Monday, September 3, 2007

NASA Continues to Hide The True Colors of Mars

On August 5th, 2004, as the Mars Exploration Rover Spirit was making the slow climb out of Gusev crater on its way toward the so-called “Pot of Gold,” JPL commanded the rover to turn south and take a set of images of a nearby rocky outcrop and the plains (and rim) of Gusev beyond. The outcrop, nicknamed “Longhorn” by the MER-JPL team, contains a number of interesting “rocks” in the near field. Like the later Pot of Gold, the Spirit team has had a great deal of difficulty categorizing some of the objects seen in the images sent back.

However, what continues to intrigue us is not necessarily the inexplicable “geology” of the region, but rather NASA’s persistent commitment to deceive the public about the true nature and colors of Mars. As we have noted before -- and as will be further documented in Dark Mission -- NASA has a long-standing policy of altering surface images of Mars in order to make the sky and landscape appear to be an absurd “Technicolor red.” As we have established in previous articles, the Martian sky is blue, not red, and the red-shifting of the surface images from Viking to Pathfinder to now Spirit and Opportunity has resulted in the general public perceiving Mars as an alien, forbidding world.

In fact, it looks a lot like Arizona.

The latest proof of this came from the aforementioned images from the high rim of Gusev crater, cobbled together by NASA under image release PIA06770. We knew immediately that the red skies and rocks were phony (the caption calls it “approximate true color” – a NASA euphemism for “outright fake”), so it was simply a matter of adjusting the saturation and balance to bring out the real color of the scene. Fortunately, most imaging software contains a tool that makes this exceptionally easy.

By simply applying a color auto-adjust (or auto-equalize) tool, we can correct the deliberate red-shifting of JPL image processing and reveal the true colors of Mars, vs. the “approximate true colors” of NASA. This filter simply applies a flat equalization to the image – meaning that the image goes from over-saturated red to an equal balance in the primary red-green-blue channels – and more closely duplicates what the human eye would see if you were standing next to Spirit as the picture was taken.

Try it yourself. Download the official rover image from the JPL site, then, use the auto color-balance feature in your imaging software. We think you’ll be pleased and impressed by the results ... at least, until you also realize what NASA has been pulling all these years vis-à-vis the “real” colors of Mars ….

NASA apologists like “Dr. Phil” Plait have tried to muddy the waters on this question by claiming that it is really hard for NASA to get the color right, and that the inclusion of an IR band “pushes the images red.” Now try this tool and ask yourself how difficult it is to show the colors of Mars correctly.

As to the reasons why NASA continues to deceive the American public in this way, well, that is all covered in “Dark Mission.” But if you doubt that NASA does this deliberately, we’ll give you a chance to prove your position. Try to find an image – any "real color" image (not one taken through false-color IR filters) – from either of the Mars Exploration Rovers that shows both the color calibration wheel and the Martian sky in the same frame.

Good luck. And, stay tuned.


Biological_Unit said...

I think that NASA is behaving like idiots, but Mars Bases are way into the future!

Mars is more Salmon Pink than Dark Red, I know because I have a Telescope!

HHMSS Sword said...

Who wrote that, really?


What are you kiding me?

How can Mike Bara or Chester know what Arizona looks like?

Its not a complete barren desert dammit - what do you think Arizona is - the Gobi? - its the So'noran!


Mike Bara said...

Actually, it was Carl Sagan, back in the Viking days, that compared Mars to Arizona. Of course, that was before the JPL techs came through the room and twisted the red color dials all the way up.

guadalupejoe said...

excellent site.. and thanks for the Truth.. joe

robert said...

Hey Richard and Mike,

Here's ANOTHER doosey...

Check here QUICK :

I am saving the ENTIRE PAGE on my HD case they wise up and change it.

They have labeled ALL repeat ALL the most interesting images of a set of 'rock' features that look like fossilized coral from the ocean as taken with ONLY the L6 filter. It's near the bottom of the page.

Now they are on Sol 1300 so there could and should have been time to fix this 'error'.

let's see if they come peeking in HERE from time to time??? :D LOL...

Hey CANNOT fool people who PAY ATTENTION to this stuff.

Sooner or later we've gotcha...if you were TOTALLY honest from the begining you wouldn't look so inept, foolish, and pulling these 'dirty' tricks all the time. 'Catbox' got your tongue?


Playing "tricks with light and shadow" has NOT helped you these past 30 plus years. What makes you think doing the same thing time after time and expecting the same results does NOT mean you qualify as 'insane'?


Richard C. Hoagland said...


What am I missing?

These images are so small (deliberately), that what I see could just as easily be "vesicular lava chunks" (very gassy lava rock, previously flowing across the surface, now broken up and tossed about by later impact events); or, "tephra" [frothy rock chunks from internal, trapped gasses (light enough to float on water!)] -- blown out of some volcanic vents as so-called "lava bombs"--

Either way, these samples could have been laid down across this part of Mars by past eons of known, mundane Martian volcanic activity. Then, brought to the surface and tossed about by much younger, violent impact events ....

So ... why do YOU think you're seeing "coral" in these images, and not just "gas-filled Martian rock?"


IonTruO2 said...

In keeping with your latest topic centered on Mars, I offer this image of a very clear and distinctly 3d geodesic dome sitting nicely in a little crater.
It magnifies well enough and one can note without much stretch of sight, the notable opening or blown open portion at the lower front of the dome.

This may not be a new image to some people, but it struck me as 'crispy' and distinct, much like the "skull image", without any image confusion".

geodesic dome on Mars


IonTruO2 said...

Mike Bara,

Mike, may I suggest, you might want to bring forward a comment made from a "rick sterling". I just saw it but back at the end of the post "Nasa Veteran speaks out".
His time stamp is September 4, 2007 5:05 PM
His point spoke well to your current topic of colour on Mars.

robert said...

I used to own a variety of aquariums and the tops of thelargest 'rock' looks like coral. I will try to link some coral types here to bolster my thought...BUT...a DEFINITIVE evaluation cannot be made until the coorect filters are indentified on the page for that set of images. THEN we can do color and IR anaylsis and comparisons.

Brain coral
Brain open coral

Elkhorn Pacific coral

Elkhorn Pafic coral

Merulina Coral

Merulina Coral

A wide variety in University format of Bivalve fossils:

Bivalve fossils

And while I know BiValve fossils are not the same as corals...they ARE evidence of LIVING things...not "rocks" or as you point the other possibilities:

"These images are so small (deliberately), that what I see could just as easily be "vesicular lava chunks" (very gassy lava rock, previously flowing across the surface, now broken up and tossed about by later impact events); or, "tephra" [frothy rock chunks from internal, trapped gasses (light enough to float on water!)] -- blown out of some volcanic vents as so-called "lava bombs"

And again...until the NASA MER team fixes the page...we can NOT tell ANYTHING with certainty other than that they made a huge boo-boo in labeling this entire series of images of this ONE feature.

There are NO OTHER labeling errors on this page at ALL !!! ONLY on this one feature.


Richard C. Hoagland said...


I saw that too. I think he wrote it in the wrong thread.

Can you move it, Mike, to the one on "Mars' color?"



IonTruO2 said...

I wonder if Buckminster Fuller got to see that dome on Mars?
He would've been proud.
Even the classic texture of his design shows through.
Zoom that image and one can see clearly the qualities of it. No visual stretch needed.

Here are a few visual examples.

classic Expo 67 nighttime

texture detail

self cooling-wink wink! Ghana dome

Anonymous said...

Goro Adachi "predicts" human civilization will migrate to Mars. Given the discussion of the Bucky Domes, what technology exists that would allow humans to inhabit a planet that has a mass that is 11% that of Earth? There ARE problem with that scenario. How about the problem of a mass migration through the Van Allen Belts? That is also problematic.

Susan said...

My Uncle, Dr. Donald Rapp has just finished a book about Mars and it is on Amazon.Com. The book addresses in detail all of the hurdles that need to be resolved in order to achieve a successful mission to Mars. I would buy the book but:
1) I can't afford it. $139.
2) I probably wouldn't understand it.
3) Since I'm an artist, I'm content to keep doing my own research, gather my own images of all the beautiful artwork on Mars, the Moon, and, ah, on Titan. Art, now that's something I can understand! (LOL)

I have that geodesic dome image in my collection, just love it. I wish I could make out what is above and behind the dome too.

jjrakman said...

In regards to the True colors of Mars.

Have you guys ever thought of using the same process on orbital telemetry?

Biological_Unit said...

Those Martians sure are dumb enough to make a Bucky Dome OUT OF OPAQUE ROCK, the same color of rock as the nearby ones.

Sunburned Sailor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
robert said...

To pick back up on the coral issue after a few days of working on the CAAIM...I took a break abd found the same coral spot taken a few sols earlier...this time the filter notations were correct. Below are two 2.3 jpgs one of true color and one in the IR of the feature.

I STILL think they look like coral fossils (like I linked to above in a previous poast) or petrified wood which in either case in a data point for evidence on past life all over Mars.

And these are of course as you know not the images showing such but one more spot added to the pile of evidence that Mars was wet and alive and thriving.

True Color Coral 1

InfraRed Color Coral-1

Bicubic resampling was used to enlarge the images from original size.


Biological_Unit said...

or petrified wood which in either case in a data point for evidence on past life all over Mars.

No, it's evidence that petrified wood MIGHT be at that spot.

The Fantastic Shapes seen all over Mars are best explained electrically, but since and RCH chose to ignore it, it will stay ignored and we are left with blurry Pixels proving that NASA needs uncounted billions more!

Gort said...

The blog reminded me of a favorite space movie from my childhood, when JFK was president.
I don't remember the plt anymore, but I remember thinking "Thr Angry Red Planet" was a really cool movie. I think it sparked my interest in Mars.

BTW don't tell Dubya and his cousin, John Kerry, about the Skull on Mars. They might want to steal it and put it in "the Tomb" in New Haven. :)

robert said...


There's enough "SKULLS" scattered across the solar system that they'd run out of room in their stone basements for them all.

Which is why the "Skull n Bones" promises made by BOTH of the "Bushes" are nothing but rhetoric from the 'proverbial' "BURNIG BUSH"...leaving us with nothing but sands of slikly slogans souring in our mouths still thirsty for unfulfilled dreams of our collective vision of who we once were...and long to be again.

And so many ask us to trust the elite again...after all these last decades of fiascos of failures and wars of corporate convience...It's time for 1776 again I believe.


Biological_Unit said...

?It's time for 1776 again I believe.

The USA is still run from the Bank of England, owned by your friends and mine, the Khazarian Rothschilds.

How dare you contemplate anything Anti-Semitic in nature! What would Rabbi Chertoff think??

HHMSS Sword said...

Rich -
You once posted an article regarding 9-11...

Care to throw the link out here?


Cultural Captivity said...

Censorship rears its ugly head

Was it something I said ?

Oh, that's right ...
it WAS something I said
... namely the truth.

Oh well, I was just trying to help a few authors avoid repeating social science frauds.

Read Sword's explanation - are you really willing to stake your reputations on those silly ideas ?

You've tied your photos to a support cult and it's not too late to fix things. Otherwise, the foul odor of the social science frauds will overshadow the photos.

IonTruO2 said...

Sword I think you might be referring to a Blog post that Richard did back at the Capt's Blog in Sept. 2005.

named: Katrina...more hints of another 911?

In it there are other symbolisms that seemed to prophecy exactly the visual imagery of the Towers and their demise.

IonTruO2 said...

My apologies Mike, the link clipped off.

here it is:

hot linked:

T'Zairis said...

1.) I am heartily sick of my tax dollars being used to make fake-red pix of Mars. While the ground might indeed be 'reddish', I find it frankly unbelieveable that everything-- rocks, sand and sky-- are *precisely* the same shade of red. Looks like a photoshop filter to me... Also, having seen my own surroundings in the light of a very orange-red sky (due to smoke from a bad wildfire in the back country near me a few years back) it is painfully obvious that the Mars pix are being diddled. Even though the sky above me was a uniform bright orange during the fire, the trees in my yard still looked recognizably green.

2.) The Plasma Cosmology folks over at the Thunderbolts website do have some valid points to make about some of the features of Mars being the result of electrical discharge phenomena on a massive scale. However, no one will be able to rule-in/rule-out electrical-discharge results vs. artifacts without *unadulterated* pix to work from. [Just so my own personal views are known up front, I think it likely that there are intelligently constructed artifacts in amongst the massive evidence of electrical discharge phenomena on Mars.]

3.) I believe the 'state's-evidence' NASA/military folks who directly testify to A) hidden agendas at NASA and elsewhere, and B) direct evidence of a Skyperson presence on the Moon, etc. I also have no problem understanding that Skyperson-derived technology is being suppressed in order to keep the big-oil status-quo hegemony alive and well, to the detriment of the entire planet.

4.) I am off to preorder my copy of Mr. Hoagland's book, as well as an additional one to donate to the library system (I work for the Public Library in the city I live in). If everyone did this-- i.e., buy one extra copy and donate it to the nearest public library-- then folks who do not ordinarily follow the Enterprise website, etc., or who cannot afford to buy the book, would have access to a copy.

Heiye slenayya tan svalesh,
(Live Long with Abundant Water-pouring-- i.e., prosperous conditions)


Biological_Unit said...

I also have no problem understanding that Skyperson-derived technology is being suppressed in order to keep the big-oil status-quo hegemony alive and well, to the detriment of the entire planet.

I believe that is being done!

I wonder why they do that, if they are already wealthy ??

Rick Sterling said...

Those individuals who think NASA always gets the colors of Mars right should read the book "The Planet Mars:A History Of Observation and Discovery" by William Sheehan. In Chapter 13(Vikings--and Beyond) the author states, "Telescopic observers have long been fascinated by the compelling, if partly illusory, colors of Mars, and the Viking imaging team also had a hard time getting the Martian colors right. They made colored pictures by mixing images obtained through a tricolor wheel (a wheel containing blue, green, and red filters), but the calibration was uncertain, and the earliest published images showed the Martian surface as a very piquant orange-red.3 Meanwhile, the Martian sky---surprisingly bright and rather unromantically described as "similar to a smoggy day in Los Angeles"---was given a bluish cast that was eerily Earthlike.4 Later, someone suggested that Mars's atmosphere was probably too thin for molecular (Rayleigh) scattering to produce a blue sky color, and that instead the sky brightness must be due to a suspension of fine reddish dust, which would make the sky salmon pink---and so it became in later images (although I must admit that I never found the effect quite believable).5 In this case, the Viking imaging team seems to have bent too far in the other direction to avoid creating the illusion of an Earthlike Mars. Because the dust load of the Martian atmosphere is extremely variable, the color of the sky ranges, at different times, from salmon pink to yellow to light blue to dark blue to purple. Since the images returned by the Viking lander just after it landed show shadows cast by the rocks as razor sharp, the atmosphere was then fairly clear. Ironically, after all the trouble taken with it, the sky seems to have been blue after all!"

After the excitement of viewing the first images

Anonymous said...


Not one penny of your "tax dollars" fund making "fake red-pixs" of Mars. Not one penny of ANY of the "tax dollars" that are extorted pay for ANY services of our Empire. EVERY SINGLE PENNY EXTORTED GOES TO TO PAY FOR INTEREST ON THE NATIONAL DEBT! What the Empire spends on its services, and everything else, is called 'deficit spending'. If we did what the Empire does, it would be called 'kiting'.

HHMSS Sword said...

Too see it with your own eyes - this is the essence of mars that I have learned..


Anonymous said...

Thanks for the show last night guys. It had me scribbling furious notes. I wish I had 2 more hours to pick your brains afterwards.

dusanmal said...

I support the statement that the NASA choice for Mars colors is wrong and at least misguided. However, for better credibility simplistic color adjustments as in your example should be avoided.

Images were taken with Blue, Green and IR filter. Gap in the visual red have been arbitrarily interpolated, leaving the end image to be based on certain human assumptions.

Balancing colors of such image by any automated software is not useful as one whole color channel is completely arbitrary. Hence your result is equally unreliable as the NASA "red bias".

I suggest you attempt calibrating the rover images using the another source as a calibrator. Good one fortunately exists! Do check ESA images of the Gusev crater from the orbit. Their instrument used real RGB channels. Yes, the scale is different but it can be done and can result in proper colors of the rover calibration disks, etc!

Results give Mars with more recognizable "color scheme" we can see from Earth through the telescopes...

ESA image:

robert said...

Below is an INDEPENDANT panorama of that Sol 120 by Spirit pancam images...since only 3 VIS greyscales were taken for each of the four positions shown it is fairly easy to download and combine them into a true color RGB. There has been NO...repeat NO...messing with color values on any of the four images. All I did was rotate to first attempt isn't as perfect as I would like but the following are right on the money. is NASA who is blowing the red "foo foo dust" over images.

The raw data does NOT show that redness.

Just like the 1998 infamous 'CATBOX' of the FACE.

The RAW data showed eyes, ridge line for nose, two nostrils, mouth, eyebrows, headdress and a chinny-chin-chin all mounted on a uniform platform raised ABOVE the plain.

Here's my photorama of Spirit's SOL 120:

RHW Sol 120 Photorama True Color


Admin said...

Thanks for the show last night guys. It had me scribbling furious notes. I wish I had 2 more hours to pick your brains afterwards.
I take it you were in SF. Give us some highlights.

Mike Bara said...

Guys, last night was just a forerunner. Tomorrow will be the big DM preview. It will be cool.

Biological_Unit said...

Israeli laws suppress all religion -- For instance, it is against the law to try and convert a Jew to another religion even if the Jew is an atheist or humanist.

Just Gossiping.

Gort said...

I remember reading in Aviation Week and Space Technology at the time of the vikng lander that the lander did not have a color calibration card, so the imaging people got a shot of an orange extension cord on top of the lander and calibrated the B&W slow scan shot throgh a tri-color filter wheel.
At least that as the story they told.

Gort said...

I noticed you intimate a connection between the Dark Mission of NASA and the JFK assasination. Does this dovetail with the info Joseph P. Farrell discused on sunday night's C2C with George Knapp. ??
Staying tuned ... :)

Biological_Unit said...

I noticed you intimate a connection between the Dark Mission of NASA and the JFK assasination.

As an Atheist and Communist, I resent the implication that the Goyyim are "allowed to Print Money"

Biological_Unit said...

As an Atheist and Communist, I support Athletics, because I exist in a Reality that values strength.

As a blog that purports to uncover Secrets, where are your reports of the horrible weapons and deployments of the Nazi's?

If you can't blame a regime that was destroyed 60 years ago, what chance will we have to enforce the Fiat monetary system on the unsuspecting masses of Muslims?

Admin said...

Seems like my images pissed off the people that run that New Mars forum. Guess I should have read their silly agenda.

Let me first say that it is not the policy of New Mars or its parent organization, the Mars Society International, to pursue investigations into intelligent alien life of the Cydonia variety. We do not believe that there is a conspiracy to cover it up, and we believe that discussion of such topics is not useful due to insufficient evidence and a complete lack of usage of the scientific method. The New Mars forums were not set up to promote this kind of discussion, and papers submitted to Mars Society Conventions relating to Cydonia are not welcome.

There sure seems to be a lot of weird people in this Mars community. So they don't want to hear about anything that hasn't been wrote up and submitted to some gatekeeper scientists? LOL. Yeah I meant to do that but forgot all about it.

All I knew was it was a dead forum. Oh well...I decided not to bother those conformists any longer and did like you guys and just opened a blog here:


Orionsaint said...

Based on what evidence is Nasa tricking us? You can alter the hue of any photo. Look did you know the Earth's sky isn't blue. It's actually red.

Gort said...

Biological_Unit said...
As an Atheist and Communist, I support Athletics, because I exist in a Reality that values strength.

Gort says:
As a former resident of the Kansas City area, I've been an Athletic's Supporter since 1958! Go A's! :)

Biological_Unit said...

Ssshh Gort! No Jocularity here!

Mike Bara and RCH are making stuff up here!

SactoMan01 said...

I still even the corrected color is not right, for one reason: Mars' atmosphere has a mean air pressure of 0.9 kilopascals, less than 1% that of Earth's atmosphere. If you've seen pictures of the sky taken from the U-2 spyplane at the 70,000 feet cruising altitude, the sky is a very dark blue; I think the Mars sky at ground level at the equator is probably a very dark blue except for periods of planetary dust storms.

In short, the picture posted on the blog is almost right, but you need to darken the sky to a very deep blue.

M said...

SactoMan01 said...
In short, the picture posted on the blog is almost right, but you need to darken the sky to a very deep blue.

The only issue there is you're altering the entire picture's luminance level. By altering the brightness of the picture to give you a dark blue sky, the rest of the landscape suddenly becomes a great deal darker.

I doubt that NASA would be selectively brightening the sky in each shot before changing hue - that would have been spotted by some eagle eye by now. The question then would be 'how bright is the ambient light on the surface of Mars?' Are the images showing a brighter Mars than what our eyes would see? A picture can be taken to make a dark landscape brighter - just leave the shutter open a tad longer.

Anyone have ISO/Shutter/Iris data for these images?

M said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gort said...

Sword asked about an Enterprise Mission article about 9-11.

He might be thinking about this one.

Or go to Enterprise Mission Archives and find year 2001 and find article from 10/08/01
Who's the Enemy---Really?
(same article as the lnk above)

George Paul Davis III said...

Yeah... I would recommend using literally any picture of anything and putting it throuhg auto adjust too.... it will show you how ridiculous this idea is.

Auto Adjusts are not scientific and they are not used by professionals. They just "guess" at what is appropriate and "correct" the situation based on this guess.

The colours are adjusted for a landscape on Earth. This is much the same way that colour correctiong automatically removes red-eye -- even though it doesn't always work correctly when it is presented with a confusing colour pallet. Auto adjust doesn't always work, and certainly would not work for a picture taken on another planet with an unknown palette.

If you look, the colours on the "corrected" version are pretty hot. They are almost blown out. The colours in the original picture have a more natural tone. While neither picture could represent the "true colours," this is not a good way to make that decision.

Youri Carma said...

Real Colors of Mars Slideshow by Youri Carma