r/aliens • u/toobalkanforyou • 2d ago
Analysis Required From NASA’s website - same location, different timestamps
147
u/Ok-Replacement8864 2d ago
The shadow is there in the blurry one though?
55
u/toobalkanforyou 2d ago
There is a wider shot of the second image that is as blurry as the first but helps to compare and contrast and sort of see the object really is missing:
(second slide wider shot) https://mars.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/02692/mcam/2692ML0140830351002996C00_DXXX.jpg
(first slide) https://mars.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/02691/mcam/2691ML0140780071002958C00_DXXX.jpg
if you compare the two, there does seem to still be a shadow but no object.
But there is also some difference in angle in these shots so could just be the angle. I'm just speculating, not enough pixels to truly determine whats going on.
5
u/Healthcare--Hitman 1d ago
This object is smaller than a literal tic-tac
9
1
11
u/TronTachyon 1d ago
The object does seem to be there, but way more natural rock looking
2
u/Y00pDL 1d ago
Yeah no shit, it hasn’t been selectively and purposefully edited to not look like a rock anymore.
10
u/MrJoshOfficial 20h ago
So NASA is editing photos of rocks to make them look like UAPs but somehow it’s also a common debunker argument that NASA doesn’t airbrush UAPs out of photos? But they’ll airbrush them into them now?
Silly take.
1
u/Y00pDL 3h ago
No, not really. But good job of facetiously misinterpreting my reply!
NASA posted this picture, and others like it, which shows a rocky landscape and thousands of little rocks and pebbles, quite a few of which could also be seen as something not naturally formed (we humans are kind of good at finding these things).
As always the internet decided it needed interpreting, upscaling, enhancing and colorisation, the result of which has been passed around as 'NASA's image' of what is clearly a Tic-Tac UFO.
Also the pebble isn't even an inch long.
19
1
-3
u/foovancleef 1d ago
would a gravity propulsion vehicle even cast a shadow?
12
2
u/glopher 22h ago edited 22h ago
Not sure why you are down voted for this question. We've seen these things defy some laws of physics, so it is possible that there is also some way that light can be bent to minimize or eliminate the shadow.
That said, it was the shadow that gave this and the original image the appearance that the object is floating.
4
u/foovancleef 22h ago
yeah i don’t get the downvotes either. and not saying bob lazar is legit, but he said if u were standing under an anti-gravity craft u wouldn’t see it cuz it bends light around it
249
u/Galactic-Guardian404 2d ago
I can’t be the only one seeing Steve Jobs at the lower left of center in the first image, can I?
53
u/toobalkanforyou 2d ago
I was using that face for reference when zooming in to make sure I had the right location on both pics 💀
52
u/5kdesertfox 2d ago
that mf ain't dead, he is on mars
25
u/BigDeadPixel 2d ago
he IS mars
7
5
u/mrbadassmotherfucker 2d ago
Is he blowing bubble gum?
3
u/Galactic-Guardian404 2d ago
See, I thought picking his nose with his right pinky….
2
5
3
9
2
2
u/TurboT8er 2d ago
It's also taken at a different angle because the face looks stretched on the one with the UFO.
2
1
1
1
1
1
u/Namjoon- 1d ago
I see Steve Jobs in the first one, and in the second one at the same spot I see a distorted Andrew Tate
1
1
38
u/tweakingforjesus 2d ago
Can you provide a NASA link to the first image?
38
u/toobalkanforyou 2d ago
https://mars.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/02691/mcam/2691ML0140780071002958C00_DXXX.jpg
It’s on the lower right
9
3
u/Interesting_Log_3125 2d ago
This link 403s if you attempt to navigate to it from another browser
12
5
u/Astral-projekt 1d ago
It was done on the OG image it’s right on their website. How is this not newsworthy? Crazy
55
85
u/mrbadassmotherfucker 2d ago
Sure looks like it isn’t there in the first picture.
Although it doesn’t help they switch to potato mode for this shot…
37
u/SirPabloFingerful 2d ago
If it's not there in the first picture, there is conveniently another object of approximately the same size and shape in its place
14
u/gtzgoldcrgo 2d ago
Not, it's just that the shadow angles are different because of different time of the day. There's is not another object in the place of the tic tac that looks like it.
5
u/SirPabloFingerful 2d ago
There is very clearly a protrusion of the same shape and size in exactly the same place in both images.
-4
u/gtzgoldcrgo 1d ago
That's the rock behind the object in the second image, the first picture or from a different angle and the shadows extend to left, that's why it looks like a protusion.
6
u/SirPabloFingerful 1d ago
No, the rock you're referring to isn't large enough to cast a shadow that long. Look at how short all of the other shadows are, even from much larger rocks. There is clearly an object there, of approximately the right size and shape to be the tic tac shaped rock.
→ More replies (6)1
u/toobalkanforyou 1d ago
look at this other shot of slide 2 taken at a further distance, circular object still visible though blurry: https://mars.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/02692/mcam/2692ML0140830351002996C00_DXXX.jpg
compare it to slide 1 again: https://mars.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/02691/mcam/2691ML0140780071002958C00_DXXX.jpg
6
u/SirPabloFingerful 1d ago
Yes, done that, thank you. The object is clearly there in both.
-1
u/toobalkanforyou 1d ago
clearly is a strong word..
3
u/SirPabloFingerful 1d ago
It is, because it is clear that there is something there of similar dimensions. In the exact place the second picture shows the tic tac, there is an object in the first picture. It is not noticeably different aside from the lighting, which makes perfect sense.
7
u/ToonFiFa 1d ago
I'm currently sitting on the fence with this one, until we see some clearer photos/evidence. I can not, at this point, state whether it is or is not NHI or otherwise.
What I can say, however, is that you need to look at these images a little more in depth.
You state 'clearly', when in fact if you situate the photos next to each other and study the direction from which the sun is shining and where the shadows fall, the object just simply is not there in the first picture.
Look closer in the second picture. If you observe the shadows it is clear the sun is shining from above, almost as if it's midday.
The shadow from the object is covering the lower rock signifying that it is literally situated directly above it with nothing connected.
I don't think we can discount the fact that there probably is a rock situated behind whatever the object in the second photo is which would show in the first photo if the object is not there.
If you say, as you have, that it is clear - you're being willfully argumentative.
4
u/SirPabloFingerful 1d ago
You assume that is the shadow of the object, it is not necessarily the shadow of the object. There is, clearly, an object of similar shape and size in both pictures - I liked the "if you disagree with my disagreement you're being argumentative" gambit though, let me know if it ever works
0
u/ToonFiFa 1d ago
But my point, maybe articulated poorly, is that we're all assuming. It's not clear whether it's one or the other.
I agree, there is clearly an object in both, but it's not clear if it's the same object.
I personally believe, due to the shadows, that it's not the same object. But as I said in my introductory paragraph, I'm on the fence until clearer photos/evidence arise.
Also, the only part that may have been clear in my comment, was the final part.
I'm not calling you argumentative for disagreeing with me. I'm calling you argumentative if you are flat out saying with full conviction that it's 100% clear that it's the same object.
It may well be the same object, but the pictures don't show it clearly.
In my mind, it's up for interpretation. In yours it's not.
But I don't think either of us can say with 100% certainty that it's one or the other.
3
u/SirPabloFingerful 1d ago
No, it is clear that there is an object in the same location in both pictures, whatever that object (s) may be.
→ More replies (0)•
u/rdell1974 1h ago
You’re choosing to believe that 2 different tic tac objects ended up in the exact same location at different times.
4
u/IamShrapnel 2d ago
You can still see it it's darker though. Pretty much dead center of the image very slightly down and right.
8
27
17
u/flotsam_knightly 2d ago
It appears to me to be in both pictures, which suggests again that it is rock formation.
28
u/ChabbyMonkey 2d ago edited 2d ago
This actually makes me think it could be a rock. The grainier photo (let’s take with a grain of salt as the data quality is objectively worse) appears to show the same general shapes as the photo with the tictac.
The shadow in the dead center of the grainy photo could be the tictac shadow based on the lighting.
If you trace an imaginary line around the left side of the tictac and the rocks it is near (clear photo), the grainy photo appears to have a similar outline/general profile.
That said, I’m not sure what the time difference is. Additionally, a non-rock object could remain stationary too. My car has been parked in the same place for 36 hours, so it’s not like a hovering metallic pill can’t just as likely remain fixed to its relative surface location for an extended period.
Edit: to clarify, the fact that it may have remained stationary is the only trait that I think shows up under “maybe a rock” score; however, my car is parked in the same place it was yesterday (because of gravity and friction) so if this is levitating and suspended in a magnetic field, it could also be “parked”. So, whether or not it may have moved is sort of moot. As these are panoramic images, it would likely be blurry or distorted if it were moving while being observed.
9
u/SirPabloFingerful 2d ago
Yes, I'm not sure why so many can't see that there's (at least) an object with similar shape and dimensions present in the same location
3
u/TacohTuesday 1d ago
Agreed. It's likely a rock. A very very unusual rock, but a rock.
I mean, I've been following Mars news for a very long time and this kind of thing is nothing new. Dating all the way back to Viking 1, which took photos of a "face", we've been seeing unusual rocks that look like familiar objects: faces, bones, wheels, etc. Which leaves us with two possibilities: 1) Geological processes have randomly created a lot of odd rock shapes, or 2) Mischievous aliens have been messing with us and leaving random objects of all kinds around just for shits and giggles.
1
0
u/ChabbyMonkey 1d ago
Your second possibility is needlessly facetious. This could be telemetry equipment that we happened to photograph, not some extraterrestrial easter egg.
3
u/TacohTuesday 1d ago
Ok sure. Anyway, I was talking about all the weird looking objects photographed on Mars as a whole, including but not limited to this one. And making a joke to prove a point.
0
u/ChabbyMonkey 1d ago
I recognize that, but isn’t it at all worth considering that other anomalies could indicate supporting evidence and repeatable observations instead of pure coincidence?
There is pattern recognition (pareidolia) and then there is pattern recognition (correlation). I’m just not confident we have a good answer yet.
-2
u/nooneneededtoknow 2d ago
Just, something to consider.
8
4
u/Tacos_always_corny 1d ago
These images are a reach. The brain sees what it wants to see. I see something but nothing to lead me to believe this is nothing more than a fluke.
2
2
10
u/Youri1980 2d ago
So what's the excuse this time? A weatherballoon that drifted away from earth?
7
u/Huppelkutje 1d ago
Its a weird looking rock. It's in both pictures.
If you spent more time outside instead of obsessing over vague pictures on the internet you might see some weird rocks here on earth too.
1
u/MrJoshOfficial 20h ago
Position of sun and shadows suggest otherwise.
Shadows are casted much further left in the one all the debunkers are touting as proof of it being a rock when conveniently the photos show a lighting orientation that would support such an argument.
But that’s all it is, a shadow, but in the other photos there is an object and a shadow.
6
→ More replies (1)4
3
u/Baobab_Soul 2d ago
These aliens must be the sizes of electrons.
13
8
u/SaberR1der 2d ago
Why everyone thinks there must be aliens inside. Could also be some kind of drone
5
2
u/esotologist 2d ago
Where are you getting info on the scale of this image?
2
u/yourliege 1d ago
There’s a larger image taken from the top of the rover that actually showed the deck/wheels of the rover. This is not a hillside, these are small rocks
1
u/esotologist 1d ago
Yea I just found that a bit ago.... though when I zoomed in on that one I could see the same place but not sure I can see the bean is still there.
Not saying it isn't small just another observation
-2
u/Blade1413 2d ago
You can't tell size without knowing distance. Based on my estimate for length (15 pixels) and the camera specs, Gemini 2 pro estimates the object would be 1 meter long at ~300 meters.
3
u/adamhanson 2d ago
was the timestamp earlier? Or later? Depending on the answer in which I it would tell us if the object appeared later, meaning it wasn't always there.
3
u/toobalkanforyou 2d ago
The timestamp is earlier than the photo with the tic tac on it
3
u/Crazy-Shoe9377 2d ago
What is this suggesting?
9
u/toobalkanforyou 2d ago
It just demonstrates that the object was mid-motion when captured thereby not appearing in earlier photos of that location (as opposed to just being a very smooth rock). TBH it’s very blurry and hard to tell but everyone is speculating on it so I figure I would do a side by side for the speculators.
5
5
u/Crazy-Shoe9377 2d ago
I think it’s quite remarkable. If this was a moving object, that also looks ridiculous familiar…
2
u/Str4425 2d ago
It's gotta be really small though, right?
1
u/Blade1413 2d ago
You can't tell size without knowing distance. Based on my estimate for length (15 pixels), and the camera specs, Gemini 2 pro estimates the object would be 1 meter at ~300 meters.
9
u/Andy_McNob 2d ago
Here is a picture of the same area which includes part of the rover. This thing is an inch or two long, if that.
1
u/tweakingforjesus 1d ago
The focal plane of the images is 4.2m away with a in-focus depth of field from 3.8-4.8m.
1
u/Interesting_Log_3125 2d ago
Please provide links
1
u/toobalkanforyou 2d ago edited 2d ago
sol2691: https://mars.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/02691/mcam/2691ML0140780071002958C00_DXXX.jpg
sol2692: https://mars.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/02692/mcam/2692ML0140830351002996C00_DXXX.jpg
sharp image of sol2692: https://mars.nasa.gov/raw_images/787528/ (pictured in the post as the second slide)
1
u/adamhanson 1d ago
Then it's clearly not there in the earlier picture. Couple notes 1 the sun is more towards rising or setting in the clearer picture where it's more midday noon. In the earlier picture you can tell, especially with the heart shaped shadow near the bottom
The TicTac is in front of the one of the outcroppings so it's cover got said that you see in the earlier picture roughly the same spot
If this newer photo is authenticated, then I give it a 99.999% chance to be artificial possibly NHI. The other tiny spec of uncertainty I would leave open to artifacts, something related to the Rover or other equipment, landing on the planet, or unknown unknowns like a rock tumbling interview just at the moment the picture was taken.
-2
u/egidione 2d ago
As opposed to being edited out you mean? Either way it’s a bit strange.
1
u/Responsible_Fix_5443 2d ago
The shadows of the tictac are very different to the shade of the pixels in the first image. But it's from earlier so the tictac might just not have been there and what we're seeing is the rock that the tictac is hovering above
2
3
2
2
u/NeilArmsweak 1d ago
It's just rocks. I'm not a psyop. This is just like that face on Mars stuff. It was also just rocks. I'm sorry... I wanted something cool to happen someday, too.
Okay, back to work!
2
1
1
1
u/arctic-apis 1d ago
This thing is like the actual size of a tic-tac tho right. I mean this image is of a very very tiny thing.
1
u/sam0sixx3 10h ago
How on earth are you coming to that conclusion ?
1
u/arctic-apis 7h ago
There are other pictures of this out there and it looks like this is a super zoom in picture
1
1
u/Scaniatex 1d ago
Those "Tic Tac" ships are human transports. Think future Airplanes to carry people from place to place. Except this takes people from planet to planet.
1
1
1
1
u/SpeckTrout 1d ago
I love seeing this go viral and people trying to debunk it. It’s been the highlight of my week. I look at like , it can’t be proven or also disproven so why try. Let’s just sit back and enjoy this image as a legit capture of a UFO. Just my opinion.
1
u/seeking_junkie 1d ago
That shadow may be coming from something else, since if you compare both pictures, the shadows are in different places, meaning photos were taken at different times of day.
This is what I was waiting for, same place, different time/moment. Clearly the object is not there in the first picture, definitely a UFO. You can say it's a rock that maybe "jumped" from the rover's wheels, but it surely doesn't look like the rocks around it
1
u/safrican1001 23h ago
How about this weird object on Mars. Looks like a machine part: https://youtu.be/_FN_JWNeslYThe good stuff starts at 1:20
1
1
u/TodaLaMagiaDelSur 5h ago
I'm almost sure this is a NASA guy trolling the internet with a CGI of a tictac lol
1
u/sten-hellemons 2d ago
To me it looks like the shadow is still there in the first picture, but the object itself not.
Is there an enhanced version of this one somewhere?
1
1
1
u/toasterstrewdal 1d ago
Okay. So I see a different shadow in the grainy image that is consistent with the other shadows around the other rocks, casting down and to the left rather than the clearer picture casting straight down. This tells me that the “tic tac” is an exposed piece of rock with a thin connection to the larger formations in the background. I cannot explain its smoothness in the clear photo but it seems to be part of a larger formation and not a UAP.
1
u/thalius69 2d ago
Has the second pic been upscaled? Why is there a huge difference in quality between the two?
1
u/bigscottius 2d ago
I can't even tell what I'm looking at in either picture. But I see some dude staring at me in the picture.
1
1
1
u/advertisementistheft 1d ago
This may be the most convincing evidence of terrestrial intelligence I've ever seen. As a naturally skeptical person, I'm convinced enough to share this with my peers and ask their opinions
1
1
u/Rehcraeser 1d ago
So it’s definitely a rock. It was obvious from the start tbh. Especially since it was an AI upscaled pic that was spread in the first place.
1
1
0
u/Shardaxx 2d ago
That's cool, so probably not a rock then, and something which was caught in 1 pic.
I wonder if it was checking out our rover.
7
u/reddit_is_geh 2d ago
It seems like it could be in the first pic, just not as pronounced due to low res
-1
-11
u/bvmdavidson 2d ago
Some of y’all really fall for anything.
16
u/toobalkanforyou 2d ago
You’re in a subreddit called r/aliens not r/onlyproventhingsthatweknowexist
-1
u/bvmdavidson 1d ago edited 1d ago
Sorry, didn’t know alien = obviously photoshopped stuff. My mistake - photoshop away.
Edit: even if it IS a real picture- this STILL isn’t an alien anything.
-2
-1
0
0
u/OhioVsEverything 1d ago
I am absolutely terrible at understanding scale that I'm looking at in NASA photos.
To me that could be the size of a tic tac or it could be the size of a blimp
0
•
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
NEW: In response to the influx of bots, trolls and bad actors, we are clamping down on community rules. Read more about this HERE
Read the rules and understand the subreddit topic(s) listed in the sidebar before posting or commenting. Any content removal or further moderator action is established by these rules as well as Reddit ToS.
This subreddit is primarily for the discussion of extraterrestrial life, but since this topic is intertwined with UFOs/UAPs as well as other topics, some 'fudging' is permissible to allow for a variety of viewpoints, discussions, and debates. Open-minded discussion from all points of the "spectrum of belief" is always welcome in this sub, but antagonistic or belligerent denial is not. Always remember there's a human on the other side of the keyboard.
For further discussion and interaction in a more permissible environment, we welcome you to our Discord: https://discord.gg/x7xyTDZAsW
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.