WHO'S ON MARS? (continued)

Thank you Tom
Nobody until now has mentioned the legality aspect of tampering with the image and I have come across a number on the web which have this (tampering) suggestion in mind.
Primarily I am looking for (and finding)on the surface of Mars, artefacts which represent (in my opinion) remnants of an extinct civilisation. In my search I have come across a number of anomalies that are not related. The above object being one of them. My thoughts regarding the photograph have to do with the strange angle of the rock and the shadow beneath. I am using {PSP7)and the filters I use indicate to my (unprofessional) eye something is not exactly right. I believe the shadow has been enhanced. And that maybe 'something' is lifting the 'rock' to its precarious position.
Vimjams

www.geocities.com/vimjams/mars_index.html

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by vimjams</i>
<br />the filters I use indicate to my (unprofessional) eye something is not exactly right. I believe the shadow has been enhanced. And that maybe 'something' is lifting the 'rock' to its precarious position.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Spacecraft images have a much wider range of brightness and contrast than the human eye can accommodate. They will always look strange and altered before they are processed to bring the image within the range that the human eye is accustomed to. When that is done, nothing remains that looks altered in even the slightest degree to my eyes. But there are plenty of things that look artificial, and in a few cases we can prove that they are artificial. -|Tom|-

Thank you Tom
I appreciate this information. As I have said: My claims about the above image are not professional but were based on simple visual conclusions. My primary interest has been demonstrating the 'artificiality' of design in certain stones scattered around on the Martian surface. On the first page of my website I show an example of what appears to be a 'steel girder' in a block of 'stone' as one would normally find on demolition sites. I have posted that image here to save people from Geocities 'popups'...I hope this isn't a distraction from the main thread of this boards discussion.
Vimjams


www.geocities.com/vimjams/mars_index.html

Hi guys,

this is my first apparition here. I´m not astronomist, in fact I´m lawyer in Brazil, and I don´t have enough knowledge to keep up with every information you put up here. But I have huge exposure to internet, I work all day with computer connected and I travel around the world with it.
Did you see one of the first images shown by Opportunity, the 2nd robot landed on mars, that shows a lot of blocks on a plain, and looks like a city scape??? Unfortunately, NASA took out this picture two days , and I had troubles when I tried to save it.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by luiz rio</i>
<br />Unfortunately, NASA took out this picture two days, and I had troubles when I tried to save it.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The featured pictures are rotated every day or two. But all pictures remain available under "All raw images". However, if you don't remember the date, you may have to search hundreds or even thousands of images to find the one you want.

I do recall one image that looked rather like ruins. But in a quick inspection, I saw no way to prove it. There was simply an excess of smooth, flat surfaces and linear edges having a cut appearance. But given that the rocks are formed in layers, it would be hard to prove the scene could not be natural. -|Tom|-

Yeah guy, I waste a little bit of time seeing all the images Opportunity made, and searching the one. I don´t know if I found it yet, but I saw one of a lot of rocks on the top of a mount.
The one that i´ve saw is similar to it, but it was taken not so much closer, and I thouhgt I had seen a line of big rectangular blocks on the right side of the picture, looking like a very big path between mountains (if my scale is right, it would be wide as a highway, or even wider).

[]s

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by luiz rio</i>
<br />Unfortunately, NASA took out this picture two days, and I had troubles when I tried to save it.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The featured pictures are rotated every day or two. But all pictures remain available under "All raw images". However, if you don't remember the date, you may have to search hundreds or even thousands of images to find the one you want.

I do recall one image that looked rather like ruins. But in a quick inspection, I saw no way to prove it. There was simply an excess of smooth, flat surfaces and linear edges having a cut appearance. But given that the rocks are formed in layers, it would be hard to prove the scene could not be natural. -|Tom|-

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">