imaging Cydonia
sto...@sscl.uwo.ca
Regarding the advisibility of imaging Cydonia: Mars is a geological
wonderland with hundreds of distinctive types of geological feature, all
well worth imaging. One is the isolated hills in 'fretted terrain'
off the edges of the highlands. Cydonia is one such area, so by
imaging the 'face' we obtain an image of a geologically interesting
type of feature. The images are not wasted.
Mind you, I'd like to see Hoaxland and his crew wriggle out of this
one! How about "It IS a face, but it did so much cocaine that half
its nose fell off..."
Phil Stooke
PETEKWANDO
>Mind you, I'd like to see Hoaxland and his crew wriggle out of this
>one! How about "It IS a face, but it did so much cocaine that half
>its nose fell off..."
No, they will most likely argue that the whole image is a CGI fake. Cries of
"conspiracy" are often the last refuge of such zealots. Or, they might surprise
me and admit (at least some of them) that they were wrong. But - sadly - human
beings don't do that very often.
Peter E. Vogel, Jr.
"(A cynic is) a man who knows the price of everything and the value of
nothing."
- Oscar Wilde
Antonio Canto Alvarez
sto...@sscl.uwo.ca wrote:
> Mind you, I'd like to see Hoaxland and his crew wriggle out of this
> one! How about "It IS a face, but it did so much cocaine that half
> its nose fell off..."
They're already at the job. Check:
http://www.enterprisemission.com
Is it REALLY so difficult to say "I was wrong"? Oh, sorry, we're speaking
about selling lots of books and earning lots of bucks...
Best wishes from Spain,
Toni Cantó
mailto:toni_...@isid.es
The Space Memorial: http://www.isid.es/nautas
radiospace
On Tue, 7 Apr 1998 15:05:06 -0400, petek...@aol.com (PETEKWANDO)
scribbled with the virtual quill:
>
>
> >Mind you, I'd like to see Hoaxland and his crew wriggle out of this
>>one! How about "It IS a face, but it did so much cocaine that half
>>its nose fell off..."
>
> No, they will most likely argue that the whole image is a CGI fake. Cries of
>"conspiracy" are often the last refuge of such zealots. Or, they might surprise
>me and admit (at least some of them) that they were wrong. But - sadly - human
>beings don't do that very often.
>
>Peter E. Vogel, Jr.
>
I heard Hoagland on the Art Bell show the other night. It was pretty
sad. They were taking the angle that the resolution of the pictures
was too bad to tell one way or the other, and ranting that this
probably wasn't even the same spot, and how did they get what detail
was there from the very-gray raw image. They were claiming that the
original Viking image was higher resolution than the new ones. He
was, in short, in a severe case of denial.
I was so annoyed that I did a little study of the relevant images with
Adobe Photoshop, using the full resolution versions I was able to
download on a T1 line.
The new images are clearly at least 4 times if not 8-10 times better
resolution in proportion to the "Face". (That is, I made the "Face"
the same size in both images, then kept magnifying the new images
until they were as pixelated and grainy as the Viking images). So
that is simply and demonstrably a crock.
Secondly I took the processed strip and compared it side-by-side with
the original Viking imagery and although it certainly is weird how the
shapes in the two major rock formations look so different in the two
photographs in their details, there can be *absolutely no doubt* that
it is the proper location based on the spacing of the two rock
outcroppings or hills, as well as the various smaller impact craters.
Finally I took the raw strip (the grayed-out looking image) and
hastily and amateurly processed it and was indeed able to pull out
most of the detail simply by increasing the constrast.
Like you I expect him to start hooting "Conspiracy!" as soon as he
realizes the above facts can be ascertained by any dummy with a
relatively sophisticated piece of imaging software (like me) and can
no longer forward the argument that the picture is of a different
place, or that its lower resolution than Viking imagery.
(Disclaimer for paranoiacs: I have a friend who works at JPL --
though not on this mission -- so I am part of the "Conspiracy" I
reckon, though I'm posting under my own apparent free will {not
accounting for the infinite possibilities of suggestion and mind
control of which I might be an unknowing victim}.)
If he was half as smart as he thinks he is he would at least have
latched on to the merely half baked-idea (as opposed to the fully
burnt and toasted ones he was spouting on the radio) that it's an
*eroded* sphynx, which would make more sense anyway. (How did he ever
explain how an ancient Martian sphynx could survive 1 million years in
the desert when ours is disintegrating in a matter of thousands?).
I find it kind of pitiful, actually, in the dramatic sense of the
word. He really crawled out a long way on his little shaky limb.
Patrick
cyd...@bemyguest.com
[Mod note: I should have redirected this thread yesterday
when non-scientific comments about Hoagland began.
Following this posting, the thread will be redirected
to s.s.policy in entirety. -gwh]
In article <352BA6FE...@isid.es>,
toni_...@isid.es (Antonio Canto Alvarez) wrote:
>
> sto...@sscl.uwo.ca wrote:
>
> > Mind you, I'd like to see Hoaxland and his crew wriggle out of this
> > one! How about "It IS a face, but it did so much cocaine that half
> > its nose fell off..."
>
> They're already at the job. Check:
>
> http://www.enterprisemission.com
>
> Is it REALLY so difficult to say "I was wrong"? Oh, sorry, we're speaking
> about selling lots of books and earning lots of bucks...
Oh, yeah, RCH is ROLLING in dough. Why would anybody choose a profession where
they're ridiculed by 90% of the public?
Oh, yeah, president was taken!
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