The above first image was taken by the Spirit engineering Navigation camera on day sixteen (Sol 016) and demonstrates anomalous artifact evidence in the Martian sky. Note that, in the Spirit imaging, this engineering Navigation camera imaging resolution is a bit better and a bit more detailed than the science Panoramic camera imaging, at least in the images released to the public and with respect to these sky artifacts. The kind of sky anomaly evidence presented here is in the Panoramic camera shots but very faint and obscure in line with the poorer resolution as released.
Here you see terrain with a portion of the two shallow depression areas in the terrain foreground denoted by their lighter color and note a larger dark rock just right of center. I’m pointing these visual landmarks out to you so that any of you can recognize this terrain scene and its location relative to the horizon should you later wish to examine other official images for yourself to compare and verify their similar sky evidence against the sample image presented here.
Now note the dark speck artifact low above the horizon on the right pointed out with a green arrow and that the across dimensions of this tiny artifact or object is uniform giving it a rounded blocky look. This tiny shape will be confirmed in closer imaging below. Now note the dark speck artifact at the very top edge of my image on the left pointed out with another green arrow. Note that this object was cut off right at the top edge of the official image, so don’t blame me for its confusion with the image edge. Note that this is a elongated tiny dark object with a vertical orientation relative to the planet’s surface.
This particular scene, with these two particular dark specks in the sky, is very typical because it is repeated over and over again in the Spirit imaging. They are always the same distance from each other and they do move around horizontally on the horizon as a set. Sometimes these two artifacts are over the area seen above, sometimes over an even more flat plain, sometimes with a single hill off in the distance alone in the flat plain, and sometimes above a series of distant hills. So these sky artifacts do get around in the Spirit sky imaging above the distant horizon in just a few days of planet rotation and are not relegated to this one general area seen in the above image.
Further, these objects move up and down relative to height above the horizon as a set. Sometimes they are either close to or right on the horizon and sometimes elevated at different positions above the horizon. Many times both are seen, many times only the vertically oriented object on the left is seen alone with the other artifact presumably below the horizon, and sometimes they do not appear at all with both presumably below the horizon or well above the camera angle. The obvious implication of all this relative positioning and appearing in so many shots is that these particular two sky speck artifacts are real objects visible in the Martian sky and are not imaging artifacts.
Now, in the above first image, I also want to draw your attention to is the texture of the light color sky above the horizon itself as the background. Note that it has a definite pattern to it. This can be seen in all of the Spirit imaging that includes the sky and you’ll get a closer look at it in my fourth and last image below. Meanwhile,the point here is that the sky, particularly such a clear one as we would have a right to expect in the thin Mars atmosphere, should clearly not have a texture or pattern to it. Since this Spirit imaging does universally, that is an important point.
The above third image was taken by the front Hazcam (hazard camera) on day (Sol 012) twelve. The front and rear hazcam cameras provide a wider parabolic field of view and that’s the reason for the curved shape of the planet surface horizon. Again please note the same two depression areas and the larger dark rock in the terrain for location purposes just as seen in this report’s above first image. Also, again please note the texture patterns in the sky that shouldn’t be there. Again please note that there are again two artifacts pointed out in the sky over this location. The terrain in this scene isn’t seen as sharp here as in the first image because clearing this up would have over lightened the sky and negatively impacted the clarity of the sky based evidence.
I’ve included this image from a different onboard camera system just as a sample to demonstrate that the sky texture and dark speck artifacts in the sky are not to be confused with camera artifacts and are not unique to the Navigation camera as represented by my first image above. This sky tapestry texture is universal in all the Spirit imaging and the sky dark speck artifacts are in many other Spirit hazcam, navigation, and panoramic camera imaging.
The dark speck evidence is seen best in the Navigation images but more faintly and poorly in the Panoramic camera images. Considering that the Panoramic camera is suppose to be capable of tremendous advancements in resolution, the exact reverse should be the case but that’s the way it is in the poor quality JPEG images released for public review. This too highly compressed JPEG browser compatible imaging does save image file size space on the Web but also very the very poor quality of the image conveniently prevents close examination of anything.
Please take note that the two dark specks in the above Hazcam image are oriented more above one another vertically as compared to the wide apart positioning in my first Navigation camera image above. Also, note that the upper elongated upper artifact is horizontal in its orientation rather than vertical. That’s because this is a different artifact and should not be confused with the vertical oriented artifact so often seen in other images even though the dark rounded blocky artifact is the same as seen in the first image here. I suspect the latter may be one of Mars orbiting moons but it’s possible it is an artificial orbiting (ours or theirs?) satellite.
The other horizontally oriented object above it in this Hazcam image I suspect may be a UFO type object in flight within the Mars atmospheric envelope. Note that it appears to be either oblong shaped or rounded with a flattened height and we may be seeing it along its flattened edge. The most compelling evidence is the sunlight that appears to be reflecting off of its upper surface and the anticipated dark shadow does appear on its underside bottom surface.
The point is that there appears to be a surface to this visual artifact shifting it from the more nebulous artifact classification to a hard solid object classification. This kind of evidence indicates that this object is well within the atmospheric envelope no further from ground level than a relatively low to mid level flying airplane might be here on Earth. In fact, it appears to be an object in flight, although speculating beyond that is a little too far for me personally to go.
In my above third image taken with the Spirit engineering Navigation camera on day 10 (Sol 010), you can see four dark speck artifacts pointed out with arrows. These are seen more faintly and distantly here because I had to reduce the size of the official image to get all four artifacts into the above image and this diminished their size causing them to appear more distant. If you follow my link below to the official science data source image, you will be able to see this evidence a little closer or you can blow it up from there, if you have the software. Doing so in this poor quality JPEG imaging doesn’t reveal much more detail though.
This double number of artifacts is unusual in the Spirit imaging because there are usually only the two artifacts positioned about the same as the two in my first image here, although they may be seen in other images to be in slightly different positions relative to the horizon. In fact, the two seen in the above third image appear to be the same two as pointed out by the arrows and labeling while the other two appear to be new and different ones.
Something that you should be well aware of is that the one vertically elongated dark speck seen in the upper left of my first and third images here and in so many other images is almost always seen at the top cut off edge of the official image, just as you see here in my first and third images. It may be higher to much lower on the horizon but the height of the sky be it a little or a lot is over and over again cut off even with this specific dark speck in the science data. It is clear then that this particular artifact or object has been used repeatedly at official level as a reference point in cropping off the height of the horizon shown in so many of these images.
The same is never true of the often seen rounded blocky dark speck artifact in the middle of the images here. It may be from very low to much higher on the horizon and its height and distance relative to the upper left elongated artifact may change slightly, but it is never used as a reference point in cropping the image. The same is true of any other additional dark speck artifacts.
Likewise, you should be aware that the presence of the rounded blocky dark speck evidence in this Spirit imaging is limited to the period of time between when Spirit made a successful landing to the time of its reported failure. After the failure and after Spirit is reported to have come back online, this object disappears from the record to date, at least from obvious view, from the Martian sky. Obviously, I find this fact especially suspicious. The now you see it and now you don’t evidence is telling evidence, but of what? Was this visual artifact removed from the imaging or is this an object that itself moved? I can’t answer that one.
In this third image, please note carefully the dark speck at the right edge of the image and its elongation and angular orientation. It appears that this to may also be a UFO type of object in flight well within the Mars atmosphere. On closer examination, its elongated shape it not quite the same as that in my second image here where the object there appears to be a solid surface casting a shadow. In this case, the artifact’s elongated appearance appears to be caused more by this object being in rapid flight and moving fast enough to appear in several pixels at once in this still camera shot with the pixels stringing out in a directional line. Unfortunately, I can’t extrapolate beyond that because of the poor quality of the imaging inhibiting closer examination.
Since the first discussed two dark specks occur so frequently in so many Spirit images and change positions relative to the horizon, any argument that they are accidental or chance camera or processing induced artifacts would obviously not for a second hold any water. So are any of these dark speck artifacts true objects in the Martian sky or they intentionally artificially introduced via image tampering? Could this be a fake sky tapestry used over and over in different shots resulting in the sky artifacts also being replicated over and over?
The above fourth image is sourced from the same official image as my first image at the top of this report. As you can clearly see here where I have introduced strong zoom, darkening, and contrast, the sky is definitely really messed up. Now here you can see closer the sky pattern and dark rounded blocky object you were seeing only faintly of the sky in my other images in this report verifying its rounded blocky uniform shape.
Here what the sky appears to demonstrate is a tapestry background that consists of a porous cloth looking weave pattern type of background seen close up but with blur treatment scattered over it to break up its obvious patterns. Likewise, the rounded blocky uniform dark speck is pronounced here as well. The position above the horizon is the same as in my second image because this is a blow up of that same image.
While I was developing this report on this sky and dark speck evidence, the dark specks were also brought to my attention in e-mail several times. One party indicated that he had sent this evidence to the various media, including CNN, where it was of course ignored. They all wanted to know what I thought of it? Without prematurely revealing my own work on this, I tried to get them to focus on the background sky pattern and take it into consideration along with the artifacts. They did well though in finding this tiny evidence for themselves and are to be commended.
Now this really ridiculous sky tapestry pattern may be explained to some degree by a severe reduction in image resolution to this very poor quality compressed JPG imaging. Remember that, even though these Spirit imaging camera systems are suppose to have tremendously advanced resolution potential, it is no better for us than what NASA and JPL are willing to release to us. I can confirm that what they are willing to release and being passed off as raw browser compatible image data by JPL is not that at all but the poorest quality JPEG compression imaging. You should be aware that JPG or JPEG imaging comes in various degrees of compression from a little to the very severe. The JPEG compression in the Spirit imaging is severe and definitely causing very low quality.
As an example, one can blow up these images as little as just 10% and one often quickly starts getting into enlarged pixels and blocky forms typical of JPEG too strong compression artifacts that blur out detail. In fact, some of the imaging demonstrates visible enlarged pixels and typical JPEG over compression blocky visuals even at the officially provided resolution. This can even be readily seen in the small image thumbnails where images normally appear clearer than they really are when viewed at full size.
The truth is that the Spirit imaging, while touted as the best ever to be had of Mars, at least in the form most often released for public review, is some of the poorest imaging imaginable and far worse than older distant satellite MOC imaging that was itself very low grade relative to what one would have a right to expect out of the known available technology of that time and this Spirit imaging is years newer technology. In my opinion, this is purely intentional as the primary obfuscation tactic of choice.
If any of the true super high resolution raw imaging was actually made available to us, being able to blow up these images very substantially beyond the rigidly controlled view that is made available to us would quickly reveal the featureless mapped tampering applications for what they really are, the splices of image inserts, the crop out areas, and the course terrain mimicking tampering applications. We can’t have that now can we. It is therefore likely that this incredibly poor quality JPEG compression imaging is a factor here in helping or solely causing this sky tapestry effect. This is your tax dollars at work producing super high resolution digital imaging with the true results available for a select few to view but not for the view of any of us out here among the unwashed don’t need to know masses who paid for it.
Rather, what also needs to be made available, as is the case in the older MOC imaging, is the Internet browser compatible GIF format imaging that is also compression imaging but provides more detail allow at least some closer view and less flexibility in the degrees of compression limiting manipulation and degradation somewhat and providing consistency from image to image. Of course, that assumes that we are going to get manipulated and doctored images to start with and obviously that should not be the case.
On the other hand, it is also very possible that the entire sky here is fake and this crummy sky tapestry effect may confirm this as well. To do this would require the use of layers of semitransparent blur treatment. It would also behave in this manner at the very poor JPEG resolutions provided and could be disguised as and passed of as JPEG compression artifact problems, if anyone started paying too much attention. Such a sky treatment would eliminate all evidence in the sky except for the largest objects that might still struggle to come through but appearing as smaller objects after coming through the blur filtering effect.
I do know that often in the Spirit imaging of distant terrain hills in the far background horizontal strips right at the horizon line appear to be illusions created by tiny geometric forms tampering applications. This same tampering technique is used to produce the illusion of broad expanses of “sand” in many hundreds of image strips in the Mars northern hemisphere that completely obliterates all natural detail substituting a terrain sort of course “sand” look that isn’t real and is entirely fake. Likewise it also entirely obliterates from view almost all of the real terrain in the Opportunity first imaging while providing this abnormally rough soil mimicking appearance in which you can hardly find a single natural rock. Of course the extremely poor quality JPEG imaging as released prevents the kind of closer imaging necessary to conclusively present this to you. Now isn’t that convenient.
Another factor you should be aware of is that, where horizons and sky views are involved in the Spirit official imaging, there are usually two official images of the same scene. In the official JPL thumbnail images index they appear side by side as pairs. Just as consistently as a clock, the thumbnail on the left will reveal sky speck evidence and the thumbnail on the right of the same scene will reveal no such evidence. Further, when it comes to the upper left dark vertical speck so often seen and so often used as the image’s reference top cut off point, the small blotch of smudge tampering application hiding this speck will be faint but detectable in almost every sanitized image. This just repeats itself over and over again in the Spirit imaging.
There is some question as to whether the most often seen vertical oriented dark speck is a artificially introduced marker since it is used so often as a cropping point by those processing the images at official level? I suspect that would be the official explanation given if they were pressed on it. On the other hand, the fact that these dark specks, including especially this one speck, in the Mars sky are routinely intentionally sanitized out of the imaging as I’ve described above obviously implies that this may very well be a real object visible in the sky important enough to sanitize whether or not the sky background itself is real or not.
If these darks specks repeatedly seen in the imaging are important enough to repeatedly sanitize, this implies that the more rarely seen horizontally oriented speck in the sky on the upper left in the second image here and the horizontal and angled oriented speck in the sky on the upper right in the third image here are real objects in flight. It may be that they were just missed when it comes to object specific tampering because of their rarity or they may have been intentionally left alone simply because of their rarity they could be explained away as camera or processing artifacts where the repeated seen artifacts could not be so dismissed.
If these are real objects, considering the extremely poor quality of the Spirit sky digital imaging as clearly demonstrated in my fourth image above, the fact that we can see these objects at all means that they would have to be larger and strong visually to be coming through in spite of this poor quality sky imaging. In fact, they are likely much larger than they appear here in this imaging. Logically that size of object likely implies an artificial construct and sophisticated advanced life as compared to anything natural like a living creature flying in the thin air.
The bottom line is that any desperate grasp at moon, camera defect, or processing defect explanations would be far too weak and just would not cut it as to adequately explaining and/or defining all of this sky artifact evidence. It’s just too highly anomalous and likely implies life of some kind associated with Mars. The degree of image tampering in this particular science data trying to hide and alter evidence just further reinforces this implication.
Since the original 2/26/04 report, a few viewers have pointed out that the official explanation is that the specks in the sky evidence is really just dirt or debris on the camera lens, particularly the evidence from the navigation camera lens such as that displayed in my first image above in this report. Sounds reasonable doesn’t it, but only if you go no further than this in your consideration.
It always amazes me how readily some will accept words from NASA and JPL as though they are the gospel and no need to consider anything beyond what ever that official position is. It is this way with some regardless of all the documented image tampering evidence pointing to official duplicity and obfuscation of truth associated with Mars science data. I just have to shake my head.
As for the specks being dirt or debris on the camera lens, think about this more carefully. The truth is always in the evidence itself rather than what someone tells you with “trust us” wording. This isn’t really an issue of the credibility of we the reporting parties involved, rather this is an issue resolvable in the hard evidence itself.
First, you should know that, tellingly, there are horizon and sky images without the presence of these specks in them. Obviously, any dirt or debris on the camera lens would be present on every shot made in the time period when the specks are present in other shots. This one simple fact alone obviously puts a serious cramp in the credibility of any dirt on the lens explanation. You can’t have your cake and eat it to as the saying goes.
Further, obviously if the dirt on the lens explanation was true, then the speck at the top left edge of the image taken by that camera would always be in that position on every shot made through that camera lens during the period of time the specks appear in the sky shots and regardless of what subject matter the camera is focussed on. In other words, the same specks would appear in this navcam’s many terrain shots as well. The fact that this isn’t the case, even though the specks are suppose to be in fixed positions on the lens and therefore would be relatively easy to locate in the image even in the terrain shots with more detail clutter, is telling and conclusive evidence that these specks are not dirt or debris on the camera lens.
Another point made to support the dirt on the camera lens explanation is that the other available navcam imaging taken at the same time is free of these specks. This is suppose to prove that the specks are associated with only the one dirt on the lens camera and thereby prove the dirt on the lens explanation. However, I even pointed this out myself in the original report but with a more detailed look at this evidence and the fact that it points to a different conclusion.
In each of the navcam shots that are free of the speck evidence, there is evidence of small faint smudge tampering over the location of these specks sanitizing them from the image. An eye practiced in recognition of this tampering can see this but there are also clusters of tiny JPEG compression artifacts immediately around these spots revealing their presence. These compression artifacts typically cluster around information (such as the smudge tampering) that has later been artificially digitally introduced into the image before the final degree of compression is implemented for browser compatible display purposes.
These clusters of tiny JPEG compression artifacts around these tampering spots would almost certainly not have been visible had they chosen moderate to very little degrees of compression that is available in the JPEG format. However, the official browser compatible so called science data imaging as made available to us is of very poor quality because too much degree of JPEG compression has been used. That severe degree of compression works well as an obfuscation tactic in preventing any meaningful research zoom in closer examination of evidence but it can also reveal tampering compression artifact evidence to. Remember again, you can’t have your cake and eat it to as the saying goes.
The bottom line here is that these specks are either digital information artificially added to the image in later processing or they are real evidence of something in the Mars sky. To me, except for the one upper left top edge speck being used repeatedly as an exact marker reference cropping point, it otherwise makes little sense to intentionally create needless controversy by artificially introducing these various specks into the imaging only then to go to the trouble of sanitizing them from some of the imaging. For me, the presence of the tampering is itself the most telling evidence of all. The attempt to obfuscate this as evidence is itself very telling.
As always, the choice is yours. You must decide for yourself whether to wholesale take in “trust us” comfort explanations substituting safe words for evidence or seriously consider the total evidence itself and its less safe implications.
http://origin.mars5.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/2/n/016/2N127787079EFF0327P1932L0M1.HTML: This link takes you to the official Spirit engineering Navigation camera day 16 (Sol 016) science data image that my first and fourth images in this report are drawn from. This is a full size larger image that will match my first image above just fine but you will need software to achieve the clarity results matching my fourth image. Just be sure to choose the full size image link at the bottom of the page.
http://origin.mars5.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/2/f/012/2F127428321EFF0300P1003L0M1.HTML: This link takes you to the official Spirit engineering front Hazcam (Hazard Camera) day twelve (Sol 012) science data image that my second image in this report is drawn from. This is a full size larger image but will still have to be blown up double size to match my report image here. Just be sure to choose the full size image link at the bottom of the page.
http://origin.mars5.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/2/n/010/2N127266163EFF0224P1513L0M1.HTML: This link takes you to the official Spirit engineering Navigation camera day ten (Sol 010) science data image that my third image in this report is drawn from. This is a full size larger image that is actually larger than my report image here and do very nicely in viewing the evidence even better. Just be sure to choose the full size image link at the bottom of the page.