The Society for Planetary SETI Research (SPSR) has as its aim the study of features on planetary surfaces, to evaluate possible signs of ET activity in the form of landscape modifications or other alterations not easily attributable to natural geological formation. This paper displays one such study, based in part on a previous one which showed that a group of twelve mound-like formations in the Cydonia area of Mars, of relatively small and nearly uniform size, have relative positions that repeatedly display symmetries well beyond chance.
Detecting Patterns of a Technological Intelligence in Remotely Sensed Imagery
A statistical classification approach for detecting artificial patterns in satellite imagery such as those produced by a technological intelligence, and its application to the search for non-natural features of possible extraterrestrial origin on planetary surfaces is presented. Statistics of natural terrestrial backgrounds (fractal textures, drainage patterns, tectonic features, etc.) and artificial features (e.g., roads, cities, vehicles, archaeological ruins) are computed over a set of terrestrial training images. Images are represented by measurements of their fractal dimension, fractal model fit, anisotropy, and rectilinearity.
Just two reasons why the British Interplanetary Society beats the "Enterprise Mission."
5 comments:
BIS is perhaps the most intellectualy rewarding of the organisations I've joined.
Steve
Another good link, thanks Mac.
This entire TYPE of mathematical argument (and I've read some other of Carlotto's papers) for Martian artificiality is the one that always impresses me least. This is mainly, I think, because you can "prove" just about anything by using statistics (or some version thereof). However, I do APPLAUD the BIS for publishing these papers by Crater and Carlotto. In general, I think, European intellectuals are more open to the idea of Martian artificiality than American ones, I'm not sure why. Maybe this has something to do with the so-called "the closing of the American mind" or maybe (as I continue to suspect) because something more sinister is afoot.
Have any of the bulletin board warriors who focus on Hoagland ever written serious refutations of Carlotto and Crater?
Mac, where's Carlotto at regarding Mars anomalies these days?
Carol--
Hoagland, of course, has publicly denounced Carlotto. I forget why, specifically, but it had something to do with his disagreeing with Hoagland. So it goes.
I don't read the "Enterprise" BBS and don't know what arguments have been leveled at Carlotto's work. My guess is that Hoagland's flock will praise Carlotto when convenient and othewise chastise him for his being an "unbeliever." (We in SPSR are conspirators, you understand.)
Carlotto himself remains scientific and rational in his approach. If pressed, I'd categorize him as an advocate of the Artificiality Hypothesis.
(BTW, the Hoaglandites read this blog occasionally. So don't be surprised if a certain someone shows up in this thread to call me a "faggot.")