Is NASA Lying About Mars's Color?

EDIT: On April 11th this video recieved 29 1 star ratings, the same number as some of my other videos. It appears I have been hit by the infamous "vote bots" that have been going around. Oh well, I never really thought the video this was a response to would convince anyone anyway so it's not that big a deal if no one sees my debunking. Please vote/favorite as you feel is appropriate.

Probably not.

In SuperFinGuy's video he attempts to "unphotoshop" NASA's Mars rover photos by using, uh, PhotoShop.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• mars
• color
• colors
• nasa
• lie
• red
• astronomy
• space
• science
• planet
• fraud
• phoenix
• rover
• conspiracy
• theory
• superfinguy

[tgz1000]

I seriously doubt anyone claims that NASA is lying about something solely because of a button in photoshop. I find it more likely that there was more evidence presented by this person and you are the one trying to smear them.

[ConstantlyQuestion]

I INVITE you to go watch his video, he opens an image and runs the auto curves tool on it.

The man is a moron

[yummybummy69]

There is no mistake, the sky is blue on mars. The bbc slipped up on one of there programs and you see a natural picture of mars with a blue sky. You really think nasa want people to start questioning why the sky is blue on mars? Stop being sheep people and realize when your being made fools of.

[Hornlein10]

Do you think really that if NASA is covering his images with filters , they did it so easy? That you can remove the filter with photoshop? Lol , they would have made it more difficult to remove.

[albedoshader]

@kindbudkudos: "dipshit mr know it all", that's all you have as an answer? That's impressive, sir.

[kindbudkudos]

@albedoshader i call bull shit. it doesnt move to slowly. no one cares to look long enought to find out dipshit mr know it all

[ibajem]

i abide to electromagnetism winding the celestial gears (on a macroscopic scale aswell, obviously) much more than gravity, i think it's overlooked because it's so damn everywhere, we always do that as humans

90% of the matter in the cosmos is in the plasma state

there were some interesting investigations tackled by afven and birkeland that basically made the platform required to try/false nuclear star theory, in the name of (a) model(s) that could account for a few anomolies in our own sun

[ibajem]

@albedoshader

perfect, i agree with everything you said and prefer your wording and general gist more than my own

all i want to stress is that there isn't room for new models, there is an infitinity of functional models we collide into perdiodically and we still have no clue if we're right about the way stars exert or interact with energy and we dont make much of facts such as the moon becoming enveloped in an electric sheet of dust once every month because of our own Earth's magnetotail

[albedoshader]

@albedoshader: The apparent magnitude of Pluto was 15 mag. That's roughly 4000 times darker than the faintest star the naked eye can see.

There was no way the Sumerians could know the outer planets.

Whatever Sitchin has written about Sumerian knowledge of our solar system is nonsense. Sitchin is neither a Sumerologist nor an Orientalist or an Assyrologist. He's a Journalist. And he doesn't have a clue about how to translate any of those cuneiforms properly, if at all.

[albedoshader]

@albedoshader: Neptune was hypothesized because of pertubation calculations by Le Verrier and Adams and later discovered by Galle in 1846. Still there were som eirregularities in the orbit of Uranus. And later, in 1930 Tombaugh discovered a object that was later named Pluto.

Uranus was dicovered with a 6" diam. and f=6 ft reflective telescope. Neptune with a 9" f=~14 ft refractor, as star with 8 mag. That's ~6 times darker than visible to the naked eye. Tombaugh had a 13" astrograph.

[albedoshader]

@albedoshader: The only "planets" they knew were the inner planets and Jupiter and Saturn. Uranus is visible if you know beforehand exactly where you have to look, but only on exceptionally clear nights with few light pollution. The Sumerians didn't know Uranus for simple reasons. It's very faint and it moves too slowly over the sky to be detected as a planet by the naked eye (cataloged as star in 1690, Herschel found it was a planet in 1781). It is certain they knew neither Neptune nor Pluto.

[albedoshader]

@albedoshader: There is no quarantine. String theory has  a "coolness factor", propagated by string theorists . Yet there are many other directions, like twistor theory etc., that are examined and worked on by a great many of physicists. Most people might not read about them but they do exist nonetheless. There's no cosmology-conspiracy.

The Sumerians thought the earth was flat (a sea with a mountain in the middle) with a dome-like firmament (3 heavenly domes) on it and 3 underworlds below.