june gloom on 8/12/2012 at 04:12
Quote Posted by heywood
Could you guys be any more condescending if you tried?
Don't give them any ideas!
SubJeff on 8/12/2012 at 09:07
Quote Posted by heywood
Could you guys be any more condescending if you tried?
You can tell what I'm asking and I said its not meant as an insult.
Please show me how you would have asked the same thing. I want to learn, I fear my years in the colonies have affected me somewhat.
faetal on 8/12/2012 at 16:55
Not trying to be condescending, but it's a bit galling how some people can wave away scientific discoveries as boring if they don't conform to some star trek fan's wet dream.
Peanuckle on 8/12/2012 at 20:07
If we do set up shop on Mars, we'd be one massive step closer to mining the asteroid belt, and that'd be awesome.
Even more awesome is the possibility to slamming multiple asteroids together to create a new planet.
SubJeff on 8/12/2012 at 20:25
Why would we want to do that? The existing planets and moons are awesome enough.
dj_ivocha on 9/12/2012 at 21:05
Because it would be a totally awesome tiny planet, duh :p. (Considering the whole asteroid belt is less than 5% of the moon's mass)
Kolya on 19/12/2012 at 17:23
Hey guys, I just found this image of which I had only seen a part before and...
Inline Image:
http://i.imgur.com/Z9vWz.jpgHow was this made? I mean where does the camera sit here?
Just curious.
Chimpy Chompy on 19/12/2012 at 17:40
It's some kind of mosaic - whenever the camera-arm shows up in an original image its covered by bits of another.
Renzatic on 19/12/2012 at 18:04
...or yet more proof that this is all shot out in Death Valley, and NASA is just taking pictures of a souped dune buggy.
:tinfoil hat:
Kolya on 19/12/2012 at 19:15
I found the original at (
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA16239)
And they indeed say it's stitched together from pictures taken from a camera arm mounted on the vehicle. That still leaves me puzzled. Because none of the original images (which I haven't seen) could include the camera arm itself obviously. So no matter how many pics you stitch together, you would still have a cut off camera arm somewhere on the resulting merger. And I cannot see that here.
I'm not suggesting some kind of conspiracy, I'm just interested how this was done.
