How do dinosaurs appear on Mars news?
It seemed to me that any more or less educated person approximately imagines what Mars is: "there are no minerals, there is no life, it is inhabited by robots" ... However, at intervals of two to three months, news feeds explode with messages like "They found a dinosaur skull on Mars" or "An alien skull was found on Mars" or "An ancient Egyptian statue was found on Mars" ... And it would be okay, such yellowness stopped at "Komsomolskaya Pravda" or "REN TV", often such news get to the official media, like " Russia 24 " or "Russian newspapers . "
Here, the day before yesterday, the next “skull of a dinosaur” appeared in “Komsomolskaya Pravda ...”, and in the comments and in a personal note, the caring fans of the Curiosity rover began to write to me with a request to comment on the find. At first, I didn’t want to be distracted, but when this murmur rose to the “Rossiyskaya Gazeta” it was time to explain.
For a start, how such news appears.
NASA's desire for openness has led to the fact that anyone can view images from Mars, even if they are not burdened with any knowledge of planetology, paleontology or geology. This led to the emergence of such a way of doing nothing as "virtual paleontology / archeology / ufology". We sometimes do this too, we search , and even find . The only difference is that we are looking for and finding real objects, and "virtual ... logologists" are imaginary. Finding in the pictures of rovers numerous skulls, statues, boots, hamsters, lizards, etc. ufologists shoot about this video, with disturbing music and voice-overs, and post it on youtube. Some, especially hard-nosed ones , also let their voice through the modulator so that the World backstage does not find the brave executor , and does not eliminate it in the most cruel way - by complaining to the mother.
')
On video channels of such fighters of the virtual Martian front journalists of yellow editions like the British Daily Mail or our Komsomolskaya Pravda signed. If they see that readers are bored without real news from Mars, journalists go to ufologists' websites or channels and publish sensational news that starts roughly the same way: "Mars researchers found ...", and they also ended in the same type. "NASA scientists have not yet given official comments ". So the sensation which spreads on the Internet is molded. As a result, an unprepared reader is forming an idea that Mars has definitely had life, but NASA is hiding it. A smarter person who is simply not interested in this topic will decide that scientists are engaged in some kind of garbage, and instead of scientific work they invent sensations, one more stupid than the other.
How to distinguish exaggerated sensation from more or less serious research?
Almost all the loud "finds" on Mars, in which the Martians, aliens or the ancient Egyptians appear, are made on the basis of one, less often two pictures. "Discoverers" persistently ignore the fact that the rover takes dozens of shots daily. Curiosity has 17 cameras and, during his work, he transferred almost 220 thousand frames. Therefore, any curious discovery must first be considered from different angles and in different lighting.
Then you need to see the find in the context of the area. Does she look like anything that is nearby? Maybe this is just an intricate stone, among dozens of the same intricate stones in the area?
I will explain with the example of the "herbivorous dinosaur", which is now being heard by the media.
Here is the original snapshot from which it all began.
We will not hide - it seems. Here and nostril and teeth. "Teeth", just, and became an additional factor "confirming" the find. If this is a stone, could such “teeth” be in a crack?
Let's look at the terrain a little wider.
Immediately you can see that the "teeth" are not unique in this place, and the same bright mineral is found in almost all cracks. Actually, it has long been known that this mineral is gypsum. It is full there.
In addition, you can not see any fragments that would have to remain from the dinosaur: the spine, ribs, bone legs ... horns and hooves? Nothing.
Now we will look at the images of the "skull" from different angles of shooting. In that place the rover was spinning for almost half a year, so there should be frames. And they were found.
Found a dinosaur?
I know, I know, not found.
Yesterday, I asked the subscribers of the Curiosity Rover group to find a dinosaur skull in these pictures. With difficulty, but still they managed. But I immediately told them that under other shooting angles, the "skull" does not look like a skull at all, so it’s useless to look for a dinosaur.
The arrows indicate the direction of shooting, from which this stone resembles the "skull of a herbivorous dinosaur."
As a result: it is just a layered stone with plaster veins in the cracks. Same as dozens of other stones in the area. And only from one angle he looks like something familiar to our eyes.
There is another illustrative example of how a review from different points destroys sensations. I even like the second example more.
This mysterious "head of the statue" turned heads to many dreamers about the Martian civilization:
Indeed, everything is very similar. It seems half a face can be seen quite clearly: eyes, nose, cheekbones, even bags under the eyes. True, something strange is already with your mouth, but this is a Martian ... It is a pity that the other half of the faces are in the sand, but even now the Martian is dismantling avatars.
But it is worth walking a few meters forward, as with the “face” it becomes something strange:
Before after:
Before after:
Beautiful illusion. I save them. Someday I will publish a collection. In general, you can write a psychological study of Martian mirage, and the intricacies of human perception of reality.
Hence morality: rich imagination and imagination are a bad adviser when studying images from Mars, the Moon, Venus, etc. It is not enough just to look at pictures from the rovers, and look for familiar features in them to be considered a researcher. If you have already found something, or you think that you have found it, consider this finding from all sides, collect the maximum of evidence, and then worry the real researchers. And when they see that they are not dealing with a dreamer or a freak, but as an intelligent person, then there will be long-awaited “expert comments”.
In the meantime, you can only rely on my commentary, let scientists do science.
Here, the day before yesterday, the next “skull of a dinosaur” appeared in “Komsomolskaya Pravda ...”, and in the comments and in a personal note, the caring fans of the Curiosity rover began to write to me with a request to comment on the find. At first, I didn’t want to be distracted, but when this murmur rose to the “Rossiyskaya Gazeta” it was time to explain.
For a start, how such news appears.
NASA's desire for openness has led to the fact that anyone can view images from Mars, even if they are not burdened with any knowledge of planetology, paleontology or geology. This led to the emergence of such a way of doing nothing as "virtual paleontology / archeology / ufology". We sometimes do this too, we search , and even find . The only difference is that we are looking for and finding real objects, and "virtual ... logologists" are imaginary. Finding in the pictures of rovers numerous skulls, statues, boots, hamsters, lizards, etc. ufologists shoot about this video, with disturbing music and voice-overs, and post it on youtube. Some, especially hard-nosed ones , also let their voice through the modulator so that the World backstage does not find the brave executor , and does not eliminate it in the most cruel way - by complaining to the mother.
')
On video channels of such fighters of the virtual Martian front journalists of yellow editions like the British Daily Mail or our Komsomolskaya Pravda signed. If they see that readers are bored without real news from Mars, journalists go to ufologists' websites or channels and publish sensational news that starts roughly the same way: "Mars researchers found ...", and they also ended in the same type. "NASA scientists have not yet given official comments ". So the sensation which spreads on the Internet is molded. As a result, an unprepared reader is forming an idea that Mars has definitely had life, but NASA is hiding it. A smarter person who is simply not interested in this topic will decide that scientists are engaged in some kind of garbage, and instead of scientific work they invent sensations, one more stupid than the other.
How to distinguish exaggerated sensation from more or less serious research?
Almost all the loud "finds" on Mars, in which the Martians, aliens or the ancient Egyptians appear, are made on the basis of one, less often two pictures. "Discoverers" persistently ignore the fact that the rover takes dozens of shots daily. Curiosity has 17 cameras and, during his work, he transferred almost 220 thousand frames. Therefore, any curious discovery must first be considered from different angles and in different lighting.
Then you need to see the find in the context of the area. Does she look like anything that is nearby? Maybe this is just an intricate stone, among dozens of the same intricate stones in the area?
I will explain with the example of the "herbivorous dinosaur", which is now being heard by the media.
Here is the original snapshot from which it all began.
We will not hide - it seems. Here and nostril and teeth. "Teeth", just, and became an additional factor "confirming" the find. If this is a stone, could such “teeth” be in a crack?
Let's look at the terrain a little wider.
Immediately you can see that the "teeth" are not unique in this place, and the same bright mineral is found in almost all cracks. Actually, it has long been known that this mineral is gypsum. It is full there.
In addition, you can not see any fragments that would have to remain from the dinosaur: the spine, ribs, bone legs ... horns and hooves? Nothing.
Now we will look at the images of the "skull" from different angles of shooting. In that place the rover was spinning for almost half a year, so there should be frames. And they were found.
Found a dinosaur?
I know, I know, not found.
Yesterday, I asked the subscribers of the Curiosity Rover group to find a dinosaur skull in these pictures. With difficulty, but still they managed. But I immediately told them that under other shooting angles, the "skull" does not look like a skull at all, so it’s useless to look for a dinosaur.
The arrows indicate the direction of shooting, from which this stone resembles the "skull of a herbivorous dinosaur."
As a result: it is just a layered stone with plaster veins in the cracks. Same as dozens of other stones in the area. And only from one angle he looks like something familiar to our eyes.
There is another illustrative example of how a review from different points destroys sensations. I even like the second example more.
This mysterious "head of the statue" turned heads to many dreamers about the Martian civilization:
Indeed, everything is very similar. It seems half a face can be seen quite clearly: eyes, nose, cheekbones, even bags under the eyes. True, something strange is already with your mouth, but this is a Martian ... It is a pity that the other half of the faces are in the sand, but even now the Martian is dismantling avatars.
But it is worth walking a few meters forward, as with the “face” it becomes something strange:
Before after:
Before after:
Beautiful illusion. I save them. Someday I will publish a collection. In general, you can write a psychological study of Martian mirage, and the intricacies of human perception of reality.
Hence morality: rich imagination and imagination are a bad adviser when studying images from Mars, the Moon, Venus, etc. It is not enough just to look at pictures from the rovers, and look for familiar features in them to be considered a researcher. If you have already found something, or you think that you have found it, consider this finding from all sides, collect the maximum of evidence, and then worry the real researchers. And when they see that they are not dealing with a dreamer or a freak, but as an intelligent person, then there will be long-awaited “expert comments”.
In the meantime, you can only rely on my commentary, let scientists do science.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/376749/
All Articles