MARS IMAGE TAMPERING
TECH AND ITS IMPLICATIONS

Commentary #021

March 8, 2007

 

 

In my email I at times get viewer feedback from around the world who are hopeful that the ESA imaging will perhaps be less obfuscated than for example the older MGS MOC imaging science data that my discoveries and reporting are often drawn from. This is mostly because the ESA mission is from the European space exploration effort that is suppose to be independent of NASA, JPL, etc. and the USA. Similar expectations are directed at the USA's most recent MRO imaging due to hopes based primarily on its well promoted very high resolution (HiRISE) camera technology. So I'm going to try and address some of these issues here.

Just remember that my comments here only represent this one person's opinion. Further, my comments are opinion and applicable just on some points on this subject I want to make here and are not to be confused with conclusive or comprehensive treatment. They are also not meant to be a detailed analysis of the subject matter and are far from that. Such exploration on this subject matter would take volumes of work and is something best left for others to pursue, if they are ever so inclined, and something that I have no time or inclination for attempting to pursue in detail here.

Also be forewarned that these observations and opinions on this kind of more technical subject matter may be considered too dry and tedious for some to endure long. If so, I sympathize because that is often my own reaction as I do not like to go into this subject matter and, believe it or not, avoid it when ever I can. In fact, this commentary piece is very tedious for me to create. Still, this subject is evidence too, it directly impacts the evidence record in a major way, and it is essential to understanding what is or is not on Mars. Evidential information is what this website tries to be all about so the content is never about sensationalism or entertainment. Okay, let's get on with it.

Now, in my opinion, artificial and intentional obfuscation in the satellite imaging of planet surfaces other than Earth I suspect dates back to the very beginning of Earth's space exploration efforts in the 1950s. In fact, I have shown hard evidence of its existence with respect to Mars dating back at least into the mid 1970s Viking mission data in my year 2000 Report #010 and year 2003 Report #054 samplings. This earlier form of Mars digital image tampering was done primarily as broad comprehensive blanketing application fields of semi-opaque smudge layers laid down in layers in the small image strips that were then later joined together forming larger images for display. The blanketing tampering fields from one small strip to the next were often not the same type or texture and this caused many mismatches where the tampering field edges touched each other forming sharp demarcation lines that defined the tampering field boundaries within a single larger image making their presence self evident. That's not good from the secrecy point of view.

There was then a long gap in such comprehensive imaging detailed survey work missions, at least any publicly admitted to or those reported as having succeeded. That is until the 1994 Clementine mission data for Navy Intelligence and the DOD (Department of Defense) to survey the Moon. In my opinion that Moon mission was also in part a mission to test the automated mapping (by high speed computers) to objects type image tampering that would lay the foundation obfuscation technology for later missions to Mars including those that suspiciously failed and then after that the MGS MOC mission and later successes to the present. This type of tampering consisted of spot applications mapping to offending objects and areas rather than being applied in far broader comprehensive tampering fields, thus avoiding the problems represented by the prior old Viking data.

In my opinion, the Clememtine data turned out to be a very crude messy sea of spot image tampering applications not even remotely resembling or adequately faking ground level geological appearance. Worse, a major tampering flaw was revealed as the applications failed to covertly adapt to really colossal size objects on the Moon without again bringing attention to their selves and to the object. Now the applications successfully mapped to and covered these huge objects thoroughly hiding their surfaces visually from view. However, their too tight application mapping to colossal size objects revealed the massive object's basic outlines and general shape as clearly delineated and defined from the adjacent surrounding terrain in the process. Examples of this type of inadequately blended in evidence and its obfuscation problems can best be viewed in my 2004 Report #067 and Report 068.

Some of this flawed obfuscation technology no doubt went into the later missions to Mars. I suspect that the "reported" failures of some of those missions, had something to do with those missions being reported as failures rather than exhibit such imaging flaws revealing too much evidential truth and the secrecy types having to publicly deal with such flawed data pouring back in numbers from multiple missions over their life that might have overwhelmed their ability to retroactively "fix" it fast enough. The 1992 Mars Observer mission failure that was suppose to send back similar camera survey satellite data prior to the MGS MOC mission comes to mind.

Then, even though it was launched after the successful 1996 MGS MOC mission, the 1999 Mars Polar Lander mission failure also comes to mind. I suspect that "failure" was simply because it was a lander securing more critical close up data in distances measured in feet and yards instead of hundreds of miles.

Just to demonstrate that such suspicions of official "failure" explanations just may be shared by others, including some at the highest levels, check out this 2003 Space.com article where this nation's premier NIMA spy agency (National Imagery & Mapping Agency) now renamed NGA (National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency) weighs in on this issue. Their mere presence investigating this space exploration matter outside what one would think is their normal Earth based intelligence terrain says a great deal. Further, it also suggests that one or more of their own important secret missions was onboard this Mars probe. This demonstrates in turn that, like the 1994 Clementine Navy Intelligence and Department of Defense mission, military intelligence communities have a deep not overtly apparent involvement in space exploration and in particular those involving the Moon and Mars.

Also, in carefully reading that Space.com article, you will see a brief passing reference no doubt coming from the always secrecy prone and very shut mouthed NIMA people back then observing that the now current and newest MRO mission camera systems are in fact color capable. That clearly has all kinds of implications for the current MRO data that is most definitely not being revealed to us in native color, only in black and white and retro artificially colorized images.

Obviously these NIMA military intelligence best of the best at satellite imaging experts were not happy campers back then with the official NASA/JPL/MSSS "failure" explanation as to the missing Mar Polar Lander (dare we say they may have been outright pissed?) and were inclined to break their secrecy character and spill and sprinkle around a few important beans for public consumption. No one at their covert level does this offhand without discretion. Yes, it's a clue! It's not hard to imagine someone there in this military intelligence community having a where's our mission data and don't screw with us attitude. Yet, years later, the only MRO mission images that are being released to us in the here and now are black and white images and artificially colorized images. What does this tell you?

I also suspect that the earliest 1996 MGS MOC mission more distant satellite data, although the mission now had to be reported as a success because of the public and congressional heat generated by the previous reported mission failures, was intentionally delayed for this reason in its initial public release stage. I suspect this was because they knew by sampling the earliest incoming data that it had some "flaws" where the obfuscation was inadequate and that some truth could get past their ability to retroactively fix it and so they were getting desperate to prevent it being revealed (just as I'm doing) by such a crude and I might add desperate illegal ploy.

For public consumption, the delay was presented as being because the MGS MOC camera data was being claimed as the private property of the Industrial Complex MSSS imaging subcontractor with the apparent suspicious tolerance of the JPL and NASA oversight. Who knows for sure but I suspect that, had it not been for a grass roots movement (of which I was a part drawing me into this business) to get this by law public data released, the intelligence super spook Navy Admiral at that time secretly chairing the JPL oversight committee and thereby Mars exploration would not have been as sufficiently impressed and this data too might never have been seen the light of day. So, in my perhaps not so humble opinion, they gave in, threw we dogs a bone, and gambled by releasing the MGS MOC data fixing what they could retroactively as they went.

As a brief example of the type of improved more subtle and effective 1996 MGS MOC mission image tampering in comparison to the earlier and more crude Viking and Clementine tampering, take a look at my 2001 . Pay particular attention to Images #4 and #5 in that report that are devoted to this to see how skillfully this can be done. Obviously the obfuscation technology advances and its effectiveness in this MGS MOC data and the Odyssey data that followed after it are certainly much more skillful than in the previous old crude blanketing fields of image tampering applications in the 1970s Viking data or more recent spot image tampering 1994 Clementine data. This demonstrates not only the tampering's historical presence in space exploration but also the advancement of the obfuscation processes technology coming down time to us.

However, now we come to the far better much closer resolution 2003 MER Spirit/Opportunity Rover mission data. Here the camera and the targeted objects are all at ground level and at much closer distances measured in feet and yards to targets rather than hundreds of miles above. This imaging data, at such closer distances, had to and does demonstrate much more advanced tampering technology capability that no doubt was not sufficiently present in the "failed" similar situation 1999 Mars Polar Lander.

Contrary to what one might think on surface consideration, the significant increase in camera resolution advancements represented in the Rovers imaging technology actually increases the effectiveness of the smudge image tampering applications. The very high resolution allows the automated software to graphically map all of the target environment in much more intricate and minute object detail than ever before. There is also the added benefit that added clarity also allows greater distinction as to what is a candidate for obfuscation treatment and where isn't. For example, it literally almost guarantees the elimination of geometric right angle shaped evidence so typical of civilization evidence. That's a big software programming benefit. Likewise, the smudge applications are laid down on the back of this intricate mapping meaning that the subsequent tampering applications themselves are now tighter and much more intricate.

For example, when subsequent artificial colorization of Rover imaging is officially admitted to, haven't you ever wondered how that artificial color application comes to be so intricately applied to even tiny individual rocks and their detail as well as the intricate terrain spaces in between them? This is the way that it is done via the software recognition and mapping process.

Now imagine if you were a artist working by hand and wanted to paint some tiny rock or rocks in your painting in individual colors. Because of the size scale of your tools versus the target, that would be incredibly difficult with your usual artist paint brush and physical canvass scenario. However, if you were a digital artist working in a digital canvass and, depending on the computer equipment resolution capabilities, you would just blow up the canvass and the objects in question with it, do your intricate applications in the enlarged objects, and then return them to their normal tiny size. It's an advantage of the digital age.

The basic principle is the same in this planetary digital imaging. The true camera resolution is more capable than admitted to and not even known in the not in the need to know loop science circles must less to other researchers and the public. In this super high resolution where a military intelligence satellite here on Earth is known to be able to recognize individuals or read a license plate at ground level from hundreds of miles away (400+) through a heavily occluded thick Earth atmosphere, the offending off planet scene is just blown up and obfuscation applications applied and the scene returned to normal resolution/size.

Further, the true raw data is received and "processed" in this way and then bounced back off of the Mars satellite for transmission back to Earth mimicking the raw data and received by the naive science community waiting on it for their own processing honestly thinking they are receiving the true raw data. Who's the wiser?

Alternatively, if you want to, you can of course believe that we went to the trouble in years of planning at huge taxpayer expense to send camera systems of lesser capabilities across millions of miles of space to a distant planet to obtain surface ground level detail at closer distances through thinner clearer atmospheric conditions than here on Earth and even though our space exploration is heavily staffed by military intelligence types possessing such advanced technology. Or, you might just psychologically pass off the stronger and clearly incredible evidence you see here at this website as just simply "anomalous," not worthy of further in depth evaluation, and thereby disposing of it from your awareness and consideration. You might also get rid of it in your head by labeling it as just conspiracy theory garbage. If you can do any of that, I've got a bridge to sell you and I'll make you a good price on it too.

However, the obfuscation tactics don't stop there and are far more complex and far reaching than that. Just in case your very good but not quite perfected automated obfuscation software operating via AI (artificial intelligence) equipment operating at super high speed missed a little something and to make sure that any such minor evidence mistakes or truths are difficult to recognize and detect, you withdraw the scene to a bit more distant resolution that tends to blur and merge objects together. After all, no one is going to know the difference unless they are a true trusted inner circle insider and know for certain and conclusively the true camera resolution beyond that scientifically or publicly (two different standards) admitted to.

But, it still doesn't stop there. As additional insurance, such as in the case of the closer Rover imaging, you make what you've labeled as the raw data publicly released in the most commonly available severely compressed .JPEG format that further substantially reduces image detail under the perfectly logical and reasonable excuse of saving digital Internet display space. The compression detail reduction is so great that compression artifacts can even be readily seen by the eye right in the small display thumbnail images. This very high compression effectively prevents these images from being zoomed in on to any significant degree for closer examination of individual object detail within them.

Further, just in case someone might get suspicious of something poorly seen in an image and might go to the trouble of obtaining the less commonly available images in the huge digital file size only slightly compressed Tiff or suppose to be non-compressed bitmapped or IMQ images, you manipulate those files by adding harmless content filler pixel information back in to build up the file size making it look for example like a true raw data Tiff image when it isn't really. For an example of this obfuscation in action, take a look at my Report #065 and specifically the second and third comparison images and their considerably different files sizes but yet with no increase in detail of the target object in question. Yes it's another clue.

Now along this same tact, let me step aside here and point out a sample of something else that may be of interest to you and what should have been of serious interest and a wake-up call in the past for the often too blind science community. In the old Viking and MGS MOC science data at PDS, back when I visited it some years ago, did you know that a compressed .GIF image file and the suppose to be uncompressed supposedly raw data image file of the same image had either the same file size or only a little larger when the raw data file size should have been many times larger? This is clearly impossible and an indicator that what was suppose to be for example a IMQ or TIFF raw data image file was in fact nothing more than a converted much lower detail compressed .GIF or .JPEG file. It's a clue, yet no professional who has haunted this data that I know of seems to have ever apparently caught onto this slight of hand to date.

Likewise, you should be aware that the later MGS MOC raw IMQ science data files are straight vertically oriented files. This facilitates easier scrolling up and down the image for examination and is therefore the strip of choice for scientists and academics who in those earlier days had the then limited available broadband connections essential for downloading these suppose to be larger and slower loading files. In most of the early MGS MOC image sets the straight oriented .GIF strips were very often flipped at official level both vertically and horizontally which can create distortion and obscure evidence. This slight of hand might have been a bit more expected from the MOC imaging subcontractor but then this imaging is suppose to go through independent scientific review process before being posted at PDS or USGS for wider research availability.

Yet, on the images that I checked back then at PDS or USGS, every straight orientation image that was flipped at MSSS initial level was also flipped the same way at PDS or USGS. Since I was early on able to easily detect these problems even as a beginner in this field, this indicated to me that someone at the oversight science level was either incompetent, not doing their job, and/or someone at these oversight levels was cooperating with the secrecy agenda. I revealed this in my earlier reporting years ago and still this does not appear to be an issue in the science, academic, oversight, or leadership communities.

In any case, I suspect that, just as the older Clementine imaging advanced the camera as well as obfuscation technology, so too did the more current Rover imaging in preparation for the newer 2003 ESA Mars Express mission imaging introducing retroactively applied artificial color of the images into the mix. All this, in my opinion, was in preparation for the current newest (as I write this) 2005 MRO mission data with its even more advanced HiRISE camera resolution and use of retroactively applied color to obfuscate rather than reveal. At the root of what is making this obfuscation more and more effective and less and less detectable is the big jumps forward in camera resolution technology that should reveal more but is actually designed to reveal even less than the lesser technology of before.

The very high closer to objects resolution than admitted to enables big improvements in higher and higher software mapping detail and the recording into computer memory of map process to surfaces down to intricate minute detail. Layers of semi-opaque digital smudge are then added on the back of the memory map in tiny intricate detail to obscure and then color can be added via the same map as a coating to further obscure as well as add new variations of false detail that lessens the chance of detection of the tampering rather than enhance evidence. The whole is then drawn back to a more distant resolution view that provides a very handsome picture but one devoid of truth and it is this product that is released as and labeled as the raw data (it isn't) for researcher and public consumption. All of this is done incredibly fast on a massive scale by super fast computers guided by software programming.

Think of the process in more simple terms like approaching the painting of a physical wall (canvass) that has seen some use and has some imperfections (evidence) you don't want visible on a reconditioned wall and want to hide. If you paint the wall without reconditioning its original surface, the paint successfully covers everything including the imperfections but doesn't necessarily completely visually hide the presence of those underlying imperfections. The basic outline of those imperfections (evidence) still partially prints through the thin paint coating as it conforms to them and, even though covered over, the imperfections are still partially visible as lighter and darker reflective tones and identifiable as undesirable in the final reconditioning result.

That clearly isn't good enough. So, if you want to do a good job of visually eliminating the imperfections (evidence), you must first spackle or mud (digital smudge) the wall surface (digital canvass) over the imperfections and smooth them out and blend them in before the paint (digital smudge) is applied to the wall or canvass. If this preparation work is carefully done, you can stand right close to the now newly painted wall and you will see perhaps only a few very minor imperfections or original evidence. Even better, if you don't want to see even those, you can stand further away from the wall across the room (distancing) and you will see even less imperfections, if any at all.

The use of a porous non reflective more light absorbing coating of paint as opposed to a more reflective one also helps in the obfuscation of smaller detail process by subduing contrasting dark and light tones. With that particular thought in mind, note that you'll see mostly a prevalence of non reflective surfaces in the satellite imaging. Yet it is well known that solid particulate geology is very solar light reflective as I have demonstrated in for example my Report #100 in Part-1 of untampered with Earth imaging where darker forest, lighter reflective more open fields and very light reflective bare dirt road surfaces are evidenced. Logically visuals of Mars should consist essentially of bare solid particulate geology with very reflective surfaces and yet this is not the case. Why? On the other hand, semi-opaque digital smudge as an artificial coating and by nature is of course non solar light reflective. Yes, it's another clue.

In the newer ESA and MRO imaging since the MGS MOC and Odyssey data, the same basic principle is at work increasingly more and more successful and effective in the satellite imaging. First, "imperfections" (otherwise known as unacceptable evidence) are repaired or reconditioned at super high speed via automated software working on super computers mostly through the application of layers of digital semi-opaque smudge. This is just one of many techniques but it is a predominant one.

Then to make sure that these "spackling" applications are not visually in evidence and detectable, most of the wall or canvass, including a lot of innocent as well as the offending material, is painted with the digital coating layers being laid down on the back of the intricate digital memory map. Often, as one example of programming skill, just the tops of offending objects (such as tiny size building tops) are left out of the digital coating along with more innocent objects to provide a little detail in this pervasive sea of tampering. Larger objects like geological hills, depressions, cliffs, craters, etc. are left out to print through from underneath the coating to also provide non-threatening detail even though you are not actually seeing their true surfaces. Then to try and insure that any mistakes in this process are further obscured, the scene is drawn back to a more distant view that tends to blur and merge objects together.

Via this overall obfuscation process, you and I here in the public get to look at the nice increasingly better looking and often very pretty wall or canvass as best exampled by the artificial colorized ESA and MRO imaging. It may even have a bit of detail left in it by design but very few of the surfaces are real with only coated outlines printing through. The point is that, despite the hopes of some, I strongly suspect that the newest higher camera resolution Rover, ESA and MRO imaging advancements actually advances the cause of obfuscation and secrecy for public consumption while at the same time pouring highly detailed information about our true planetary environments into private secrecy coffers at tremendous public expense.

Further, this principle remains the same regardless of the country or countries producing the data. It is what President Eisenhower warned us about the dangers of with respect to the now world wide Military/Industrial Complex. It now days knows no country boundaries.

For the secrecy agenda, this business may have started off as an attempt to push back the unknowns of our planetary environment and gain some insight and hopefully some answers they as leaders of the day didn't yet have without the interference from a emotionally worried and demanding public and before being answerable to us in this regard. Such a psychology and strategy might be evidenced and further reinforced under the guise of manipulated entertainment in this day and time. For example, via such TV series as "StarGate" where elite secrecy and public ignorance is constantly promoted as our friend and strictly for the public good. However the true bottom line is that the pursuit of knowledge proceeds in secret without public input or checks and balances while at the same time we are tactically kept in ignorance for decades insuring the absence of such checks and balances.

Remember that this process can also pay off big time in the ability through such high visual detail information retrieval to offer increased insight into and even the reverse engineering of advanced technology as viewed via the advancing covert surveillance. This can provide countries with advancements in high technology to maintain their edge over others. It can also equate to a big money payoff in trickle down technology here on Earth and obviously that in turn equates directly to the retention of power and control.

Unfortunately secrecy, especially deeply entrenched secrecy spanning decades, tends to perpetuate itself as it breeds isolation and myopic them or us thinking focussing too much on myopic ends. Further, we know that secrecy and power corrupt big time. So are you prepared to believe that now subsequent secrecy generations, who have grown up in this secrecy and its perpetuation knowing nothing else and that are now conducting the secrecy and promoting our ongoing continued ignorance, are these days giving anything more than lip service to any professed goal of this process being for the public's own good? Do you believe that those now as thoroughly addicted to and corrupted by control and power as though it was powerful dope are prepared to turn loose of this control and power for the public good, for your good and mine or our children's? Does this sound like the kind of human nature you are familiar with? If so, would you care to discuss that previously mentioned bridge?

Now don't get me wrong here, my comments here are not meant to throw blame and cast stones even though it may sound like that a bit. Yes the control and power hungry secrecy types may have allowed themselves to be corrupted and enslaved to a negative. But, so too has the world populations and cultures wanting to float along, just do our everyday thing, not grow, not be bothered, and to just shift and abdicate difficult larger responsibilities to someone else. Worse, then wanting to complain about them for being corrupted by that which we ourselves have made such an effort to ignore and avoid. Concentrating too close on blame can get to be uncomfortable for all.

My goal here is simply to promote understanding of the peril at hand (as others are doing for example with global warming) and wake up as many as I can on all sides to our common plight and that ultimately a common struggle is needed here with all sides working together for any kind of voluntary correction before steadily advancing events decide the issue for us letting the chips fall where they may in the process. In other words, we must some of us step up to the plate starting with those individuals that have the courage to first do so leading the way for others of like mind to follow and reinforce.

Wouldn't it be nice if some alien(s), as a few espouse, would for example appear and force off on us the technology necessary to abandon our addiction to and dependence on fossil fuels and the problems such as pollution and global warming that stem from it? In doing so we could then just keep floating along irresponsibly using and abusing resources and the other life that share this place with us. Sorry but I just don' t see it. First, we've got to get our act together and earn any consideration like that.

We first need to demonstrate that we deserve such technology and help and to do that we've got to grow up some, step up, and be more responsible with regard to such greater issues in our stewardship of this planet before we consider expanding out from it elsewhere to other planetary environments. Prematurely stealing the technology from tolerant others for the corrupting purposes of power and control or looking for someone else to take care of us like we are babies and bail us out of some serious messes of our own making without that level of growth and maturity will just not cut it. Also, making large unrealistic expectations out of our power corrupted leaders will not cut it. It is our time and up to us to step up and measure up.

In other words, we out here in the public cannot allow ourselves to be like the snake watching the NASA-JPL-ESA, government, or Military/Industrial Complex snake charmer's hand waving around right in front of us while the other hand where the real business is at concealed by such frontal misdirection comes in from low and behind. If we do, then we'll come to our senses in the bag with nothing to say about it wondering what the hell happened and be milked of our monetary security for someone else's secret goals and/or benefit.

In such a scenario, when the snake is regarded of value only in this materialistic view and when the milk/money runs out and the snake is no longer useful in this regard, the prognosis for the snake is not encouraging to say the very least. But, make no mistake about it, such a scenario playing out can be expected to be the product of a population's directionless apathy, passivity, and lack of involvement. Countries and civilizations have historically repeatedly gone down the toilet via this psychology. Surely we can learn from that.

Remember, we are what we actually do, not what we say we're going to do or intend to do. But then this is all just one person's opinion.