Mars Moving Evidence

[Marsrocks]

This may give me my best angle (least difference in perspectives) when the object appears on our right:

[Marsrocks]

Well, this one is a mixed bag of tricks. Our tilt is similar enough that it couldn't have moved down behind the hill, but the slant may be enough that it moved behind the rock on our right.

Take a look at the marked background object giving us the appearance of moving to the right as a result in the change in camera angles. The object under study may have made a similar apparent movement to the right and be blocked out of our view as a result:



So, this comparison doesn't help much.

[Marsrocks]

Of course, again - the subject is not in the distant background - unless its HUGE - so its apparent motion should not be much more than the apparent motion of the rocks at the top of the hill.

Okay, I'm arguing with myself. That'll be enough work on this one for today.

:P

:-[

[Marsrocks]

Okay - new perspective:

Now, let's presume that it is a single object that did not move.

These four frames put it all together with the mystery object centered in the animation:

[Marsrocks]

Faster:

[Marsrocks]

Even faster:



(This seems to make sense - rover moving up the hill and to the right - with a drop off just on the other side of that hill - and our mystery object peeking up out of the drop off area).

[Marsrocks]

[Marsrocks]

official guide to the MER motion counter etc.:



pds-imaging.jpl.nasa.gov/data/mer/incoming2/mer2-m-pancam-2-edr-sci-v1/mer2pc_0xxx/document/coordinate_systems.pdf

pds-imaging.jpl.nasa.gov/data/mer/incoming2/mer2-m-pancam-2-edr-sci-v1/mer2pc_0xxx/document/mer_pppcs_excerpts.pdf

(One Mars sol or day is equal to 88,775.245 earth solar seconds).

[convex]

Good work. It certainly took a couple of hours working to create all this pictures and animations.

When I first saw the pictures, I thought, it is impossible! A huge stone that moves by itself. Seemingly inexplicable.
:o

Well, did I understand you correctly that you have shown that the stone has not moved? Sometimes I do not trust my own translation skills. I ask just to be safe, because with the animations you've created, I come to the conclusion that there are no moving stones. It is just a very tricky optical illusion, caused by changes in the viewing angle.

Did you inform Joseph P. Skipper about your results?

[Marsrocks]

convex, you are basically correct. But I am still not finished with the task. I think the motion counter - if I can come to understand it - will answer it conclusively though. I do believe the rover moved up hill or raised its mast between the shots which can explain the illusion of movement of this rock.


Even if it turns out to be an illusion, it is pretty dang amazing - I have not seen another example like this.

[sultan5000]

Is there a discussion regarding the object that is just to the right of center?-- reminds me of a segmented armadillo with a paddle on its tail.

Has this been addressed?

[Marsrocks]

Sultan5000, no one has addressed that feature yet - though that thing you perceived as a tail - I also perceived as a tail. It is an attention-getting shape.

[sultan5000]

Okay, I will work on getting something started on it.

[kane]

Sry for my english, this mars moving evidence reminds me the theory about the photos taken on the lunar surface, using the stereoscopic method - www.aulis.com/stereoparallax.htm .
Its hard to know what to really believe in all this eh, but you can definetely call something "fake" or "not fake = real", one thing just a "bit" fake is pure shit imo.
The situation you have shown in this great topic cannot occur in real world photography, here on earth, mars, moon or wherever you say.

[Marsrocks]

thales100, that's a neat link. Thanks for posting it.

I forgot they call those gif left-right animations "wiggles."