Here is the beginning of the Mars update:
Why is Nasa running modified photos of Mars as originals, are people that stupid?
The biggest problem I have with the original Mars rover is the zero bit sky of Mars, which is obviously not the real sky in any photo. Why would Nasa put a fake sky in all the photos? And why so fake?
When the original rover began beaming photos back to Earth, I called it fake because of the sky. Viking was definitely real and sent back a photo that looked like it was taken on Earth, with the exception of the fact that the sky was blue on the horizon and faded to black above. This is what would be expected on a planet with a thin atmosphere.
The sky is the most difficult of all things for a digital imaging device to capture
This is because the sky is a gradient which has an infinite range of color values which starts with low value bits (straight up) and goes to high value bits near the horizon. Straight up, all the bits will be (for example) hexadecimal values that are all below 5, and on the horizon the sky will be much brighter to a camera, with all hex values being A or greater. (long story if you do not understand this, but what it means is that the sky has near infinite color depth in shades of blue. It is really difficult for a camera to capture accurately.)
Mars would be greatly accentuated in this way, with straight up into the sky at high noon having hex values of zero or one, and the same values as Earth on the horizon. A double difficult whammy for a camera to capture.
How can I say this differently for people to understand? Easy
If you take a paint bucket filter in a photo editor and you want to fill in the sky with a single color, that paint bucket will have to be set to a value of 200 before it will actually get the entire sky. And when set that high, the paint bucket filter will also turn portions of the ground, if not the entire photo the same color. However, once a fake sky has been sucessfully paint bucketed in, it has a bit value depth of zero, because that is what a paint bucket filter does - it changes everything it fills to exactly the same color with no variation at all
Yet on the Nasa mars rover photos, you can set the paint bucket filter to ZERO and the entire sky will change, having no hexadecimal value variation or bit depth AT ALL. No doubt about it, the sky in the mars rover photos is FAKE AS FRUIT LOOPS, and I would like to ask WHY.
When I first discovered this, I posted it to forums and blogs everywhere (this was before I had this web site) asking how the sky could be all one color value. It proved the mars rover was FAKE, and I took an old Olympus C-700 camera, taped to to a basket ball and went out to the San Rafael swell and took photos of the "Mars rover" basket ball as a joke (because the landscape was identical)
You can prove the sky is fake on the mars rover photos yourself with currently posted images from Nasa
Update: I cannot find the original photos of this online
Too many people obviously figured out that the behavior of the sky proved the images were photoshopped, and I can no longer find the original truly damning photos. However, I have them on backup (but do not have any backup drives available here). I will post these later. Nasa learned and is now putting a more realistic sky in the mars photos, but little good that will do them when the originals from early in the mission are so obviously fake. I am now looking through this web site's cache to see if I sent any to people (in joke E-mails about how stupid Nasa has become)
Why would Nasa put a fake sky in the rover photo pics?
1.To hide the contrails, which appear everywhere on earth now.
2. To live up to a deal from an alien civilization that we would not publish it
3. Unlikely: To stop people ahead of time from asking why the sky so quickly fades to black so close to the horizon.
Nasa's excuse for zero bit depth mars sky: Dust storms. But that falls flat when the sky is pinkish and EVERYTHING to the horizon is super clear. If dust storms did that, all the mars photos would look like pictures taken in a red fog. Instead, we have a red filter applied that obscures the photo as much at 3 feet as it does at 10 miles. Obvious hoakery.
So, would a fake mars sky prove the stone head false? No, because that leaves something else to be explained - why that head was never found by archaeologists. Stuff like that is not just left to sit and wait for a "robber" to discover it and sell it on the black market.
Hackers installed a forum on Jimstonefreelance
They subsequently installed 5 separate databases and used it all for spamming and hacking. NOT GOOD. I shut them down by deleting all their databases, the forum software they installed, and then redirecting all requests to their hoax forum off into an abyss.
Why is Nasa running modified photos of Mars as originals, are people that stupid?
The biggest problem I have with the original Mars rover is the zero bit sky of Mars, which is obviously not the real sky in any photo. Why would Nasa put a fake sky in all the photos? And why so fake?
When the original rover began beaming photos back to Earth, I called it fake because of the sky. Viking was definitely real and sent back a photo that looked like it was taken on Earth, with the exception of the fact that the sky was blue on the horizon and faded to black above. This is what would be expected on a planet with a thin atmosphere.
The sky is the most difficult of all things for a digital imaging device to capture
This is because the sky is a gradient which has an infinite range of color values which starts with low value bits (straight up) and goes to high value bits near the horizon. Straight up, all the bits will be (for example) hexadecimal values that are all below 5, and on the horizon the sky will be much brighter to a camera, with all hex values being A or greater. (long story if you do not understand this, but what it means is that the sky has near infinite color depth in shades of blue. It is really difficult for a camera to capture accurately.)
Mars would be greatly accentuated in this way, with straight up into the sky at high noon having hex values of zero or one, and the same values as Earth on the horizon. A double difficult whammy for a camera to capture.
How can I say this differently for people to understand? Easy
If you take a paint bucket filter in a photo editor and you want to fill in the sky with a single color, that paint bucket will have to be set to a value of 200 before it will actually get the entire sky. And when set that high, the paint bucket filter will also turn portions of the ground, if not the entire photo the same color. However, once a fake sky has been sucessfully paint bucketed in, it has a bit value depth of zero, because that is what a paint bucket filter does - it changes everything it fills to exactly the same color with no variation at all
Yet on the Nasa mars rover photos, you can set the paint bucket filter to ZERO and the entire sky will change, having no hexadecimal value variation or bit depth AT ALL. No doubt about it, the sky in the mars rover photos is FAKE AS FRUIT LOOPS, and I would like to ask WHY.
When I first discovered this, I posted it to forums and blogs everywhere (this was before I had this web site) asking how the sky could be all one color value. It proved the mars rover was FAKE, and I took an old Olympus C-700 camera, taped to to a basket ball and went out to the San Rafael swell and took photos of the "Mars rover" basket ball as a joke (because the landscape was identical)
You can prove the sky is fake on the mars rover photos yourself with currently posted images from Nasa
Update: I cannot find the original photos of this online
Too many people obviously figured out that the behavior of the sky proved the images were photoshopped, and I can no longer find the original truly damning photos. However, I have them on backup (but do not have any backup drives available here). I will post these later. Nasa learned and is now putting a more realistic sky in the mars photos, but little good that will do them when the originals from early in the mission are so obviously fake. I am now looking through this web site's cache to see if I sent any to people (in joke E-mails about how stupid Nasa has become)
Why would Nasa put a fake sky in the rover photo pics?
1.To hide the contrails, which appear everywhere on earth now.
2. To live up to a deal from an alien civilization that we would not publish it
3. Unlikely: To stop people ahead of time from asking why the sky so quickly fades to black so close to the horizon.
Nasa's excuse for zero bit depth mars sky: Dust storms. But that falls flat when the sky is pinkish and EVERYTHING to the horizon is super clear. If dust storms did that, all the mars photos would look like pictures taken in a red fog. Instead, we have a red filter applied that obscures the photo as much at 3 feet as it does at 10 miles. Obvious hoakery.
So, would a fake mars sky prove the stone head false? No, because that leaves something else to be explained - why that head was never found by archaeologists. Stuff like that is not just left to sit and wait for a "robber" to discover it and sell it on the black market.
Hackers installed a forum on Jimstonefreelance
They subsequently installed 5 separate databases and used it all for spamming and hacking. NOT GOOD. I shut them down by deleting all their databases, the forum software they installed, and then redirecting all requests to their hoax forum off into an abyss.
This is good reasonable analysis. Why couldn't he have done it like this with the mars statue?