- Thank you received: 0
My pareidolia knows no bounds.
10 years 10 months ago #22026
by rderosa
Replied by rderosa on topic Reply from Richard DeRosa
From the lawsuit:
Petitioner's Writ of Mandamus R. Joseph, Ph.D.
9. Instead of investigating or taking close up and microscopic photos, NASA and its rover team dismissed the structure identi#64257;ed as Sol 3540, as a rock or a meteor which somehow just mysteriously appeared in front of the rover. NASAs explanation is bizarre, absurd, ignorant, and little more than magical thinking. A rock or a meteor does not grow in size. A rock is unable to move upon its own volition. A meteor would have shattered upon striking the Martian surface and at a minimum there would be evidence of impact and a debris #64257;eld. There is no such evidence. Even if a bowl-shaped rock had somehow became dislodged from another location there would be some evidence on the ground of its acceleration and deceleration including displacement of other rocks and stones. There is none. Further, in the NASA press release it was admitted, without explanation, that the structure had "too much sulfur, magnesium and manganese and thus could not be a meteor or a Martian rock. Yet, NASA insists the structure is a rock or a meteor, a explanation which is preposterous, absurd and ridiculous. The description of this structure as a rock or meteor, coupled with the inexplicable failure to take close-up and microscopic photos and refusal to make high resolution photos available, raises the specter of a purposeful attempt to deceive the public and scienti#64257;c community so that administrators at NASA can continue gutting planetary exploration programs and diverting funds to private corporate interests without opposition. The only other explanation is that NASAs rover team is outrageously negligent, obscenely incompetent, shockingly ignorant about basic biology, and prone to magical thinking.
10. NASAs refusal and the failure to conduct a thorough investigation, even before being contacted by this Petitioner, is inexplicable, a dereliction of duty, and completely contrary to NASAs mission as authorized by the U.S. Congress, and contrary to NASAs stated mission, and the mission of its billion dollar Mars rovers whose explicit purpose is science, exploration, and scienti#64257;c investigation. NASA has a duty and an obligation to the public, to the scienti#64257;c community, and to this Petitioner to throughly investigate this structure identi#64257;ed as Sol 3540.
11. Bolden and 10 other NASA administrators at NASA headquarters as well as the rover project director John Callas, have been contacted in writing and supplied pictorial evidence, a link to the online report by this Petitioner, and they received speci#64257;c demands outlining exactly what investigative actions must be taken. Emails were sent to: charles.bolden@nasa.gov, John.c.brasunas@nasa.gov, max.bernstein@nasa.gov, barry.geldzahler@nasa.gov, jonathan.rall@nasa.gov, jlcallas@pasadena.edu, leonard.dudzinski@nasa.gov, kelly.e.fast@nasa.gov, james.l.green@nasa.gov, jeffrey.n.grossman@nasa.gov, Michael.h.new@nasa.gov, heather.d.smith@nasa.gov. Petitioner has also contacted Steven Squyres, NASA Mars Exploration Rover Lead Scientist, 2 times by phone (607-255-3505) and several times by email (Squyre@astro.cornell.edu), all of which Squyres ignored. All those at NASA with the power or the authority to scienti#64257;cally examine this structure by taking close-up and microscopic photos from various angles, have refused to do so despite the fact that the rover has the technological capabilities to easily perform these duties and despite the fact that NASA admits this structure is unlike anything we have seen before...We are totally confused.
12.Petitioner has speci#64257;cally requested and has demanded in writing the following of NASA, NASAs chief administrator Bolden, and NASAs rover team:
A) take 100 high resolution close-up in-focus photos of the specimen identi#64257;ed in Sol 3540, at various angles, from all sides, and from above down into the "bowl" of the specimen, and under appropriate lighting conditions which minimize glare.
Take a minimum of 24 microscopic in-focus images of the exterior, lip, walls, and interior of the specimen under appropriate lighting conditions.
C) NASA, and the rover team must make public and supply Petitioner with all high resolution photos and images of that specimen as demanded in A and B.
www.scribd.com/doc/203107954/NASA-Lawsuit-Filing
rd
Petitioner's Writ of Mandamus R. Joseph, Ph.D.
9. Instead of investigating or taking close up and microscopic photos, NASA and its rover team dismissed the structure identi#64257;ed as Sol 3540, as a rock or a meteor which somehow just mysteriously appeared in front of the rover. NASAs explanation is bizarre, absurd, ignorant, and little more than magical thinking. A rock or a meteor does not grow in size. A rock is unable to move upon its own volition. A meteor would have shattered upon striking the Martian surface and at a minimum there would be evidence of impact and a debris #64257;eld. There is no such evidence. Even if a bowl-shaped rock had somehow became dislodged from another location there would be some evidence on the ground of its acceleration and deceleration including displacement of other rocks and stones. There is none. Further, in the NASA press release it was admitted, without explanation, that the structure had "too much sulfur, magnesium and manganese and thus could not be a meteor or a Martian rock. Yet, NASA insists the structure is a rock or a meteor, a explanation which is preposterous, absurd and ridiculous. The description of this structure as a rock or meteor, coupled with the inexplicable failure to take close-up and microscopic photos and refusal to make high resolution photos available, raises the specter of a purposeful attempt to deceive the public and scienti#64257;c community so that administrators at NASA can continue gutting planetary exploration programs and diverting funds to private corporate interests without opposition. The only other explanation is that NASAs rover team is outrageously negligent, obscenely incompetent, shockingly ignorant about basic biology, and prone to magical thinking.
10. NASAs refusal and the failure to conduct a thorough investigation, even before being contacted by this Petitioner, is inexplicable, a dereliction of duty, and completely contrary to NASAs mission as authorized by the U.S. Congress, and contrary to NASAs stated mission, and the mission of its billion dollar Mars rovers whose explicit purpose is science, exploration, and scienti#64257;c investigation. NASA has a duty and an obligation to the public, to the scienti#64257;c community, and to this Petitioner to throughly investigate this structure identi#64257;ed as Sol 3540.
11. Bolden and 10 other NASA administrators at NASA headquarters as well as the rover project director John Callas, have been contacted in writing and supplied pictorial evidence, a link to the online report by this Petitioner, and they received speci#64257;c demands outlining exactly what investigative actions must be taken. Emails were sent to: charles.bolden@nasa.gov, John.c.brasunas@nasa.gov, max.bernstein@nasa.gov, barry.geldzahler@nasa.gov, jonathan.rall@nasa.gov, jlcallas@pasadena.edu, leonard.dudzinski@nasa.gov, kelly.e.fast@nasa.gov, james.l.green@nasa.gov, jeffrey.n.grossman@nasa.gov, Michael.h.new@nasa.gov, heather.d.smith@nasa.gov. Petitioner has also contacted Steven Squyres, NASA Mars Exploration Rover Lead Scientist, 2 times by phone (607-255-3505) and several times by email (Squyre@astro.cornell.edu), all of which Squyres ignored. All those at NASA with the power or the authority to scienti#64257;cally examine this structure by taking close-up and microscopic photos from various angles, have refused to do so despite the fact that the rover has the technological capabilities to easily perform these duties and despite the fact that NASA admits this structure is unlike anything we have seen before...We are totally confused.
12.Petitioner has speci#64257;cally requested and has demanded in writing the following of NASA, NASAs chief administrator Bolden, and NASAs rover team:
A) take 100 high resolution close-up in-focus photos of the specimen identi#64257;ed in Sol 3540, at various angles, from all sides, and from above down into the "bowl" of the specimen, and under appropriate lighting conditions which minimize glare.
Take a minimum of 24 microscopic in-focus images of the exterior, lip, walls, and interior of the specimen under appropriate lighting conditions.C) NASA, and the rover team must make public and supply Petitioner with all high resolution photos and images of that specimen as demanded in A and B.
www.scribd.com/doc/203107954/NASA-Lawsuit-Filing
rd
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Marsevidence01
-
- Offline
- Elite Member
-
10 years 10 months ago #21975
by rderosa
Replied by rderosa on topic Reply from Richard DeRosa
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Marsevidence01</i>
<br />Is Humanity NOW really prepared to deal with this reality?
From what I have seen thus far in the images, I'm sadden to say, I'm not confident it could.
Malcolm Scott
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The reason why I posted the excerpt from the law suit is because the scientist laid out his reasoning. I've heard that before here on this website years ago.
Do I believe in this big conspiracy, maybe, maybe not, but the reasoning is somewhat compelling, I have to admit. It always comes back to the $$$
Having said that though, I have not seen anything to make me think it's true. When I look at the Mars landscape, I see a vast wasteland, rich in contrast and the exact kind of spacial resolution that lends itself to pareidolic images.
Not to mention the fact that there's a huge difference between mushrooms (apothecium, whatever) and Martian Art!! [}
]
But I will grant you this much Malcolm. I will be watching this case with interest. I think it's beautiful that this scientist is putting the onus on them to prove to us it isn't life.
rd
<br />Is Humanity NOW really prepared to deal with this reality?
From what I have seen thus far in the images, I'm sadden to say, I'm not confident it could.
Malcolm Scott
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The reason why I posted the excerpt from the law suit is because the scientist laid out his reasoning. I've heard that before here on this website years ago.
Do I believe in this big conspiracy, maybe, maybe not, but the reasoning is somewhat compelling, I have to admit. It always comes back to the $$$
Having said that though, I have not seen anything to make me think it's true. When I look at the Mars landscape, I see a vast wasteland, rich in contrast and the exact kind of spacial resolution that lends itself to pareidolic images.
Not to mention the fact that there's a huge difference between mushrooms (apothecium, whatever) and Martian Art!! [}
]But I will grant you this much Malcolm. I will be watching this case with interest. I think it's beautiful that this scientist is putting the onus on them to prove to us it isn't life.
rd
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Larry Burford
-
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
- Larry Burford
-
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
Time to create page: 0.533 seconds