Curiosity Finds Screw on Mars

Obviously, the people setting up the terrestrial terrain to look Martian left a screw on the landscape.  Par for the course as far as NASA's track record goes.  The guys running the rover had to spend extra time examining it.  I don't know if they are doing this because they themselves are just as dupped as the public, or if they had to do it to make it look like they are surprised.  In the end, they will undoubtedly end up having to claim it fell off their 1 billion dollar dune buggy.

It's not a screw.  And isn't the conspiracist claim that they're in the mojave desert or something?  Why would there be props?

http://www.examiner.com/article/mystery-object-found-by-curiosity-rover-is-benign-plastic

Oh, so they say it's something that fell off the rover? Who saw that excuse coming? Also, that's clearly not the same object. A tech probabally switched it out to not have to answer why screws were falling off the rover.

Evidence of human inbabatance is all over the earth. It's not surprising that NASA's little RC full of cameras found a bit of it.

Clearly not the same object? The shape is the same, the orientation among the small rocks near it is the same.. what's your claim exactly?

One is a picture of a shiny piece of metal and the other is a picture of a dull piece of plastic. How can you even claim they are the same?

One is a picture of a shiny piece of metal and the other is a picture of a dull piece of plastic. How can you even claim they are the same?

I don't see what indicates to you that the first is metallic; not just metal is shiny. The plastic looks pretty shiny to me in the second picture. Of course the reflections will vary depending on the angle between the light source and the viewer.

The colors look different, but that applies to the ground too - makes sense given that different cameras were used, which probably have different color filters.

It doesn't look straight enough to be a screw in the first picture, although it's so low resolution it's hard to tell exactly. If the second is something placed there they did an excellent job matching the shape and positioning exactly, without disturbing the ground around it, or for that matter disturbing anything on the ground by walking on top of it...

Let me get this straight. In your vain attempt to carry NASA's mantle in defense of my -- and lets be honest, any rational persons assault -- is A: not only metal is shiny, and B: there is no way that the plastic could have been placed there without leaving a trace.

Okay, I'll agree with point A. Point B however, is simply a failure of your imigination. Tweezers immediately come to mind. In association with a concept known as "off camera", the switch can be easily made without "leaving" footprints. More likely though, the plastic was simply photoshopped in. It would take a pro, like the kind NASA staffs, less than 5 min to shop that picture.

One is a picture of a shiny piece of metal and the other is a picture of a dull piece of plastic. How can you even claim they are the same?

Just so we're clear, you've never seen plastic packing that (or metal scrap for the sake of argument) that shines intensely when it catchs light the right way and is otherwise reasonably dull by comparison, especially when you get closer and block out said light source?

If we go along with idea that NASA is a big conspiracy...why oh why would they intensionally post fake pictures that do not appear congruent at first glance?  I mean...if they are fabricating everything anyway with increadible photo editing etc...what would be the point in doing a slope-shod job and making and article over it?



Either way... FEr or REr...

It's pretty sad that this is considered newsworthy...  I can see the dialogue now:

NASA PR:  What have we discovered so far on Mars, it's been a tremendous effort so far!

NASA ANALYST:  We think a scrap of plastic was on the ground...it's probably from our own equipment.

NASA PR:  That's it? 

NASA ANALYST:  Yeah...pretty much...

NASA PR:  Damn...I guess we'll roll with it...


Don't get me wrong, the logistics to get to Mars is in no way trivial, but "Hey...check out the plastic scrap" is a touch on the anticlimatic side of things. 

One is a picture of a shiny piece of metal and the other is a picture of a dull piece of plastic. How can you even claim they are the same?

Why would NASA even bother to replace a screw with a piece of plastic?  If they're just going to claim that it came from the rover (or possibly the lander), then what's the difference between one man made object and another?  Seriously, don't you think that NASA would just love to find shiny piece of metal on Mars that didn't come from Earth? 

Let me get this straight. In your vain attempt to carry NASA's mantle in defense of my -- and lets be honest, any rational persons assault -- is A: not only metal is shiny, and B: there is no way that the plastic could have been placed there without leaving a trace.

Okay, I'll agree with point A. Point B however, is simply a failure of your imigination. Tweezers immediately come to mind. In association with a concept known as "off camera", the switch can be easily made without "leaving" footprints. More likely though, the plastic was simply photoshopped in. It would take a pro, like the kind NASA staffs, less than 5 min to shop that picture.

I didn't say there's no way, I said they must have done a very good job. There is actually a difference. But of course just because something could have been done isn't evidence that it has been done... I don't really see the point either. If this were a hoax and it were a screw they would, as you said, just say it came off the rover. It's not like NASA missions never have unexpected problems, although a screw falling off wouldn't necessarily constitute a problem.

Try, if this is even possible, to look at this from the perspective of someone who isn't already under the assumption that this is a hoax.

It's pretty sad that this is considered newsworthy...  I can see the dialogue now:

NASA PR:  What have we discovered so far on Mars, it's been a tremendous effort so far!

NASA ANALYST:  We think a scrap of plastic was on the ground...it's probably from our own equipment.

NASA PR:  That's it? 

NASA ANALYST:  Yeah...pretty much...

To be fair, they also discovered an igneous rock that was "surprisingly" earth-like in its composition.   

To be fair, they also discovered an igneous rock that was "surprisingly" earth-like in its composition.   

It was a hard day in the NASA PR office.  LOL

Obviously, the people setting up the terrestrial terrain to look Martian left a screw on the landscape.  Par for the course as far as NASA's track record goes.  The guys running the rover had to spend extra time examining it.  I don't know if they are doing this because they themselves are just as dupped as the public, or if they had to do it to make it look like they are surprised.  In the end, they will undoubtedly end up having to claim it fell off their 1 billion dollar dune buggy.

THe picture won't load for me.

Why would NASA even bother to replace a screw with a piece of plastic?  If they're just going to claim that it came from the rover (or possibly the lander), then what's the difference between one man made object and another?  Seriously, don't you think that NASA would just love to find shiny piece of metal on Mars that didn't come from Earth?

Just so we're clear, you've never seen plastic packing that (or metal scrap for the sake of argument) that shines intensely when it catchs light the right way and is otherwise reasonably dull by comparison, especially when you get closer and block out said light source?

If we go along with idea that NASA is a big conspiracy...why oh why would they intensionally post fake pictures that do not appear congruent at first glance?  I mean...if they are fabricating everything anyway with increadible photo editing etc...what would be the point in doing a slope-shod job and making and article over it?

I have already answered all of these questions/points.  If after rereading my posts you find the answers still unsatisfactory, I'll elaborate.

Looks like a giant flat earth photoshop to me.

A tech probabally switched it out to not have to answer why screws were falling off the rover.

I think it's this one that feels insufficient to me in regard to the "why oh why would NASA post incongruent fake pictures on purpose".  AKA why post a picture with an item in it that they didn't want there?  Particularly since that was the point of the picture release unless I'm missing something else?

Your response (to me) doesn't really answer the question as to why do it in the first place?

Quote from: Pongo on October 12, 2012, 10:34:49 PM

A tech probabally switched it out to not have to answer why screws were falling off the rover.

I think it's this one that feels insufficient to me in regard to the "why oh why would NASA post incongruent fake pictures on purpose".  AKA why post a picture with an item in it that they didn't want there?  Particularly since that was the point of the picture release unless I'm missing something else?

Well, because NASA does sloppy work and the public believes without questions every contrived lame excuse they make up. 

As to why they did it, here is how I see it going down.  Guy working the camera finds a screw and takes a pic.  The public sees it before a more competent employee can cover it up.  They say they need to look at it for a few days while the start the BS train up.  They decide that they are going to say it fell off the rover.  They also decide that they are going to switch it with a piece of plastic because it makes NASA look incompetent to have screws falling off their rover.

Of course you're assuming that the object in the first picture is indeed a screw.  I don't see how the object is clear enough to make a positive identification.

a screw? that original picture shows something that reflects light.
how did you conclude that is a screw?
and a moderator needs to move this to angry ranting for a pointless attack on NASA

As to why they did it, here is how I see it going down.  Guy working the camera finds a screw and takes a pic.  The public sees it before a more competent employee can cover it up.  They say they need to look at it for a few days while the start the BS train up.  They decide that they are going to say it fell off the rover.  They also decide that they are going to switch it with a piece of plastic because it makes NASA look incompetent to have screws falling off their rover.

That analogy doesn't hold a lot of water for me personally, but I appreciate you humoring my question regardless.  We'll just have to agree to disagree since I haven't been to thier training facility in quite some time let alone actually worked for them directly. 


And Iwanttobelieve... I wouldn't call this a pointless attack.  I'm generally pretty proud of all our space program has accomplished and the amount of material science, logistics, and engineering that has gone into their efforts is truly amazing if you get a chance to study it in detail.  Much of what they have developed has had excellent contributions to the rest of society as well.

But you have to admit...calling attention to a piece of plastic...I believe the scientific analogy for that is "weaksauce". 

Even I have to laugh when this is considered newsworthy. 

Curiosity also found a road on mars.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Curiosity Rover is a fake. Road on Mars

theres roads on Mars??

I often see faces and stuff in the clouds too, what a conspiracy

If this is a road I wonder why it suddenly stops at the bottom. I mean, the portion that has been circled in the "enhanced" picture, not the line that the guy drew on top of it. I also wonder why it has such a sharp angle on its left side. What a badly planned road segment. Especially considering such a shape is not at all necessitated by the neighboring terrain.

Seriously, the more willing you are to cling to absolutely any claim anyone makes the more pathetic your entire position looks. Show at least a little discretion.

Come on people, plastic or a screw on Mars, roads on Mars. If you don't see a problem here you are blind, and will never gain your vision.

Come on people, plastic or a screw on Mars, roads on Mars. If you don't see a problem here you are blind, and will never gain your vision.

Plastic that can easily be described as something that came off the rover itself and a road that looks nothing like a road. Real nail in the coffin.

If you guys think this is a terrestrial locale where exactly do you think plastic OR a screw would have come from? Props? What props exactly?

Curiosity also found a road on mars.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Curiosity Rover is a fake. Road on Mars

Looks more like a river to me.

BTW, here's NASA's cover story:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/multimedia/pia16052-color.html

This image of the crater wall is north of the landing site, or behind the rover. Here, a network of valleys believed to have formed by water erosion enters Gale Crater from the outside. This is the first view scientists have had of a fluvial system - one relating to a river or stream -- from the surface of Mars. Known and studied since the 1970s beginning with NASA's Viking missions, such networks date from a period in Martian history when water flowed freely across the surface. The main channel deposit seen here resembles a dirt road ascending into the mountains, which are actually the north wall and rim of Gale Crater.

So why are we incapable and unwilling to travel to Mars again?

Curiosity also found a road on mars.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Curiosity Rover is a fake. Road on Mars

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Oh, and why would NASA release this picture?

Curiosity also found a road on mars.

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Curiosity Rover is a fake. Road on Mars

I love the way some of you guys look a something, and never bother investigating to see what it really is, in this case an ancient river channel. it's like looking at clouds and concluding monsters and horses live in the sky.

with processing an image, you can fake it! another lie from flat earthers!