be a natural formation. 🙂
@ 31' 16'55.99 N by 24'22'55.30 W looks like lines or tracks ?
Its pretty well known to those of us who use Google earth a lot, that these are sonar tracks of ships. They are all over the oceans, not just here. They are basically lines of higher resolution in the data. However Google recently changed Google earth to make it look more uniform from higher up, so such things are now a lot less obvious.
I have no problem with amateur arm chair adventurers using tools like Google Earth or Google Mars to learn about the universe and maybe even find stuff in the imagery that nobody else has noticed. But when a reporter takes up stories like these and turns them into a sensationalist articles, and doesn't even bother to check the basic facts, or print the well known explanation for a phenomena, then they are being irresponsible.
I have no problem with amateur arm chair adventurers using tools like Google Earth or Google Mars to learn about the universe and maybe even find stuff in the imagery that nobody else has noticed. But when a reporter takes up stories like these and turns them into a sensationalist articles, and doesn't even bother to check the basic facts, or print the well known explanation for a phenomena, then they are being irresponsible.[/b]
if you want compelling and thought provoking examination of martian anomalies (and you have to be into conspiracy theories), check out the mars anomaly research project.
Originally posted by kevcvs57 Lol Whats the problem, did you get a fright.
Huh? I have a problem with people deliberately spreading misinformation for sensationalist reasons. I don't see why you think I got a fright. Frightened by what?
Originally posted by twhitehead Huh? I have a problem with people deliberately spreading misinformation for sensationalist reasons. I don't see why you think I got a fright. Frightened by what?
Well, it might be a missile silo. Bet you never thought of THAT one🙂
Seriously, I would like to see this cleared up, as it were🙂 We can put it to bed just like the 'face on mars'. I think some people still think it's a face, even with better images.....
I think it will be interesting to find out just what it is, assuming it is just a natural outcrop of rocks, the clearly white color has to be saying something about the mineralization in that area.
what do you think this is on mars
11 Feb '12 05:39
Back to Top