The CRITERION to image Cydonia.
Angel Garcia
(cam...@emtex.com) writes:
> In article <6gdvt3$j...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
> bp...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Angel Garcia) wrote:
>
>> As I have said many times in previous posts the "Complete Atlas.."
>> from 11 Viking frames in ONLY TWO passes or orbits CANNOT be improved
>> with the presented type of tiny strip from MOC. The degree of resolution of
>> the Viking frames was very close to optimal.
>
> Oh yes. That's right. The Viking data is optimal because it shows a face.
> Too higher resolution and it looks like a mountain. Too low and you can't
> see it.
Art is something very special: every painting or sculpture HAS to be
admired with the degree of resolution for which it was designed by the
Artist. There are famous Van Goghs which looked from 1m appart resemble just
a pile of careless touches of the brush and when you are 5 to 10 m appart
then the geniality appears.
Nor the Face NOR ANY of the divine Monuments in there have to be
admired at higher resolution than its overall, 9000 (km)^2, demand.
Viking got it right for ALL of them.
>
> Mind you Angel, in the cleverness that you display here, you forgot
> to mention that the face will only be visible when the sun is in roughly
> the same position in the sky as in the Viking images.
No. The Face looks as such at mainly two positions of the sun: late
afternoon (as in Viking) and early morning (not yet seen).
At near noon as present picture the SYMMETRY is clearly seen DESPITE
the awful tangential angle of the camera and very poor contrast which
makes one wonder about the technical value of such MOC: the 'negative'
shows better symmetry than the presented one. No shadows at all make
it hard to decide which one is the positive or the negative.
The effort of JPL has been outstanding in their 'navigation' team who
has managed such accurate and precise location of the Face; but
the presented 'enhanced' image is very poor and will be improved
in other trials, of course.
Yet the proof of Art is already complete: nobody is going to alter
the presently seen MAGNIFICENCY of a truly SYMMETRIC contour and
hair-dessing equally designed in BOTH sides as expected.
There is a paramount criterion which cannot be overlooked in
imaging the epic Museum of Monuments: The images have to be
taken, as close as possible, from zenith; namely 'orthonormal' to
the martian surface; not only because there is quasi-divine
geometry embedded between the Monuments, but also in order to make any sensible,
reliable, cartography. It would be very ridiculous to try to survey
the mmartian surface using these ANECDOTAL , 4 km wide, strips of the
MOC. One would need some 30 passes to cover the Museum (or any piece
of land, for that matter); and since at each pass the parameters vary
the patching, with overlap, of the 'strips' would contain endless errors.
If on top of that the spacecraft-MOC is tilted wrt ground, to catch some
feature, as it has been done with the present FACE, then everything gets
distorted: geometry, Art, cartography, etc. and the 'focussing' which
in the present case is horrible.
Thus, good for the present, much needed, instance; but, please, JPL
do not overuse such high-resolution MOC. If some feature goes exactly
below the spacecraft, fine !: use it then. It is very very stupid to
think that higher and higher resolution will decide the ART at Cydonia.
Such Art has absolutely nothing to do with RESOLUTION: there are
Monuments as LECTIO which are bass-relief in very abstract Art with
only main lines clearly seen in BOTH Viking images; if you put
high resolution to it you will see just piles of rocks and cracks on
flat slabs. The same for NDC and all the rest. The ART is in the
harmonious COORDINATION of a few master, large scale, lines; there is
some even SUBLIMINAL Art as in the TWINS craters. It is, understandably,
some tendency among technically trained individuals to consider RESOLUTION
as the supreme tool for everything; certainly it can help in some features,
but it is IDIOTIC to use it to ascertain any work of Abstract Art.
--
Angel, secretary of Universitas Americae (UNIAM). His proof of ETI at
Cydonia and complete Index of new "TETET-97: Creatoris Digitus.." by Prof.
Dr. D.G. Lahoz (leader on ETI and Cosmogony) can be studied at URL:
http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~bp887 ***************************
Michael L. Cunningham
Angel Garcia wrote:
> lot's of garbage deleted <
You're really reaching on this one aren't you Angel.
Even when presented with photographic evidence contary to what Viking
imaged, you still believe you see a face. Squint a little harder and
you'll see it's sticking it's tongue out at you.
Michael
ste...@darwin.ucsc.edu
Hey remember the Canals of Mars? ;-)
--
Jim Carr
"Michael L. Cunningham" <hydrom...@earthlink.net> writes:
>Angel Garcia wrote:
>
> > lot's of garbage deleted <
>
>You're really reaching on this one aren't you Angel.
Certainly. Another case for analysis within a Kuhnian framework.
Science isn't the only case where you see people cling to a paradigm.
You see it in pseudoscience also. Often more so.
>Even when presented with photographic evidence contary to what Viking
>imaged, you still believe you see a face.
Not contrary, since it is obvious that if you reduce resolution you
can recover the Viking image. That is his problem, of course. The
high quality image is not consistent with his hypothesis about why
the low quality image looked like it did. Just wait until all of
those pyramids are imaged at 1m/pixel to 5m/pixel.
>Squint a little harder and
>you'll see it's sticking it's tongue out at you.
That is the medium resolution image.
--
James A. Carr <j...@scri.fsu.edu> | Commercial e-mail is _NOT_
http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac/ | desired to this or any address
Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst. | that resolves to my account
Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306 | for any reason at any time.
Peter Nelson
Angel Garcia <bp...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in article
<6gfvs7$f...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>...
>
> (cam...@emtex.com) writes:
> > In article <6gdvt3$j...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
> > bp...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Angel Garcia) wrote:
> >
> >> As I have said many times in previous posts the "Complete Atlas.."
> >> from 11 Viking frames in ONLY TWO passes or orbits CANNOT be improved
> >> with the presented type of tiny strip from MOC. The degree of
resolution of
> >> the Viking frames was very close to optimal.
> >
> > Oh yes. That's right. The Viking data is optimal because it shows a
face.
> > Too higher resolution and it looks like a mountain. Too low and you
can't
> > see it.
>
> Art is something very special: every painting or sculpture HAS to be
> admired with the degree of resolution for which it was designed by the
> Artist. There are famous Van Goghs which looked from 1m appart resemble
just
> a pile of careless touches of the brush and when you are 5 to 10 m appart
> then the geniality appears.
Oh bullshit. This isn't a function of the distance we seeing it; if it
was you could simply scale the new pictures to have the same
size relative to the eye as the old ones. This is a function of
image resolution. What you're saying is that if I scan in a picture
of the Mona Lisa at 300 dpi it might look OK, but if I scan it in at
2400 dpi it breaks it.
> Nor the Face NOR ANY of the divine Monuments in there have to be
> admired at higher resolution than its overall, 9000 (km)^2, demand.
> Viking got it right for ALL of them.
I seem to recall that prior to these images Angel Garcia was
all excited about MGS because now we would see that he was
"right".
I agree the topic is art all right -- Garcia is a bullshit artist.
---peter
cyd...@bemyguest.com
In article <352BB3F4...@earthlink.net>,
"Michael L. Cunningham" <hydrom...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Angel Garcia wrote:
>
> > lot's of garbage deleted <
>
> You're really reaching on this one aren't you Angel.
>
> you'll see it's sticking it's tongue out at you.
>
Squint even harder and you'll see that tongue is actually an altered image
flipping you the bird.
New Cydonia Anomalies:
http://www.bemyguest.com/mars/platform_dolphin.html
Peace,
The WebMaster
cyd...@bemyguest.com
http://www.bemyguest.com/mars/
Face II at Cydonia on Mars: The Anunnaki?
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Dan Hartung
> admired at higher resolution than its overall, 9000 (km)^2, demand.
> Viking got it right for ALL of them.
Starting the spin for the rest of the photo set, huh, Angel?
Michael L. Cunningham
cyd...@bemyguest.com wrote:
>
> In article <352BB3F4...@earthlink.net>,
> "Michael L. Cunningham" <hydrom...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > Angel Garcia wrote:
> >
> > > lot's of garbage deleted <
> >
> > You're really reaching on this one aren't you Angel.
> >
> > Even when presented with photographic evidence contary to what Viking
> > imaged, you still believe you see a face. Squint a little harder and
> > you'll see it's sticking it's tongue out at you.
> >
> > Michael
>
> Squint even harder and you'll see that tongue is actually an altered image
> flipping you the bird.
>
> New Cydonia Anomalies:
>
> http://www.bemyguest.com/mars/platform_dolphin.html
>
> Peace
Truth is always painful. Get over it. If you're going to flip me "the
bird", remove "Peace" from your response.
Michael
xe...@webtv.net
In article <6gfvs7$f...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
Your just the kind of guy that when shown a pictue of a Duck will say its a
Cow! Its A DUCK ANGEL! Your starting to give artists a bad name. BASTA!!!!
xetor
xe...@webtv.net
In article <01bd6339$50979900$0100a8c0@spartina>,
"Peter Nelson" <pne...@lagoon.ultranet.com> wrote:
>
>
> Angel Garcia <bp...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in article
> <6gfvs7$f...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>...
> >
> > > In article <6gdvt3$j...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
> > > bp...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Angel Garcia) wrote:
> > >
> > >> As I have said many times in previous posts the "Complete Atlas.."
> > >> from 11 Viking frames in ONLY TWO passes or orbits CANNOT be improved
> > >> with the presented type of tiny strip from MOC. The degree of
> resolution of
> > >> the Viking frames was very close to optimal.
> > >
> > > Oh yes. That's right. The Viking data is optimal because it shows a
> face.
> > > Too higher resolution and it looks like a mountain. Too low and you
> can't
> > > see it.
> >
> > Art is something very special: every painting or sculpture HAS to be
> > admired with the degree of resolution for which it was designed by the
> > Artist. There are famous Van Goghs which looked from 1m appart resemble
> just
> > a pile of careless touches of the brush and when you are 5 to 10 m appart
> > then the geniality appears.
>
> was you could simply scale the new pictures to have the same
> size relative to the eye as the old ones. This is a function of
> image resolution. What you're saying is that if I scan in a picture
> of the Mona Lisa at 300 dpi it might look OK, but if I scan it in at
> 2400 dpi it breaks it.
>
> > admired at higher resolution than its overall, 9000 (km)^2, demand.
> > Viking got it right for ALL of them.
>
> all excited about MGS because now we would see that he was
> "right".
>
> I agree the topic is art all right -- Garcia is a bullshit artist.
>
> ---peter
>
>
=============================================================== Garcia since
you don't seem to get it yet try this: RESOLUTION =TRUTH (spellmans axiom
no.1) understand now? Spellman-xetor
Hoffman, Nick N
cyd...@bemyguest.com wrote:
> New Cydonia Anomalies:
>
> http://www.bemyguest.com/mars/platform_dolphin.html
>
> Peace,
>
> The WebMaster
> cyd...@bemyguest.com
> http://www.bemyguest.com/mars/
> Face II at Cydonia on Mars: The Anunnaki?
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion
> ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based
> newsreading
I saw your so-called "Transport Ship" and was immediately stricken with
its exact proportional representation of our beloved Michael Mouse.
Obviously, Walt Disney was an alien intruder living amongst us........
Nick Hoffman Geophysicist Extraordinaire