TITHONIA CIVILIZATION EVIDENCE
Report #081
January 17, 2005
The above discovery site, to the best of my knowledge, was first reported by Stewart C. Best with the primary piece of evidence in his reporting being what Best identifies as a "mining or manufacturing" facility pointed out with the yellow arrow in the above first image providing a wider area view of the site. Best also refers to this site as "Tithonia City" and "The case for absolute artificiality" as well as "Absolute proof of alien artificiality on Mars." His reporting can be found at the links below.
http://www.truinsight.com/tithonia_citythe_case_for_absolu.htm
http://www.truinsight.com/absolute_proof_of_alien_artifici.htm
http://www.truinsight.com/official_press_release.htm
Best did a lot of good analytical visual work supporting this one piece of Mars evidence he found and he apparently promoted it for commercial purposes as well. Apparently, because of his promotion, his presentation of this site has been picked up by other Internet presence's and has achieved increased exposure. This has in turn resulted in a number of viewers asking me via e-mail what I thought of this evidence. I try to answer truthfully but to do so always requires a lot of detailed and time consuming but still inadequate explanations. Therefore, I've finally decided cover the subject in this report.
Follow-up investigation that stymied many viewers resulting in e-mails to me was the fact that Best was a little reluctant in his main reporting at the first two links above to readily identify the original official MGS MOC M02-01270 image up front that he drew his evidence from. This may have been because he may have been trying to protect his being able to capitalize on this one discovery of his commercially? In any case, as many of you know, this is the opposite of how my reporting works where I not only link to the official documentation for confirmation and verification of the evidence purposes, I encourage it.
However, this did not present a problem for me because I had also discovered this site earlier in midyear 2000 but held off and debated with myself reporting on it for two reasons. First, this evidence is deep down in the far west end of the great deep rift system on Mars in an area known as Tithonium Chasma and because of that it is further from the camera with a more distant view. This in turn normally hurts resolution a little. Added to that is that this strip and its contents are the recipient of considerable image tampering including artificially degrading resolution and pixelation problems as well as direct terrain carpeting applications. All this makes the view of the evidence difficult relative to some other better sites I've reported on. Second, although some of this evidence is fairly plain to me, it was my opinion, especially in the first years of my involvement in this work, that too many would regard it as marginal and have trouble recognizing it.
So I kept putting it aside debating reporting on it and then Best found it and reported on it putting an end (I thought) to any involvement in it by me. The discovery is legitimate and Best's work on it was good enough that I didn't want to rain on his parade but there were also some technical problems with his development of the evidence that I would have had to comment on to. Let me say that I can confirm that this evidence is real in the official science data and that it does appear to in general represent civilization evidence. Therefore, I support Stewart Best's basic conclusions in this regard. My caution is only in some technical details as you will see below.
The above second 4-way split screen image demonstrates what I want to caution viewers about when examining Best's visual work and that goes for a considerable amount of the official MOC science data as well. As you will see if you go and visit Best's work and compare to the imaging here, I've duplicated fairly closely Best's imaging of the "mining or manufacturing" facility (pointed out with yellow arrows) in the upper left and right images at 300% and 400% zoom respectively. Note how objects are smooth, rounded and merged in the upper two images. Although it is perhaps a more pleasing and convincing view to draw conclusions of civilization evidence from, the view is not technically correct and is heavily influenced by false but unintentional artificial visual distortion of the evidence.
The view in the lower left and right images is the real view as seen in the GIF image and more faithful to the original GIF science data image content. The demonstrated false smoothing, rounding, and merging effect can be produced several ways. Some of the MOC imaging has traps or bombs in them awaiting the unwary. When you save the image, it automatically converts to and produces this effect. Very large scale evidence may not be significantly impacted, except under very close zoom inspection, but original very small evidence, such as that in this image, is severely impacted and artificially altered.
However, because the evidence is so tiny in the official view to start with, it is very easy to miss that this has happened to the evidence and one goes on inadvertently assuming that the scene is still original when it is not and starts working from this flawed base material not realizing that everything then produced from it will be equally flawed. This effect can also be set off by changing any of the original parameters of the image after it is saved as one is working with it. This same effect can also be produced by the use of filters and that is why I never use them at all in my imaging work.
In the above second image, note how Best's main building pointed out with my yellow arrow is not much impacted by the merging effect because of its pronounced shape and slightly larger size but the "ramp" out in front of it pointed out by Best has been forced by the merging effect into a continuous smooth narrow appearing object whereas the image more faithful to the original evidence "suggests" that this tiny scale evidence may be a series of individual light colored objects in a line. Now I'm not saying that this is not a ramp or disagreeing with Best's analysis. What I am saying is that the evidence more faithful to the original GIF image makes this particular evidence too inconclusive to extrapolate from as to it being a smooth ramp as it appears in Best's imaging.
The above third 2-way split screen image is another example of evidence from the same strip but not reported on by Best. It demonstrates the same merging effect on even larger evidence in the left split screen while the view on the right faithful to the original official GIF image demonstrates the geometric shape of many various height tall rectilinear structures. Even in the clearer and more correct right view, they are all messed up because of the various image tampering techniques like degraded resolution, pixelation at official level, and over saturation with artificially induced light color. Even so, if you look close, you can still pick out many tall upright geometric structure outlines very suggestive of buildings in this mess. However, on the left, you can clearly see how this smoothing, rounding, merging process very effectively obscures the geometric evidence, essentially destroying it visually.
It takes considerable care and a fairly good trained eye to pick out the geometric evidence. It is clear to me but probably not to many of you. You can then perhaps appreciate why I vacillated on reporting on this evidence when stronger evidence was available as per some of my reports both before and after Best reported on this particular discovery. Now days, even though it is still recorded in my head as increased experience, I routinely pass up reporting on evidence like the above because I feel that too many will see it as marginal. Even now, I would not be reporting on it if it were not for my having to generate involved and time consuming e-mail responses to those interested in this evidence.
As an aside and on the chance that you may have come to recognize this merge effect tampering technique and realize how easy it is to hide geometric structure evidence as in the second and third side-by-side image comparisons, it might be that some of you may then be able to take the next step and make the same connection with the above fourth image scene from the M00-01661 image strip just picked at random for this comparison. I suspect that the above light color evidence has been treated the same way at official level by the same rounding, smoothing, merging effect. This type of image tampering doesn't cover and hide civilization evidence so much as it changes its shape from individual geometric rectilinear objects and patterns into something rounded, joined, merged, and meaningless interpretation wise.
This particular illusion tactic is used very often on evidence that either is in the bottom of a crater or appears to be in a crater. The best guess is that the official explanation would be that the light colored evidence is suppose to represent old eroded CO2 ice masses down in the colder bottoms of craters and is therefore terrain natural geology, but it is not that. Although I cannot be certain, I suspect very strongly that we are looking at civilization evidence thoroughly corrupted by this merging effect and left out to break up the image tampering applications that carpet and hide just about anything real over this entire image strip.
As an example of this carpeting obfuscation technique, in the above fourth image, note that the light color evidence appears to be in a shallow sloped crater. The crater depression appearance is stronger the further away from the site the view is, as it is in the official view. However, even the terrain surrounding the light color evidence is itself image tampering application purposefully creating this illusion. This same false carpeting texture application is used extensively all over this strip along with other techniques.
I have seen many thousands of obfuscated sites very much like this in the science data and I've long suspected that I am looking at very successfully altered civilization evidence. But, you can't just claim this without something to back it up and so I haven't, at least until now just a little bit. Mostly I just ignore it as a lost cause and move on. But, this time, I thought that I might be able to utilize a discussion of Best's evidence and the insight that may be gained from that to help offer some increased insight into this particular very successful and very extensively used image tampering technique. You must decide for yourself whether this suspicion of mine has any merit or not.
On the other hand, the above fifth image from the same strip as the first through third images here demonstrates line after line and row after row of super high density geometric rectilinear forms so very suggestive of artificial structures and civilization evidence. It is very strong stuff. The problem is that it is just far too densely packed in this distant view. Because of that it is very hard to pick out individual objects in this massive very uniform density leaving only the great many long structure lines or rows to be more adequately identified.
Mr. Best also did not report on this kind of evidence so plentiful (the above is just a very small sample) in this M02-01270 image strip where darkness and image incorrect orientation obscured most of it. I'm sure he would have since his reporting was otherwise so thorough. So I can only assume that he did not do so because he just simply did not see it. If so, that is no doubt because he was examining the image after the sneaky bomb went off in it and corrupted his downloaded copy thoroughly merging and thereby hiding this kind of originally very tiny evidence from view.
As for me, I did not report on this either in the earlier days. That's because I did not think that enough viewers so fresh to this kind of evidence could have adequately recognized it for what it is and psychologically rejected it. I left this kind of evidence out of a number of my earlier reports and then much later went back and included it through revisions. After now reporting on this kind of evidence a number of times, perhaps many of your will be able to recognize it for what it is.
The bottom line is that Stewart Best did a good job of reporting on some of the very legitimate evidence that he did find. Just be aware that the rounding, smoothing, merging effect bomb can significantly effect the visuals and thereby conclusions drawn from it and caution as well as understanding what is really going on is required.
DOCUMENTATION
http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/ab1_m04/images/M0204304.html: This link carries you to the official M02-04304 science data image strip that the evidence in the first, second, third, and fifth image here are drawn from. Note that the first listed JPEG angled image has the correct orientation. Unfortunately, the second angled GIF image does not work and the third listed straight GIF image has been flipped vertically and horizontally at official level and will require flipping back to the correct orientation. Also note that my report third and fifth images here have been rotated 90º clockwise to achieve a better view of the evidence.
http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/ab1_m04/images/M0001661.html: This link carries you to the official M00-01661 science data image strip that the evidence in the report fourth image here is drawn from. Note that the first listed JPEG and second listed GIF angled images work and have the correct orientation. However, as is so often the case, the third listed GIF straight image has been flipped both vertically and horizontally at official level and will have to be flipped back to the correct orientation.
, Investigator
