Strange Mars Pathfinder Sojourner Rover Photo?

1 | 2 Next
Author Message
Tim David







PostPosted: November 25, 2004 11:23 PM 

Here's something for everyone to chew on. I have tried to get feedback from JPL, James Oberg, and the Mars Society folks on the image found on the link below. Only Mr. Zubrin from the Mars Society responded with an honest "I don't know what to make of it?"

http://www.intellco.com/news/marsrover.htm

Halitosis


Posts: no

Reply: 1



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 12:19 AM 

Those rocks are interestingly crystalline.. but why does the photograph look so 'weird'? It seems to be two photos overlaid, or blurry in some odd way, and the colors are .. different.

JonClarke


Posts: 542

Reply: 2



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 2:37 AM 

Yeah right. I have a bridge you might be interested in too! Laughing Laughing Laughing

Sojourner did not take "colour" images. It does not look like any othe image published from Sojoruner. There is no identifer of this image Time, date, number etc.). The source has been "Omitted by request"

Can anyone say "FAKE"?

Jon

moby


Posts: no

Reply: 3



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 5:48 AM 

"FAKE" , there I said it.
We've got a bridge in the US he might be interested in too ...

Tim David


Posts: 5

Reply: 4



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 2:03 PM 

There are many color-enhanced photos of this mission on NASA's Pathfinder Images site at:
that appear to be just as out of focus in certain areas as this, including one that was published on the front of Science Magazine:

Also, this was printed out in 2002 on an HP Photo Quality Bubble Jet Printer which I am certain does not have the highest dpi available on the market and was scanned into jpeg format at 75dpi. I imagine the original image was of much higher quality.

I'm not saying this may not be a hoax but don't write it off just because of the coloring and less than perfect quality.

As for the person who may have leaked this image, if real. Would you want to risk your career and end up in Leavenworth for a long time for violating a non-disclosure agreement?

Tim David


Posts: 5

Reply: 5



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 2:08 PM 

Sorry folks, I didn't realize the links would be left out if proceeded by an arrow sign. Here are the links for my last post:

Color-enhanced photos of this mission on NASA's Pathfinder Images site at:
[link]

Science Magazine:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/278/5344/1743/F1

Anonymous


Posts: no

Reply: 6



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 2:56 PM 

It shows most of Sojourner, so if it's a picture from Mars, it would have had to have been taken from the lander base. That large rock that is in the upper left corner locks like nothing in the panorama from the lander.

dx


Posts: 1661

Reply: 7



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 2:58 PM 

Why would anyone post a pic or ask anyone with assumed authority, outside of NASA, and that would also cause stress to thinking people in this Forum as to its authenticity is beyond the nature of this Forum.

>>>if that's the case in presenting this pic that cannot be certified as legitimate by qualified individuals in JPL then its a damn fake.

Please.

yt
dx


Halitosis


Posts: no

Reply: 8



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 3:24 PM 

Those 'giant crystals' look suspiciously like sugar crystals or the like seen through a microscope to me. There's also the fact that the crystals are uniformly blurry whereas the bizarrely tiny Pathfinder is quite sharply in focus.

As much as I would like for weird crystals to be on the surface of Mars.. this has to be faked.

Tim David


Posts: 5

Reply: 9



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 6:15 PM 

I have uploaded the full size image (almost 1mb) to give you a better analysis.

Of particular interest is the largest bolder left-of-center that appears to have some type of fossilized creature on its surface. Not very likely on a sugar crystal but I'm not a geologist either.

JonClarke


Posts: 542

Reply: 10



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 7:05 PM 

Re post 4

yeah right. The mysterious whistle blower you might loose his or her job if the source was revealed. Please. This assumes that something is being covered up, an assertion for which there is not the slightest evidence what so ever. Therefore it is far more likely that the image was engineered, possibly using elements of a geninue Sojourner image, by some prankster or woo woo.

Unless we have proof of provenance we have absolutely no reason to take this image seriously in any shape of form. Even if it contains elements of a genuine image the fact that it has been colourised shows that it has editted and, I suspect those "crystals" added. It is so easy for anyone to fake images days. That is why proof of provenance is essential.

Caveat emptor

Jon


JonClarke


Posts: 542

Reply: 11



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 7:23 PM 

Alright had another look at high resolution. Someone has photoshopped a genunine pathfinder lander image showing the rover (or maybe of a model or test article) onto what looks like genuine SEM image of crystals. All good clean fun as a joke. However if the people psting this claim it is real then this is fraud.

Jon

Tim David


Posts: 5

Reply: 12



PostPosted: November 26, 2004 11:05 PM 

The cut and paste theory in photoshop was the first thing that I checked. However, the colorization and pixels are consistent with the depth of field and shadowing of the background.

Normally with a paste over you have a problem with the edges meshing, not to mention shadowing. Not an impossible task for a pro with the right equipment but I don't see any evidence so easy to affirm and write off without some explanations of what areas show the evidence of a blatant fake.

The reason why I even brought it to this list was because my efforts to get a response from NASA's JPL and James Oberg proved fruitless so far. (I have corresponded with James a few times in the past.) I don't get off on hoaxes and that is why I put "alleged" in the posted description.

Also, I've been looking over some SEM Crystal images but nothing comes close to the strange cuts and fossil like images found on the surface of some of these. Remember, the descriptive text on the post did say that this picture was included along with a number of other images that dealt with crystal formations.

So my question is. Could it be possible for such formations to develop on a macro scale in the right environment instead of just the micro that we know of here on earth?

Not this forums area of expertise but just a thought.

mooks


Posts: no

Reply: 13



PostPosted: November 27, 2004 12:57 AM 

Those martians obviously have a sweet tooth:

(from [link] )

JonClarke


Posts: 542

Reply: 14



PostPosted: November 27, 2004 6:14 AM 

The image is so obviously fake I am not surprised almost nobody responded

Jon

Tim David


Posts: 5

Reply: 15



PostPosted: November 27, 2004 11:03 PM 

After further analysis and image enlargement/enhancement I did find the area where it is clear that two separate images were pasted together. I have labeled the image a hoax on our website. Thanks for the input folks! Embarassed

Pertinax


Posts: no

Reply: 16



PostPosted: November 29, 2004 8:31 AM 

This image was crated by the folks at the Beltsville Agricultural Reseaerch Center's Electron Microscopy Unit. They were looking into the CO2 crystals that would form under martian atmosphereic conditions.

See: http://www.lpsi.barc.usda.gov/emusnow/MartianIce/crys1098.pdf

Unfortunatly, the web page no longer has the cartoon image (the one being discussed here with Sojourner driving into the EM image of the CO2 crystals) posted. I imagine however that if one rally wanted to, any of the authors would be be happy to claim the image.

It is sad that such an obvious cartoon / composite image is able to create such consternation and confusion.

Cheers,


Pertinax

Tim David


Posts: no

Reply: 17



PostPosted: November 29, 2004 3:48 PM 

Much thanks to all and especially Pertinax. I did find the original image listed under a parent directory at:

cavebugs


Posts: no

Reply: 18



PostPosted: November 30, 2004 12:03 AM 

What's more, careful examination will show that the "Sojourner" is the one created by Hot Wheels, not NASA--I have its twin on my desk. The antenna gives it away...

Tim David


Posts: no

Reply: 19



PostPosted: December 1, 2004 3:20 PM 

Unless you have a special addition Mattel Sojourner Rover that no one else has, I don't think we are talking about the same antenna:

But yes, the real Rover had a different antenna then the one on the USDA's photo.

Which leads to the earlier comment by Jon about a prototype or perhaps another model?

Tim David


Posts: no

Reply: 20



PostPosted: December 1, 2004 3:21 PM 

Unless you have a special edition Mattel Sojourner Rover that no one else has, I don't think we are talking about the same antenna:

But yes, the real Rover had a different antenna then the one on the USDA's photo.

Which leads to the earlier comment by Jon about a prototype or perhaps another model?

1 | 2 Next


Join the conversation:















Very Happy Smile Sad Surprised
Shocked Confused Cool Laughing
Mad Razz Embarassed Crying or Very Sad
Evil or Very Mad Twisted Evil Rolling Eyes Wink
Powered by MTSmileys