THE TRUE MARS SKY?

Report #206

August 14, 2011

Joseph P. Skipper

 

J. P. Skipper can be contacted at: jskipper@marsanomalyresearch.com

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00hx6qc (for those in range of BBC One)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEjJlFtXsTI (for everyone else)

I thought you might be interested in this bit of information and its potential implications. The above image is from a 7/1/2011 video release on The Sky at Night on BBC One in the UK. The Sky at Night is a monthly documentary television program on astronomy produced by the BBC. The show has had the same permanent presenter, Sir Patrick Moore, from its first airing on 24 April 1957, making it the longest-running program with the same presenter in television history.

The video is a packaged eulogy of sorts for the Mars Rover Spirit espousing its merits, accomplishments, and how it exceeded expectations before it finally failed while at the same time briefly introducing the concept of the new rover named "Curiosity" that will shortly be on its way to Mars. The man you see sitting there in the video and who apparently narrated much of the piece is variously identified as Dr. Chris North in the show's promotional text but in the video itself as Professor Steve Squyres of Cornell University and as someone that has been intimately associated with the day to day operation of the Spirit rover if not the leader of the rover team. I suspect Squyres is the correct identity and I will just refer to him as that.

The promotional video is only 3.11 minutes long and you should take a look at it at the links above and below. If you do, note that this was apparently targeted at viewers within reach of BBC One and The Sky at Night show broadcasting area. That means that it may be limited to the UK and Europe and the first link provided may not work for you if you are outside that broadcasting range. If the first link doesn't work for you, the second link on YouTube provided will no doubt work just fine for all. This piece was brought to my attention in some solid heads up work by a viewer in the UK who wishes to remain unidentified.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00hx6qc (for those in range of BBC One)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEjJlFtXsTI (for everyone else)

As you can see in the first image, Professor Squyres is shown working on a lap top on the desk while behind him are two very large monitors pushed up side by side against each other. Their fairly large size suggests that these two monitors are dedicated to working with the visual research data provided by the rovers on Mars while the portable computer he's working on is likely the operational control unit. The above second image just provides a closer view of the two larger monitors.

In fact, the scenes we see on these monitors are almost certainly from the rovers in Professor Squyres current work time and likely used in displaying the views that he would see and use in navigating the rover and making changes in its operation. The most obvious thing that you can see is that the big monitors views are in full color. We know that the rover cameras are capable of taking color images on the spot and it makes sense that this is what Squyres and company would be working with if there was a choice. After all color information would be critical to a team responsible for navigating the rover and especially in taking side trips to investigate certain things.

On the other hand, note that some of the terrain in the right monitor appears to be smudged. That could suggest that what Squyres and company receive is not the true original terrain data but data already obfuscated. If so, Squyres and company may not be aware of this if they've never seen anything other than such obfuscated data. In other words, you see what you expect to see and no need to question it.

However, I'm sure that Professor Squyres and the team would be perfectly satisfied that they are receiving original raw data directly from the Mars satellite feed and would almost certainly be offended at any suggestion that it may be otherwise. This is how perfectly honest dedicated well meaning people can be made a part of secrecy and illusions without realizing it and even be motivated to defend secrecy because they do not fully understand it or its reach.

Even so, note that beautiful blue sky and the much more normal terrain color (from our point of view) in both of those big monitors even though they are displaying different Mars surface scenes. You can bet that he and the team sees that well enough and knows very well that the science data released for public consumption is reduced to less informative black and white imaging. So it is likely that any innocence here goes only just so far.

Why would secrecy allow this apparently mistake to slip through? The most likely scenario is that the team members routinely work with scenes like this every day and just didn't think about it and overlooked what these big monitors in the background were displaying. It's kind of like a western movie that is suppose be set in the late 1800's period might sometimes overlook jet contrails in the background sky simply because they are so routine. An alternative might be that a team responsible only for promotional work (this video) within their organization and not directly involved in secrecy just picked this out of stock photos catching team members at work not realizing its potential for undermining secrecy.

Of course when called to task about this, you can bet that the secrecy crowd would just explain this away as colorful automatically displayed wallpaper when the monitors are not in use and that the wallpaper is just displaying Mars as the rover team wished it might appear. After all, what else can they say after the fact that might have some halfway reasonable ring to it?

It is up to you what to think of this. However, one thing is for sure, it is very provocative and evidence of a failure to anticipate public perception that has the potential for big implications. Remember that many thousands of people in the public have likely seen this promotional piece but only someone who could think outside the prescribed box thought to question it and bring it to my attention because they thought I might of course bring it to your attention.

Each of you must decide for your self but it is at the very least interesting.

Joseph P. Skipper, Investigator

 

Contact J. P. Skipper
Contact the Webmaster