Added: 3 years ago
From: SuperFinGuy
Views: 47,023
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (297)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • You obviously have an interest in the subject & have sacrificed your time to research it. Why not get yourself a telescope & look at it with your own eyes, then you will understand why they call it "the red planet" lol, I can assure you it lives up to its name. There are many videos of mars on youtube shot by amateurs, search for "mars telescope"

  • Brilliant video. A lot of greedy wealthy investors rely on us not knowing the truth about Mars and many other facts.

  • that look just like a normal picture here on earth... they don't want earths population to migrate to other planets

  • @uneekking85 That must be the dumbest assumption I have heard in my life..I think it gave me cancer.

  • Audio fine, video - most time boring lol

    Lets get to RED Planet - sorry, I mean Red-Blue planet and kicks some NASA asses

  • ok mars has high iron oxide content. on earth it is known as rust. the sky is naturally red because of this content, o and the sky would not turn that blue beacause ther is not nearly enough oxygen

  • @firedwheelman the sky is not blue for oxygen...

  • ok mars has high iron oxide content. on earth it is known as rust. the sky is naturally red because of this content

  • @matthew00123 ROFLMAO

    As much as i review my comments, can´t find anywhere a single word where i state my beliefs in any way. Just stating that the process shown in the video is just shenanigans; an automatic curves adjustment in Photoshop over an overcompressed image is defenitively NOT a scientific proof for ANYTHING, much less if the image was taken outside our own planet. Didn't think THAT was SO HARD to get.

  • @Mornatur Oh shut up with your dishonesty, anyone here with a brain knows your full of it. Just because an image is compressed doesn't mean it's not usable obviously, it just means it uses less pixels to encode the data, not to mention the picture that I used is supposed to be a true color, high definition one of over 70 mgbytes. It is not as you say "it changes radically the way a camera lens, a film and/or photo sensors capture images and light" lol That would make it a false color picture.

  • @Mornatur I suggest you look up the definition of true color and false color since you're an expert in photography lol The nasa image is supposed to be a true color one or as seen by the human eye on the location, so spare us of your color twisting bullshit. If you don't accept true color photographs taken outside or on the surface as evidence for the color of mars obviously you're an irrational idiot.

  • @SuperFinGuy

    Wait. Gotta stop laughing before answering.

    That's it.

    Now. As another commenter said "so, you digitally modifying an image makes it MORE legitimate?"

    And to put and end, congrats: you have made an excellent example of scientific research insulting your detractors when unable to counter-argument. And that makes ME irrational. Oh, wait, it doesn't.

    Best luck next time. You up for some Sastquatch videos? LOL.

  • @Mornatur Wow you should be ashamed of yourself, I insulted you for valid reasons since you obviously have sanity problems. I perfectly countered your bullshit as everyone can see.

    "modifying an image makes it MORE legitimate?"

    The auto curves tool is not a modifier, it color corrects images. It couldn't guess or invent that the sky is actually blue on mars. Please don't be such an ignorant person.

    LOL yeah you'd like Sastquatch videos since you don't care about evidence.

  • @matthew00123 Think about it: Amateur photography of Mars doesn't mean there are amateurs going to Mars to take pictures, ¿or are they? If that's the case, let them call me, i wanna go there. For it's true: i haven't been there. Nor the people making the amateur photography. Nor you. BUT i KNOW light behaves differently under different atmospheric conditions, and i KNOW a predefined photoshop filter is NOT scientific proof for a dumb conspiracy theory. It's simple RATIONALITY.

  • @matthew00123 LOL

    I actually think i know visible spectrum quite well. It´s actually part of my job. As it is to know what environmental conditions can change it´s perception for human beings and even for capture by artificial meanings. It happens taht i actually know about what i'm talking about here. And this is just typical: when bereft of argument, let´s become emotional. What 'love' has to do with anything? Or even 'trust'? It's as simple as fact, and the fact is, the video is a naive FAIL

  • @matthew00123 Simple untrained perception - like the one used to edit the image on the video - lacks scientific insight as how the image "should look". And something tells me that NASA techs may just know a little more on the subject than a YOuTube fan.

  • @matthew00123 Again, you say "when fully lit the damned thing almost looks like earth". Almost. And only after the photographs have been adjusted to be appreciated by eyes accustomed to earth imagery.

    Provide just one raw, untouched, unprocessed, image from Mars and it can be a basis for a discussion.

  • @matthew00123 colors are part of the light spectrum, that's true. But, as i said before, having a lighter atmosphere, and one without even a ozone layer to strip light from UV radiation, and allowing more energy to hit the planet's surface, it changes radically the way a camera lens, a film and/or photo sensors capture images and light. Filters must be provided just to protect sensors from UV radiation, camera settings must be adapted to meet the requirements of the environment, even on earth.

  • @matthew00123 Yes, they do. As atmosphere has a different composition and is thinner, light from the sun operates differently there; less filtered, i guess more intense... Yet, i'm no expert and, off course, i haven´t been on Mars. But i knmow photography and Photoshop well enough to say, if different adjustments have to be made to a photograph of tha same location at different times of day and different seasons, to work on images from a different planet should just be a lot different.

  • LMAO and even used a Ministry song for this, 2 thumbs up

  • @LivinWorstNightmare Thanks, I thought Ministry was perfect for the task.

  • These pictures were taken from Area-51 looking outward toward the edge of the base. Being that Area-51 is a secret base civilians cannot duplicate the photos as they have no access to the landscape and film locations. This is all I will say. Don't ask me how I know.

  • mars looks a lot like nevada.

  • u see all mars images n u will always feel that somethinng i wrong with ths pics.colors seem to be added intentionally there.

  • Just absurd. Light conditions on Mars are just not the same we have in Earth - and graphic tools like Photoshop have been designed to work in Earth, not Mars. Besides, i can do the same to any photograph whatsoever and it will change its colors. Let's do some science, people. Science is not about the colors i think are right in a JPEG (this is, compressed in an information-loss format) derived from a RAW image originally taken with an equipment which configuration we don't know.

  • Auto adjust works good. Has anyone tried this? There is a gift to us all from Bill Nye the science guy The mars rover's colorful sun dial. Take a original image of the sun dial with its wonderful colors before launch while it was on earth. Take a image from the sundial in a picture while on mars and the colors are a little off huh? Adjust colors to match especially any white parts of rover, and create a filter, apply filter to mars images and see what mars looks like to a human on mars:) Enjoy!

  • Let us de-photoshop this raw image file. OH WAIT YOU CAN'T.

  • no need for proof, viking 2 picture of frost (ice showing whiteness is correct only with bluish sky):

    go to wikipedia 'viking 2' and see last image

  • If you want to see an example of this effect on earth, find a photo from INSIDE bryce or Antelope canyon, where most of the light is reflected off the walls and therefore colored by them. Everything in such a place will be colored by that light, and using the autolevels or autocurves will make the scene grayer. Obviously, this grayer image is not the true color of the canyon. For the same reason, neither is the grayer version of Mars.

  • People, photoshop does not magically know what color Mars is. This guy used the autocurves function to adjust the color of the image. Autocurves and autolevels remove significant biases towards any one color, like those caused by colored lighting or faded images. Since the sky of mars has a red cast to it, everything will be redder than normal. Even the grays will be red. That's what the auto adjustment eliminates. What you see here is what mars would look like if its sky weren't red.

  • @knowyourunknowns Why would Mars' sky be red? Scattering turns light blue in the atmosphere. Not red. Red Mars is chicken shit bullshit.

  • I don't know if this video is really a proof , but sure NASA hiding various things about mars. And also NASA have got super equiment and tools and specialized people , so if they wanted to hide or for example put a filter on a photo , they did that in way that photoshops and such programs can't unlock/delete the filter on it. I THINK.

  • no way dude mars is yellow.

  • Bullshit

  • @Moondawn68 No Bullshit

  • WHow could you know the true colour? did you have been there?

  • So Mars looks like a desert. What were you expecting, Endor? Mordor? Ewoks and orcs waving spears at the camera? LOL.

    Everybody's got a conspiracy theory.

  • @cloakster not. everybody.

  • this is bullshit

  • @ganteng133 You are just ignorant

  • what web browser are using?!!?!?

  • @oblivion234brown Avant browser, it is a pretty fast clean and straightforward browser based on Internet Explorer but now I have its sister browser called Orca, it mixes it with Firefox. 

  • wow ... now the picture is normal!

  • on the first picture shown there at the bottom you can see the edge of the Mars Rover. Look at the pertruding noob inside that round shiny ring. If you zoom in on it, it is a symbol to alien life with an inscription TWO WORLDS ONE FAMILY. With a representation of our solar system with Earth and Mars both the same color. And in diffrent photos the colors are diffrent.

  • wtf is wrong with you.

    auto curves simply looks at histogram and if picture has a lot of red/orange on it, it gets decreased.

  • I dont see how this video is any kind of proof. The algorithm changes the pixel values depending on the colours in the image.

    If the image has already be shop'd by NASA then auto levels will give you the wrong image since it will have done calculations based on the wrong pixel values..

  • wow!1that pic was real and nasa faked it..almost all nasa's mars pic look faked(2 much red)

  • the music is very extremely unnecessary

  • I know one fact that absolutely proves false color done by nasa. Check every single photo done by nasa. Look at their gear and equipment. They ALL exhibit colors only possible to be seen by EARTHS atmosphere. Mars' atmosphere has a different composition...so if they try to say mars loks red because of the different atmosphere...it must be absolutely true for their equipment. "Our" blue...would not be blue on mars. Nor would "our" red be either. Magically...mars atmosphere doesn't effect nasa...

  • Maybe they change the colors so people can get used to different things so when something truly different is seen its not so shocking.

  • shit ape music

  • wow you made quite a discovery

  • yes its true Nasa is hiding the true colors, google earth will have no part of it and the true colors can be seen on explore Mars. On google earth - mars is anthing but red it is more yellow just like this video.

  • I hold no naive illusions about gov honesty, but if Mars was indeed habitable(in the same manner as Earth), then others would be able to tell by simply watching it. And those who would be the ones to do it,with access to large telescopes, are likely to be academic's. Some would be patriots willing to shut up for "the good of the country,"and others could be intimidated. But a lot of people would find out, and academic's are NOT known as lovers of gov. in general, and secretive one's even less.

  • Your video might be taken more seriously if you did not have to resort to stupid music in the background. A brilliant commentary instead would have been great. Being that you opt for the stupid sounding music to me means that you and your video are just as stupid.

  • @MrFBCBSALES hey, if you could send me a list of music that is "Supid," and another with a list of music that is "Good," I'd appreciate it. What with you being the authority on the subject; I mean, you sound so sure about what constitutes "stupid," I figure you must be an authority on the matter. Nobody would be a big enough a-hole to speak in such a manner based solely on their own, unimportant, arbitrary and useless personal opinion. Also, when you get a free minute, go fuck yourself.MINISTRY!

  • so, you digitally modifying an image makes it MORE legitimate?

  • cool work..and a great find..Also i'd like to add that when i look up at the stars...I see lots of them..from a light polluted Earth....So why is it that when i see shots taken by astronauts visiting the space station that in the background there are NO STARS..I find this strange...Also ppl you gotta stop blaming nasa for disinformation as they do answer to a higher hierarchy..That could have closed them down along time ago. Question: what will replace the shuttle in 2011?

  • @spacedman42 The fact that we see no stars on the pictures is that the light emitted by them is faint and so its not captured in the image.

  • @spacedman42 Oh god.. the stars thing again.. Have you ever tried taking pictures of you or friends or something during the night (with some light pointing at them), making sure to include part of the sky? The stars dont show up there either... Its normal and to do with the camera itself.

  • @gordon1201 ..yeah i know..this has been and gone..lol..thanx anyway

  • @gordon1201 Yeah anyone that has ever used a camera should know you cant get a decent picture of stars (Or sometimes even the moon.) at night without some effort and gear.

  • Don't know if I would say that's the true color. All I have to do is look through my telescope and I can tell you the ground is redder than that. But as for whether NASA is trying to deceive us, I think not. Maybe you should go back and looking at the viking lander images. These clearly show the sky is much brighter.

  • LOL I just tried to show my friends family this, and they all kinda laughed and said I put the color in myself not NASA. Funny how they are beyond comprehending this subject.

  • PS : This makes me feel like Homer and I am awaking on a distant beach. The odyssey is just beginning I feel. (clash of the titans 2010 sucked and the new youtube design is horrible)

  • Hey guys I found a really strange anomaly's on the World wide telescope panoramic pictures from mars. I would like to talk about with someone how can help me talk about what we are seeing together. Contact me after you install " World Wide Telescope" by Microsoft and I will give you the exact location of the anomaly's.

  • Well whaddaya know; grey rocks and pale blue sky. I've seen a good few other videos and photos that confirm this too, including shots from NASA showing clouds on Mars. Clouds = atmosphere.

    And what's that in the bottom of the frame there? That big, flat, square-ish rock? Looks suspiciously smooth to be natural, almost like some sort of paving... I could be wrong... what would cause a rock formation like that on a planet with no atmosphere and therefore no atmospheric effects (such as wind)?

  • @JCLeSinge Sedimentary deposition

  • @beachcomber2008: Wait; there are only three positions here; either Mars has a CO2 amtosphere, virtually no atmosphere at all, or some other kind of atmosphere, possibly Earth-like. If there's no atmosphere (a near vacuum, as you put it), then there's nothing to support dust particles in the air, because there is no air. If a CO2 atmosphere, CO2 doesn't support anything, it sinks, so again, no dust clouds.

    Also, red dust doesn't create red sky, same as blue sea doesn't create blue sky.

  • @JCLeSinge There ISN'T "nothing to support dust particles in the air"

    There IS CO2 gas

    Erosion is powerful on Mars because wind speeds are five times faster

    A particle of sand does more than "sting" when it's doing 500 mph

    Because Mars has no precipitation to bring down dusts, Martian dust simply gets finer and finer, all the way down (almost) to single molecules

    Dusts color the sky the color of the dust

    Go and find a satellite photo of a Saharan sandstorm, there's a good fellow

  • @beachcomber2008: Ok, so a CO2 atmosphere. That's not a near vacuum, was my main point there.

    A Saharan sandstorm wouldn't be a good example to demonstrate why there should be a red sky on Mars; different atmosphere on Earth, which again is the point. Does CO2 refract red light in a similar way that Earth's cocktail atmosphere refracts blue light? No, CO2 does not. Given that CO2 is not a buoyant gas, I'm skeptical that it could support the volume of dust you're proposing in the atmosphere.

  • This simply isn't true. Onboard cameras are calibrated against a spectral strip which is mounted on the rover or lander.

    The atmosphere of Mars is almost completely pure carbon dioxide (carrying a suspension of fine red dust) at an average pressure of ONE OUNCE per square inch and an average temperature of -63 deg C

    Exposure to it for more than a few seconds would be FATAL

  • @beachcomber2008: Exposure for more than a few seconds would be fatal... would it? Carbon dioxide isn't innately poisonous; we just can't breath it. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the Martian atmosphere is mostly CO2, then a human could survive unprotected for as long as they could hold their breath, which could be several minutes. You'd at least have enough time to say "Damn, NASA weren't lying!"

    ...or possibly the opposite, y'know, in the event that they are...

  • @JCLeSinge You would have a hard job holding your breath in a near-vacuum

    Made even more uncomfortable by your blood coming to the boil

    Of course you could always stop this process by allowing yourself to cool down down to maybe -100 deg C (which you WOULD be doing anyway)

    and THAT way you'd end up perfectly preserved - freeze-dried - and DEAD

    Well, not perfectly. After a million years or so, hard solar radiation would have crumbled your organic remains to a powder

  • @beachcomber2008 You're joking, right? The average temperature on mars in the summer is above 50 degrees F, in the shade! As recorded by NASA's own Opportunity rover. The Spirit rover also reveals high summer temperatures picking at 90+ degrees F. Look it up. Such temperatures are not of a near vacuum atmosphere.

    /watch?v=MpC7hF3o67Q

  • @SuperFinGuy All the more reason for your blood to boil, then, even at the lowest spot on Mars's equator

    Near vacua can be any temp they like

    It just depends on their heat inputs and outputs

    Whatever temp the atmosphere was, having boiling blood would put a damper on your day

    It would make a prawn cracker of you...

  • @beachcomber2008: Secondly, there's no reason why a CO2 atmosphere would make a red sky. NASA colours Mars red because that's what we expect to see; in reality, an atmosphere composed of CO2 would be... well, invisible; it'd be like looking up at the night sky on Earth (for the debatably brief time you'd be alive to do so, assuming the atmosphere actually is CO2...).

    Also (and this is a cheap shot); near vacua having any temperature preference would imply sentience, so... Life on Mars! Yay!

  • @JCLeSinge CO2 doesn't make the Martian sky red. Dust does, though

    For the last billion years the story of Mars has been the story of DUST

    Re cheap shot - 500 chrs and you want me to filter out figures of speech

    Well, OK, if you'll filter out ignorance of the topic about which you write

    Why is it "dot-joiners" can never join dots?

  • @beachcomber2008: Aw, lighten up. I said it was a cheap shot; I was obviously having a chuckle with that one. I get pissed off with people who can't grasp figures of speech too; just trying to maintain a conversational level rather than get into a right/wrong argument, since we don't actually know whether there is/was life on Mars. Right now, I lean towards "was".

  • @SuperFinGuy: Of course those temperatures are possible in thin atmospheres. Even on earth. At 150 km above the ground earth's atmosphere has a temperature of well above 400 °C. And above 250 km the temperature rises above 1000 °C.

    But the thinness of the atmosphere plays an important role as heat transfer doesn't work well in that case. Otherwise the ISS would be a boiling can of beans in a matter of minutes.

  • @SuperFinGuy could you translate that in C ?

  • @beachcomber2008: Yeah, I left the air pressure and temperature issues for someone else to argue; point was, CO2 alone wouldn't kill you in seconds.

    But that's assuming the official story is true; there are a few inconsistencies. For example... NASA's unedited shots sometimes show clouds on Mars. CO2 doesn't form visible clouds, and if it somehow did (It's speical Martian CO2), those clouds would be on the planet surface, since CO2 sinks, especially when it's cold.

  • @JCLeSinge There are clouds on Mars. These are similat to NOCTILUCENT clouds on Earth, which also have little to do with water. Study up

    Apart from that, there is almost always DUST in Martian air

    This is red, and it reflects the red light radiated from the planet to give the pink of the atmosphere

    Once again your knowledge falls short of the facts

    That's a poor position for a "public Mars theorist" to be in

  • @beachcomber2008: Noctilucent clouds... I'll look that up; cheers.

    I never mentioned water on Mars though. The existence of caves proves that there was once water there; I haven't seen any convincing photos to suggest there still is. Conversely, NASA is on the record both for doctoring photos and for saying they'd outright lie if they did find evidence of ET life. So there's BS on both sides of the debate; filtering that out to get the truth means weighing both positions skeptically.

  • @JCLeSinge atoptics. co. uk

    There's calculated to be enough water on Mars to fill its dried-up ocean to a depth of a metre. Or so...

    A lander landed on ice too, which had been revealed by the blast of the landing rockets blowing a layer of dust out of the way. As soon as water ice is "mulched" by a layer of fine dust it no longer sublimes into the CO2 atmosphere

    One of Mars's polar caps comprises a multiple spiral of ice ridges each a half-mile high

    Some of Mars' features are GLACIAL - to me

  • @beachcomber2008: Dried up ocean-beds would imply that there was once life.

    The question then becomes, "was it intelligent?"

    While I agree that many of the Martian land features are clearly glacial, there have been some eyebrow-raising things found there that suggest more than microbial life at some point in the past. As I mentioned before, NASA have outright said they'll lie about this; their latter debunking of, to pick the best known example, the Cydonian Head, can't be considered reliable.

  • @JCLeSinge Ocean beds don't imply life. Volcano/ocean interfaces in great numbers would be best - as on Earth

    Intelligence would first evolve from a non-specialized omnivore, which would require an oxygen-rich atmosphere (which it has never had) and a dense ecosystem to work within

    After Mars's atmospheric collapse all traces of life on the SURFACE will be gone. Especially if it never got past single-cell...

    But beneath the surface?

    The "head" is a butte standing on an ancient shoreline

  • @beachcomber2008: Water implies all the requirements for life, so dried oceans would be a strong indicator that there was once life on Mars.

    Granted, what we'd really need to see to prove it would be a bona fide skeleton of a Martian lifeform, if only a partial one. But NASA have said that if they found anything like that, they'd cover it up. For the same reason, we don't know what the Cydonian Head is; if it's natural, why doctor the photos?

  • @beachcomber2008 You are a pawn of the system, wake up and live

  • @Zoroasterrrr

    I'm an anarchist living outside of "the system", fully awake, and, as they say, "in the bosom of my family".. I see outside my window a sub-tropical desert, the Atlantic Ocean, and a volcanic island sixty miles across the sea

    What do YOU see?

  • @beachcomber2008 A vacuum has nothing to do with temperature!

  • @kalekold I never said it did

    If you start up a normal displacement vacuum pump in a laboratory, the "vacuum" it delivers is the "vacuum" you will find on Mars, which is only about 10% larger than our Moon - which has a "vacuum" much closer to "space"

    The color of Mars's atmosphere is the color of its dust

    Sometimes surface features of Mars are completely obscured by its fine dust

    Some of its dust is finer than cornflour - it has been circling Mars for many millennia

    Surface life isn't possible

  • have a look:

    /watch?v=pGGQoVFkRLc

    maybe theres really something

  • @soza2000 A "flying saucer" parked on the top of a "Tibetan monastery"?

    More likely a boulder resting on two sheared-off blocks of sediment or dust-covered ice

    Have you seen the "forest" or the "transport tubes"?

    The crater with "dome"?

    And the Cydonia "face" which is a butte standing over a dried-out ocean bed?

  • I think one can infer that we may have never been to Mars, or that the planet images are modified.

  • i have NO doubt whatsoever that JPL has given us a completly different version of MARS to us than what really exist's

    however i would like to know why mars appears red from earth when you look at it in the sky

  • yea mars im sure is like earth it probaly has oxygen too

  • its obvious mars true colors are similar to that of earth , as seen by JPL media conference about the mars rovers,in that conferences background was a piccy of mars which looked so much like earth i had to make sure i was watching the right thing..and i beleive IBALEM is sexist.

  • The nasi saucer which landed on Mars in 1945 also returned footage of a blue Martian sky. So it comes down to a simple, imaging - color calibration problem, which of course could easily be fixed.

  • @Richardhedditch261 lol what an idiot

  • and exceeding developement of any chemical in the human body does not respond directly to anything but what statistically works for survival so such an argument is as valid as "you make yourself out to be an encyclopedia on life; you must surely be male and more surely even still within grasp of your virginity to be so unappreciative of the selfless sacrifices the majority of women must put up with when coupled or simply in coexistance with a man"

  • much more important to the effects of (this particular) hormonal presense are the material they work upon, which is the life experiences accumulated; with irritation or humbleness being a lottery concerning the deck of cards we call personalities

    your own ego is not exactly tame in that you seem to take into consideration something as spontaneous as a dialogue box to repress an entire person into the gender you deem, in terms of selfcenteredness, inferior

  • upon closer inspection based on research, yes, water is in fact blue; but only because of the same reason the sky is blue which is reflection of the waves associated with the blue-color scale

    so saying that it is a reflection of the sky isn´t too bad an approximation of the real reason it is blue; albeit not quite precise

    your female comment, though backed by your hormone knowledge is quite discriminating all the same. Newton was several times as egocentrical as any fussy lady of his time

  • you guys love misinterpreting! a glass of water is clear if i am not mistaken or colorblind

    einstein explains to us that atoms exist in more than one way, but one is by the dispersing effect on of the different elements and compounds in the atmosphere on the light coming from the sun, where the sun itself appears orange and the sky bounces around the blue light wavelengths, the ocean rivers and other bodies of water reflect this, not the other way around!

  • that's not really unphotoshopping it

    it's changing it to fit to earth light standards so what looks normal on mars doesn't on earth and when you click the auto button it changes it to what it should look like on earth

    so in other words it wouldn't matter if u got a photo of venus it'd do the same thing and make it look like a picture taken on earth. trust me i know shit loads about photoshop so i know!

  • So removing red hue isn't a means of unphotoshoping?

    You just killed your argument when you said "Trust me, I know shit loads about photoshope so I know!"

    Also you indicated yourself to be female by the heighten tone of your ego. A perfect indication of exceeding development of particular hormones found in women that raises aggression levels.

    I highly advice you to chill and examen the information with a clear mind.

  • You can download RGB images from the Mars Rover site and compose your own color images with GIMP.

    There is a red green yellow blue dial on Spirit and Opportunity for comparison.

    I've composed my own color images of various landscape and sky photos as well as color compositions of the color dial.

    Mars does look too red in the NASA color photos.

  • get a telescope and investigate it for yourself because nasa surely wont do it for us. fuck em.

  • Everyone knows that they 'touch up' these photos to make them conform to our expectations, or vice versa. While I don't agree with doing it I don't see whats so 'damning' about it, it's not scandalous or amazing in any way, it's just the way it is.

  • For fun ,get clips of JOhn Lear from Coast to coast am. What a nut job!!!! He stated that ALL 9 planets are populated with civilizations. Martians just live under ground and has a population of 660,000. I wonder if the have McDonald's or Burger King?

  • Right.

  • The mainstream world we live in is a media presentation, and I'd say the underlying reality is pretty amazing. I'm open to anything, but I know where you're coming from here - it sort of rubs me wrong when someone claims to KNOW something that over the top, i.e. how can anybody say with authority that life exists on all our system's planets? It makes me wonder where they get the info and how they can totally believe it without substantial evidence.

  • I strongly advise you check out anything by Richard C. Hoagland especially the NASA-Cydonia Breifings.

  • It is Allegory of the Cave my friend.

  • yep sheep talk.. behh behhh..

  • Sounds like the fluoride is working dude - that's some serious apathy. Just having some fun here so don't take offense. I'd say for the average person on the street who doesn't realize the extent of mainstream propaganda this definitely *is* amazing.

  • this proves nothing other than you know how to use photoshop and the only thing suspicious is the voice of your teacher and that windows 2000 operating system you are hacking on. ;~D

  • mars no es rojo...es como el planeta tierra.

  • I think the main reason for N.A.S.A. (Never A straight Answer) colorizing the photos they release to the public is really quite simple. Colorized photos make it extremely difficult to spot any kind of anomaly that might be present in any given photo, whereas true color photos tend to enhance the viewer's perception and scrutiny of their photographs. Remember, NASA isn't all that smart. They are simply afraid the general public may find something that they might have missed in their own analysis.

  • @Tiberiusduck You 100% right about red making it difficult to see engineered structures, but it's not something they could "have missed in their analysis", because there are thousands of examples of their digital editing coverup. In fact, it's safe to say all nasa images are edited.

    This solar system is teeming with life. Mars and Venus have mutlitudes of large cities which can be seen in nasa/esa images despite their digital editing, because there is too much activity to cover it all up!

  • YUP..! Every one of them, with something in them.. If they are clean.. We can have them.. haha B.S huh.

  • Na.. the top line I give ya,, But think about why you said that..

    They know. And all governments know. Why in the hell can't we know. That makes me distrust and dislike all. And when I get bashed for my thoughts and views, I see how big that army is too.

    We are ALL.... in trouble. know that.

  • they are smart

    they just play with fire over a forest the size of the nearer reaches of the solar system

  • y9dnkb

    hahaha there is no such myth, the ocean reflects the sky not viceversa.

  • @ibajem If that was the case iraq sky would not be blue like here in america. Iraq has no ocean.

  • what the hell? why do i care if it has no ocean

    i´m saying the oceans are blue because of the sky, not the other way around

    sky color has to do with optics/wavelengths/white light being scattered...

    it depends on many things though. we have an atmosphere. the moon sky is black

  • yup what you say is true

    if the sky wasn't blue the oceans would be clear

  • No they wouldn't... The Oceans aren't blue because the sky is blue. In fact, the sky really isn't blue.

    What you are seeing is the variance of white light under increasing undertones as it scatters by each molecule. It is called the Rayleigh scattering effect.

    Water's surface does reflect light, but deep under the surface you can still see the ocean being blue without facing the surface.

  • The water in lakes in texas was blue 60 years ago! My older relatives told me about it! They were born and raised in texas!!!! And everybody has seen blue oceans don't be rediculous!!

  • What the hell does this have to do with what I've said? Go and get yourself anally raped. Just get out of my face, you shallow minded baffoon.

  • The ocean's color has two causes: water is a blue chemical, but also the water's surface is smooth and reflective.

    If you gaze downward into deep water, reflections are minimized and you can see the water's true color. Water absorbs the red end of the color spectrum and transmits the blue end. If water had no color, then lakes and oceans would be grey or black.

    The color of water is not fixed. Shallow water appears turquoise, while deep water appears blue/black.

  • The moon has no sky, no atmosphere.

    The Earth's oceans are not blue because of the sky. They are blue, because water is a blue chemical that is non-fixed and varies from torquoise to near blackish blue, depending on depth.

    The reason why water out of your foset looks so clear and colorless is because the fixation of color in water by volume is quite little, unlike mercury which is an obvious gray. So it is not really colorless, it is actually an extremely pale teal that looks colorless.

  • It is located off the Persian Gulf and it has two rivers that run through it called the Tigris and the Euphrates.

  • @ibajem haha there is such a myth, there are people who believe that the sky is blue because the oceans color is reflected

  • mayby its cause they just dumped the thing in a desert on earth,

    driving around making bs pictures(wich would explain alot of the anomalies in pictures)

    therefore, useing the Money for something else,all abouth cash,makes sence to me

  • Hey I'm from the government. You have to take this youtube down or we'll send a van to come and get you.

  • lol

  • It's true, you have 24 hours.

  • @0871Atta LOL

  • Even if the sky is blue on Mars, Why would they want to cover it up? Does this mean that Mars has an oxygen rich atmosphere?

  • Because they (the parasitical government and the catholic church) don't want us to see what is really out there and get ideas.

    "Mars has an oxygen rich atmosphere?"

    Probably, someone needs to do an independent analysis of mars' atmosphere.

  • I believe NASA did cover up the color of the sky, but I don't believe there was any ill intent on their part (at least in this forgery) as there seems to be no point to it.

    I think it was simple marketing. Its much easier to convince the public that you landed on an alien landscape if the alien landscape you s how them actually looks like an alien landscape. It would be much harder to convince the tax payers that you landed on an alien landscape when that alien landscape looks like arizona.

  • Then how come mars appears in the night sky as a red dot? If it had a blue sky it would appear in the sky as a blue dot (Much like earth does in the martian sky).

    Just making an observation.

  • Check the description box for amateur telescope pictures of Mars. From far away it has a brownish glare due to its mostly brownish surface but from relatively up close it is bluish brown because you can see its atmosphere.

    Also check out /watch?v=hJQpcqzxopA

  • The earth appears blue because of the oceans and Mars does not have large vast oceans. Most gases are colorless that make up the atmosphere.

  • no, the earth apperas blue because light passing through hydrogen and oxygen tend to turn blue. the explination that the sky 'refelcts' the sea is an urban legend

  • y9dnkbe,

    What if the earth was stripped of its water. It would appear as a tan colored planet as well.

    Water makes majority of earth blue from outsiders looking in. Dry land masses are red brown as Mars is.

    But the hydrogen and oxygen atmosphere make Earth's sky blue when looking outwards into space.

  • @y9dnkbe - go and learn some physics

    Light of different colors passing through water vapor in air refracts and scatters at different angles - blue the most and red the least. Hence blue skies and red sunsets

    The explanation that the SEA reflects the SKY is perfectly true and you will observe it the very next time you see it

  • @beachcomber2008 eh? read my comment again, it says 'sky 'reflects' the sea'. So im not too sure what you meant by your comment

  • @y9dnkbe "it says 'sky 'reflects' the sea'."

    RE-READ what I wrote...

  • @beachcomber2008 yeah, my comment says 'sky reflects the sea' which is a pretty common urban myth, which I'm saying isn't true. So frankly i don't think your comment was relevant to my argument.

  • @y9dnkbe: The sky is blue because of light refraction through the atmosphere (although I'm sure you know that); a blue sky on Mars would imply a similar atmosphere to the one on Earth, since different gases in the upper atmosphere would give a different light refraction. Also there's no reason for the Martian sky to be red, since "red sky reflects red desert" is no more true than "sky reflects sea"; if there were no atmosphere, it'd look like the night sky from Earth, but with brighter stars.

  • @JCLeSinge yep, couldn't agree more, i dont believe there is some kind of 'true colour' conspiracy on mars, and i think this video is crap

  • @y9dnkbe: Actually, I do think NASA saturates their Mars images red; they're on record for doctoring pictures. NASA say they're doctoring images to show us what's "really" there (e.g. "Nothing to see folks, move along...").

    The video here hasn't done any photoshop on the image; he's just turned down the saturation. It's not honest skepticism to automatically yell "Fake!" at every single video questioning the official story.

  • @JCLeSinge im sure nasa doctors their pictures too, they are the front line of space exploration. The problem with turning down a red saturation is it will bring up the blues in the image, its not really possible to get an idea of what the "original" image looked like. And when i read things like 'Let's unphotoshop NASA's red pictures to show the true colors of Mars' then now nothing is being questioned, were simply being told.

  • @y9dnkbe: That's a fair point, and I noticed that in some of the shots here, the blue-saturation was too high. We know (from older images and "classic" astronomy") that Mars is a sort of dusty red, rather than the bright red of many of Nasa's new pictures or the blue-grey colour seen here. Questioning both sides is key; totally agree with you there.

  • @y9dnkbe you are right. To be more specific, the sky is blue because the covalent bond between oxygen and hydrogen, also known as moisture/water, produces an 104.5 deg. angle. When photons/light pass through this mass of moisture known as our atmosphere it has a prismatic affect producing this blue color.

  • @y9dnkbe Ah, legend or myth? You're right... :)

  • @y9dnkbe

    Theres less than one millionth of a percent of hydrogen in our atmosphere

  • @dgd138 .....cool

  • LOL some kids go to M.I.T. to study AeroAstro, become inspired, and then build cameras capable of taking photos on the surface of other planets...SuperFinGenius goes to his mother's basement to smoke marijuana, listen to Ministry, and then plays with their photographs in CS3.

    thank you for your contribution to civilization

  • LOL yet you're the prejudiced and ignorant one that can't figure out the obvious evidence presented in this video, even when it's right in front of your nose.

    Yes you're the one doing a great favor to civilization and not living in the basement :P

  • hay cheek out google sky it is blue.I believe u superfinguy the truth is out there and your on to it

  • Thanks, I try to be as objective as possible :)