Mission selfie from 16 km

If you thought last month’s mission ‘selfie’ from a distance of 50 km from Comet 67P/C-G was impressive, then prepare to be wowed some more: this one was taken from less than half that distance, at just 18 km from the centre of the comet, or about 16 km from the surface.

Rosetta mission selfie a distance of about 16 km from the surface of 67P/C-G. Credits: ESA/Rosetta/Philae/CIVA

Rosetta mission selfie a distance of about 16 km from the surface of 67P/C-G. Credits: ESA/Rosetta/Philae/CIVA

This latest image was taken by the CIVA imaging system on board Rosetta’s lander Philae, on 7 October. It captures the side of the Rosetta spacecraft and one of its 14 metre-long solar arrays, with 67P/C-G in the background. Not only does the comet appear much larger than in last month’s image, the active ‘neck’ region of 67P/C-G is now clearly visible, with streams of dust and gas extending away from the comet. The primary landing site, currently known as Site J, can also be seen on the smaller lobe of the comet.

Two images, one with a short exposure time, one with a longer one, were combined to capture the whole dynamic range of the scene, from the bright parts of the solar arrays to the dark comet and the dark insulation cladding the Rosetta spacecraft.

CIVA, the Comet Infrared and Visible Analyser, is one of ten instruments on-board Philae. The CIVA-P part of the instrument comprises seven micro-cameras arranged around the top of the lander to take panorama images, while CIVA-M is a visible/infrared microscope imager/spectrometer that will the study the composition, texture, and albedo of surface samples.

The 7 October selfie is the last image from Philae before the lander separates from Rosetta on 12 November. The next image will be taken by CIVA shortly after separation, when the lander will look back at the orbiter to bid it a final farewell. While the lander’s ROLIS instrument will take images during the descent phase, CIVA will be tasked with making a 360 degree panoramic image of the landing site, including a section in stereo, once safely on the surface of 67P/C-G. The images and other data collected by Philae will provide important in situ information about this particular region on the comet, providing ‘ground truth’ data that can be used to complement the data collected for the whole comet from the Rosetta orbiter now and into 2015, as the comet becomes more active.

Final confirmation of the landing site and its landing scenario is under discussion today at ESA’s Lander Operations Readiness Review, being held at ESOC in Darmstadt. A formal announcement of the outcome will be made tomorrow, 15 October.



  • brobof says:

    Just too cool for words. Safe landing now.

    • Mike says:

      Why do most pictures from space have to be in black and white? Is it because of a limited data to be transmitted? Just wondering. Great work for sure.Good luck! Should get a lot of unknown answers! I appreciate so much, what you guys are doing!

      • Benjamin says:

        They transmit with 16kbit/s,
        I guess color images would take too long (x4 the size of BW)

  • Marc says:

    Indeed, WOW. Great work, great picture

  • DavidW says:

    Great one Emily

    Here is a poem I wrote as a tribute to you all.


    With tales of comets, Mankind has journeyed, learning, growing
    Fear crept from face to face within the eyes of our ancestors
    Peering into the blackness of portent space, misunderstanding
    Fearing what’s riding on the comets tail, and it’s prophecies

    Medieval man, we think, could never grasp the truth, reality
    As we can neither, to this day, have completeness, only strive
    Yet, something, something brings us closer, closer, our ingenuity?
    And to the comets tail we truly come, face to face, beyond lies

    And on this blogging, craggy frozen boggy face we rave
    spectacular speculations, truth unfolding above or beneath us
    Truth permeating from the rocks and dust ahead of the eye of Osiris
    As Rosetta swoops to catch the very tail it rides, a comets tale

    For the tale of Rosetta, that, will soon be closing, short lived
    That is, at the side of the comets tale, as comets lumber on
    But Rosetta, now Rosetta is born of a Man and a Woman
    And It does not lumber, it grows and develops, it seeks, explores

    Probing back to the very beginnings of our existence, looking
    Looking possibly, at that very giver of life to the first Life, sailing with it
    Looking through the eyes of a thousand teaming eyes, sailing with them
    The men and women that made them, and made the dream come true

    Rosetta team we thank you

  • franck says:

    wonderfull !!!

  • donquijotemuc says:


  • “Two images, one with a short exposure time, one with a longer one, were combined to capture the whole dynamic range of the scene” – real aficionados would be even more impressed by the long exposure image alone, to get a feeling or what it would actually be like to be on Rosetta, even if its structures came out heavily overexposed.

    • jhs says:

      Great picture – nice motage:
      The comet seems to be illuminated from the lower left.
      The solar panel from the back of the viewer.
      I guess we see the back of the panels which seem to be oriented towards the sun. Nevertheless there is light on the back of the panels: where does it come from ?
      Could it be that the panel image was taken at a different time than the comet image ?
      When Rosetta is in an orientation that light fells on the back of the panels, the comet would apear flat because there are no shadows …

  • Jacob nielsen says:

    Another selfie. Yes we know: it’s a amazing, you traveled this long way. Now you are here, snapping selfies. ESA, it is getting embarrasSing… I guess What made me hooked on this mission were the tears of emotion she by mr. Andrea M. When I watched the wake up transmission, I stared at that spectrum analyzer and felt like part of something big. Stupid, stupid me. Ignorant me. Astronomy, physics, rocket science (actual rocket science) that happens not to be my line of work. Biology and electronics is. What you are about to find, what you have already found, is not irrelevant to me. I teach. Some of your work will enter my work. Neil Armstrong on the moon: a selfie? Columbus on Cuba: a selfie? Watson & Crick inside the DNA: a selfie, Leonardo daVinci: a selfie? Well yes, but had he shown us only that, we would know that he was really good at sketching. We know that you are tied by contracts that date back to the 90′, but this is not good, this is not how it should have been.

    • AndreH says:

      It is very funny how times are chnging. When the two voyagers passed the outer planets we were impressed by the pics they have been taking of Jupiter and Saturn……Nowadays people are complaining that “only” pictures are shown.
      I bet if the camera woould not have been mounted on the chest of Buzz Aldrins space suit Neil Armstrong would have taken a selfie too….

      • Jacob nielsen says:

        Hi Andre, I guess I’m people?. The selfie as such is not bad at all: picture perfect, photoshopped, aestheticly pleasing. The larger picture is less pleasing to me and other people. Have you taken a look at “cartoon Rosetta”, riding through space carrying snugly little baby Philae? Who is that going to appeal to? Certainly not my son, age 9. I would say 7 years and less. Ok, ESA wants the attention of little children, sweet. But there are problems: 7 year olds do not surf ESA’s website. To find comets and Rosetta (and ESA) remotely interresting, my son (age 9 remember, beyond the scope of public relation) needs me, his parent, to feed him with an interrest. How is that supposed to happen? This is a scientific mission, but publicly it is presented as a roadtrip. Wouldn’t you have been a little less than umused, if, say, you were invited to watch the moonlanding, and *all* you received was Armstrong-selfies? I see only two explanation to all of this: either adults are totally irrelevant in ESA’s PR strategy, or contracts with participants completely cuts off public access to anyting remotely “scientific”.

        • AndreH says:

          yes, I assumed you to be people me being in another group of people ;-)…. ESA’s PR strategy can always be questioned. I personally feel a great awe looking at those pictures and beiing a physicist I love the rocket science behind it. The only science I would expect from Rosetta at the moment are raw data which would not be of any use for us people. The real science will take a couple of years. All the public saw from the moon landing where a bunch of nice awesome pictures. The whole science came years later and is partially still going on.Ther was not even a live coverage of the moon landing in German (European?) TV (because that was not possible at that time AFAIK) . The only things we had where some pictures of starting rockets, poor animations, rocket models in hands of TV scientists…..and so on. I truly believe you are expecting too much. We live in the age of “Avatar” “Star Wars” and alike and are used to all kinds of realisticanimation stuff. Maybe it is simply the fact that a 2 minute dog fight scene from “Star Wars” in anesouround beats any “boring” bw picture. As I said, too high expectations

          • logan says:

            So you where there ANDREH. My first ever TV. A 10″ vertical sync forever jumping B&W set. Resolution there was very probably 128 lines. Deliberately unfocused. Pure PR 😉 . As a kid really enjoyed it. Four months latter the best technical dossier (about forty pages) at the back of my Natural Sciences 5th Year Public School Book. Not a bit of the science.

          • logan says:

            That were the very ‘cold war’ years. ‘Space’ endeavors where just a ‘seasoning’ to the astronomical rocket budgets. This are not those times.

    • THOMAS says:

      I agree 100%.

  • To such romantic author—David,

    What an inspiring warmhearted expression of great words. So electrifying & striking words from a man perspectives. I’m on edge LOL

  • test…and hello out…

  • JanderMoore says:

    2014: A Comet Odyssey.

    Just Epic.

  • luis alonso says:

    Very impressive, indeed!

  • Henk Smid says:

    Verdorie ! This is great.

  • Ken says:

    Typical showing off from self-absorbed Rosetta and her selfies. I bet she posts them right to her Facebook account too.

  • I have read about the almost zero albedo from 67P and so I am extremely interested with what exposure values all the images of the comet are taken. f/stop, exposure time and ISO.

  • Sajid Rabbani says:

    There must be some technical reason why we cannot see another selfie before Philae separates from Rosetta on 12th Nov.
    Otherwise it would have been a great view to see another selfie from a distance as close as possible.

  • Gary Sprang says:

    Great work! Excellent pictures! Best of luck on the landing phase.

  • Birgit Hofmann says:

    Yes, a great picture, star wars on rosetta..

    Thank´s rosetta team, and always :

    GO, philae !

  • Jouni Issakainen says:

    Funny: looking at the shadows of the comet, as if the material gassing out would not go to the direction away from the sun?

    • Kamal Lodaya says:

      Jouni: It is the tail which is pushed back by the solar wind and hence in a direction away from the Sun. The Hubble space telescope images of Siding Spring A1 show jets in different directions.

    • Arto Vuorela says:

      I was wondering the same. Could it be due to the considerable rotation of comet?

  • Ralph says:

    Will the lander be touching down in an area “with streams of dust and gas”? I imagine emissions begin as a surface is exposed to the sun. If the lander is in an emitting area, would it be visible in a picture?

  • John says:

    Why do people think that selfie is a synonym for photograph?!

  • George Wealleans says:

    Sweet! I didn’t think anyone did prose anymore.

    Looking forward to the landing now.


    • Jacob nielsen says:

      Prose? At first I read pose, made no sense in the context 🙂

  • Kai Roesner says:

    Jouni: Close to the comet nucleus material ejection is mainly driven by the pressure of the sublimating ices. Since the sublimation is due to the sun heating up the comet’s surface the direction of the material ejection is likely to point toward the sun. This can be seen on the images from Giotto’s encounter with comet 1P/Halley (http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2012/11/Comet_Halley_close_up2), too. Only further out from the nucleus solar radiation pressure and orbital dynamics take over, pushing the material away from the sun and behind the comet nucleus (w/r/t its motion around the sun).

  • Ian McWeen says:

    G,day from down under. Have been following this since September arrival and have been truly amazed at some of the pictures. But I do share some of the concerns that some posters have mentioned. I feel that we wont get immediate science when Philae lands. Can ESA assure that we (the common man/woman) will get good science asap after Philae lands? Keep up the great work. Also good to see that Australia is playing a part in this. http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Operations/New_Norcia_-_DSA_1

  • Antonio says:

    What are the bright spots/dots on the panels?

  • Dave says:

    Water, Water everywhere
    but not a drop to drink

    Well not if you are on the surface of the comet.

    The discussion is still ongoing about water in the tail or coma but not on or in the comet so for an alternative view, try this NASA report;Here is an interesting NASA article in which it is conceded that the presence of the hydroxyl radical in the coma does not necessarily imply the existence of water on comets. 14.6. INFERENCES ON THE NATURE OF COMETS FROM EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS

    The assumption of ices as important bonding materials in cometary nuclei rests in almost all cases on indirect evidence, specifically the observation of atomic hydrogen (Lyman [Greek letter] alpha emission) and hydroxyl radical in a vast cloud surrounding the comet, in some cases accompanied by observation of H20+ or neutral water molecules. In addition, CH3CN, HCN, and corresponding radicals and ions are common constituents of the cometary gas envelope. These observations can be rationalized by assuming (Delsemme, 1972; Mendis, 1973) that the cometary nuclei consist of loose agglomerates containing, in addition to silicates (observed by infrared spectrometry (Maas et al., 1970)) and also water ice with inclusions of volatile carbon and nitrogen compounds.

    It has been suggested by Lal (1972b) that the Lyman a emission could be caused by solar wind hydrogen, thermalized on the particles in the dust cloud surrounding the comet. Experiments by Arrhenius and Andersen (1973) irradiating calcium aluminosilicate (anorthite) surfaces with protons in the 10-keV range resulted in a substantial (~10 percent) yield of hydroxyl ion and also hydroxyl ion complexes such as CaOH.

    Observations on the lunar surface (Hapke et al., 1970; Epstein and Taylor, 1970, 1972) also demonstrate that such proton-assisted abstraction of oxygen (preferentially O16) from silicates is an active process in space, resulting in a flux of OH and related species. In cometary particle streams, new silicate surfaces would relatively frequently be exposed by fracture and fusion at grain collision. The production of hydroxyl radicals and ions would in this case not be rate-limited by surface saturation to the same extent as on the Moon(for lunar soil turnover rate, see Arrhenius et al. (1972)).

    These observations, although not negating the possible occurrence of water ice in cometary nuclei, point also to refractory sources of the actually observed hydrogen and hydroxyl. Solar protons as well as the products of their reaction with silicate oxygen would interact with any solid carbon and nitrogen compounds characteristic of carbonaceous chondrites to yield volatile carbon and nitrogen radicals such as observed in comets. Phenomena such as “flares,” “breakups,” “high-velocity jets,” and nongravitational [236] acceleration are all phenomena that fit well into a theory ascribing them to the evaporation of frozen volatiles. However, with different semantic labels the underlying observations would also seem to be interpretable as manifestations of the focusing and dispersion processes in the cometary region of the meteor stream, accompanied by solar wind interaction.

    highlight added

    nick c

    Posts: 1802
    Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
    Location: connecticut Top

    Re: Are they saying water when they mean OH radical? Please
    by viscount aero » Wed Aug 20, 2014 12:20 am

    To answer the original question, it is OH- radicals they are detecting yesteday, today, and tomorrow. That is all they have detected for the past 27 years starting with Comet Halley. There is no actual water.

    To add, Nick, though you have highlighted the region that you did in your above post (which is of great importance), the last paragraph, in my opinion, is even more telling. What they are saying–albeit very tacitly and vaguely–is nearly exactly what the “Electric Comet” documentary explains (in far greater detail) as the comet interacts with the solar wind.

    Read the bold part below. They are admitting in plain sight a giant thing–yet remain semantically vague-ish and not quite so specific as to avoid the tendency to actually rule out comets being dry and reactive bodies within the solar plasma. They blatantly word it this way: “…of the actually observed hydrogen and hydroxyl…”

    “…of the actually observed hydrogen and hydroxyl” In other words, there is NO water ever detected. Not ever. Yet virtually all press releases for nearly 30 years have not only implied the existence of water, but have outright demanded that the public believe that comets are typically going to “gush” water out. That and that comets are icy and snowy. Yet all of this is completely false

    In other words, they’ve already admitted long ago that there is no actual water even though they have told the public–as fact–that the “main event” for a comet is water.

    What’s more, they even went so far as to seriously hypothesize that Earth’s oceans were seeded by trillions of cometary impacts! National Geographic or NOVA even made a documentary about this!

    Skip to about 22:00 in the video:

    nick c wrote:

    At least they have room for both views and confident enough to discuss

    • Jacob nielsen says:

      Hi Dave, you realize that you put a lot of trust into the least likely explanation to the source of hydroxyls? Now, we dont wave a lot to work with do we? So we are left to speculate. But try reading te single post on the MIRO instrument… Do believe lots of water is detected 😉

    • Jacob nielsen says:

      Try not to be too disappointed if it eventually revealed that 67p holds some water. Me I will be excited either way, as long as it is actual scientific results!

  • AndreH says:

    Yes, at the surface I would expect gases erupt perpendicular (or almost) to the surface and are later pushed away by the solar wind away from the sun.
    Also it is really har two tell a direction in 3d from a 2d pic.

  • Comeatstalker says:

    If no water around then no beer as well. I suppose that our really big planets also where supplied with their moisture from comets, no not really. Im convinced that H2O is present inside the comet as well as a lot of other stuff but not like in icebergs, more like in an old trash can where just about anything can be found. In Sweden once there was a person that sold a lot of shares to stupid people believing in his idea that methane was carried with a meteor that crashed in what now is called the Siljan-ring. They drilled a lot and got nothing but empty pockets.

    Its easy to convince the public to believe in almost anything, media is always telling the truth and so are institutions, and there is no risk at all that criminal minds are present as well, right?

    • logan says:

      ‘…where just about anything can be found’.


      Think that as for accretion processes there is a limit in size.

      • logan says:

        Future comet scientists could end being ‘trash’ investigators.

  • logan says:

    Hi Emily. Don’t see how to make threads in this new format.

  • Rob says:

    @Jacob nielsen – so… you don’t have anything positive to say about this amazing mission. Which tells us a lot about yourself. Thanks for that, have a good one.


    • Jacob nielsen says:

      Hi Rob, well I wrote “amazing”, from lack of imagination, you chose to my words. I follow this mission as close as I can, which is more frustrating, that I initially, naively believed. You are happy go lucky about it all, and me, you guessed it: never satisfied 🙂

  • Jouni Issakainen says:

    Kamal & Kai,

    Thanks for your kind clarifications as to jet directions.

  • Dave says:

    Hi Jacob
    I happy which ever is chosen but diss appointed there is no debate. I may be too late for you you seem convinced, the article from NASA does not discount ice , not does it come down certain that the opposite is true. They are eminent scientists that are saving their conclusion for more data.
    However if you are an ice supporter are you not worried that the handful of close ups with comets have found no surface or deep ice. When you see a 40 meter boulder that’s fallen off a ridge don’t you think ice would be detectable on the ridge it came from or on it. Do we really need to dig for 40 meters or more to find ice? If so what process is going to sublimate at that depth, it would not matter dark side or bright side, the sun won’t go that deep.
    Nice to talk to you I wish you luck

    • logan says:

      Hi Dave. Tend to think that surface is highly ionizing. Nowadays, Very old 67P data says of 3.6 Tons/h of molecular water (Computed at overall ejecta).

    • logan says:

      Not even sure if it is a boulder. Think Kamal pointed it first.

    • Jacob nielsen says:

      Hi Dave. Let’s say 67p looks roughly like a barbecued half eaten apple. To me it resembles best choal, carbon black, maybe very black rock, just to pick among material that I am fairly familiar with. Where I live there are no mountains and no black rock. It is all soil and rather humid. In winter it snows. I grew up on an small island with steep soil formations on shores. They really resembled rock, but they were clay, silt and sand with some stones “thrown in”. I see no water on 67p! I read that the MIRO instrument detects water. I don’t know what the current rate of release of water is as measured by MIRO, and we may doubt the method used: I don’t see it described in detail, so how can we know it is not detecting something else? or water formed in the coma not originating from the coma itself? I have nothing invested in the presence of water on 67p! Maybe there has been a lot, maybe it is gone, maybe there i still some left. I am not sure I see boulders fallen of a ridge, I see boulders also where there are no ridges in the “up” direction. I do not, and did not imagine a super sized regular snowball with a thin coat of paint. Who did? I’d like to see some evidence. If 67p is some kind of rock, it will have to be hollow or porous. Considering a massive rock would disregard calculations of average density, which would be extremely controversial. At this stage the sublimation has been speculated to stem from gravitational stress causing heating in the interior. The surface layer may very well be highly insulating, so the radiation from the still distant sun may be less significant, at least at this stage.

  • logan says:

    Congratulations to people on the bridge.

    Leave the port as soon as you can.

  • AndreH says:

    Organisatory question: The appearance of the website has changed. My todays posts have vanisched. HAve I been moderated? Or was there a problem. One more: the ReCptscha function shows only almost unreadable text…..I have to click about 10 times to get something readable

  • eric domeier says:


    Can you email a very hi-res copy of this image so that I may have a large print made of it?

    Thanks, Eric D.

    • logan says:

      Hi Eric, Seems native resolution. If on Windows, you can take a photo-editor and make an ‘inteligent’ scaling. If you don’t have one you can download a very recommended free one from irfanview.info. (On advanced options you can even select the scaling algorithm). Linuxers have lots of options. 🙂

  • Marco says:

    Fabulous ESA video of the close orbits to lander phase. Brilliant to see actual comet shape and rotation. http://youtu.be/4a3eY5siRRk

  • Robin Sherman says:

    What has happened to the blog page from Emily on 15/10/2014 about the confirmation of landing site J?

    • logan says:

      Hi Robin. Found it on link ‘OLDER’ at bottom of ‘visual’ menu.

  • logan says:

    Congratulations to People on the Bride 🙂

  • DavidW says:

    Hi Emily,
    I wonder how many really understand my prosaic poem. Especially the line “And on this blogging, craggy frozen boggy face we rave” I nearly put ‘Rant and Rave’

  • DavidW says:

    I meant to finnish with a 🙂

  • emily says:

    Hi all, apologies for the technical difficulties with posting comments, viewing the blog, missing/delayed posts etc, there were some issues with the platform the last 24 hours and even I couldn’t post any comments to let you know about it! I hope that everything is now back to normal 🙂 Apologies for the inconvenience (and if I trashed any of your comments it’s because they appeared multiple times in my moderator panel).

    • Robin Sherman says:

      Thanks Emily. I dread to think how many frustrated posts and duplicates you’ve had to sort through. We might have a go at ESA, but we all enjoy this blog and are totally engrossed in what Rosetta can tell us about 67P. I for one am proud of what they have achieved.

  • AndreH says:

    @ Logan: (There was no “reply” button I could use on your post so this will be in a new thread.)
    Hi Logan: Yes I was a kind of “there”. Actually I was 5 years old when Apollo 11 landed, but this happens to be one of my very first “TV memories”. A bit blurred, but still vivid. The next thing I really remeber was Apollo 13 including my Dad explaining me how the capsule could get reflected by the Earth’S atmosphere if the angle was’t correct. Ok enough chit / chat.
    I still disagree with those here in the blog who are saying there is not enouhg real “scientific” posted. As I have said before the only thing to expect at this point are raw data which need to be interpreted. As I also said before I think there are a lot of over expectations. I repeat: The rocket science alone is awesome. The trajectory video: great!! Imagine what has been done! They are there! They are orbiting a comet! They are going to land a probe on that comet soon! (keep fingers crossed). Also I have seen the argument coming up it is all paid by RTax money so public has a right to know everything immediately. I disagree also here. An army tank or fighter plane is also paid by tax money, that does not mean that everyone could use it or know everything about it. Maybe an extreme example, but you can easily think of other things. (Computers in administration offices, the photo copy machine at your local high school…….public purpose does not automatically mean accesible for every one).
    I feel we will not agree on this topic, so I think we should agree to disagree, maybe.

    • logan says:

      Sorry about the upsetting, Andreh. Some of us -me specially- write here lacking consideration for newcomers. Glad your comment give the context.

      • AndreH says:

        No upsetting here…
        I follow the blog quite a while. Normally I stay away from posting as I feel I have not very much to contribute to the scientific debate. And normally I stay away from starting “flame wars”. It wa just that first line in the post of Jacob Nielsen (see alos my reply to him before) that caught my attention. For the resons I have stated there I wrote my reply tying to give some further explanation about my back ground and the context I was seeing it in the following posts.

    • Jacob nielsen says:

      I think you are right: common people should not be allowed to fly military jets, that’s why similarly Osiris photos are not published: somone could, err.. Crash them! or do awful things to them in Photoshop. Has anyony asked to use ESA’s photocopiers? Or fiddle about in mission control? No, we are just begging to know the current increase in water emission rate (rough figures, stating computational method) they have been published once, so it is possible. Infrared data please.. Etc. Why? Because we love this mission and because we are so impatient. And also to be able to settle our ongoing discussions like: rock versus ice and dust? Or exotic theories about electric sublimation or crazy weather phenomena.

      • AndreH says:

        @Jacob Nielsen.I understand very well why you are impatient. There is nothing wrong with the desire to gather knowledge. My first reply to you’re post was driven by the fact that I personally could not (and still cannot) understand the obvious disappointment and slight anger (which seemed to underlie in your words) over something that from my point of view is great achievement by itself. (the great pictures we have seen so far, in this special case the mission selfie). Impatience I can understand, but annoyance with pictures I personally would fill my living room walls with (if my wife would allow me to do so…..). I don’t get that. For the examples I gave: They should not been taken literally. Of course you have not asked for using ESA’s photo copier. My examples are meant explain that “public property” or “property founded by tax money” (which can be intelectual property as science data), are not automativcally accesible or usable by everyone. I saw this line of argumentation in the blog before (not necesarrily from you Jacob Nielsen). Typically I don’t post to often my opinion in such blogs because one can easily start a “flame war”. But I simply could not leave this quote: “Another selfie. Yes we know: it’s a amazing, you traveled this long way. Now you are here, snapping selfies. ESA, it is getting embarrasSing…” uncommented.
        Therfore my voyager and moon landing examples. I am sure we will still not agree, I just try to make clear why my first post in this blog addresses something that is non science, but an “attack” on someone elses post.

  • dave says:

    Hi Emily

    We seem to have lost the 2 pictures that showed site c in close up, just when I was getting to know Bob the builder, Aparently he left some building materials there.
    Any chance to get the pictures back? They were some of the most detailed we have had.


  • dave says:

    Thyanks Emily,

    Strangely I can find the pictures on my (I)phone more easily than on desk top.

    Do you have any clues about the structures on C (b)?

    There have been a few different suggestions including two different hot processes.

    But Bob insists he left them on site and will be back to get them for his next job.

  • Cometstalker says:

    So far this mission is a triumph for engineers creating the instruments and gadgets to get all the way and beyond.
    Scientific research is totally camouflaged and i have my doubts that it is present at all. Maybe the ESA alchemists are gathering blog informations, feeding us with bits and pieces, a bit manipulated for their experimental use of us in the maze, then make an average of it to present it as their new theses. Something like this new dance on the Wheatstone bridge, the impe-dance.

    • Robin Sherman says:

      That thought has occurred to me also. Read the “About This Blog” and it implies that might not be too far from the truth. The rate we are going here with our theories we will have it all worked out before they get round to telling everyone.

  • jason says:

    This is definitely the best ive seen so far. The celebrity selfie will not top this one.

  • GoSelfie says:

    This is the coolest selfie photo I have ever seen 🙂

  • Peter says:

    Pity that this selfie won’t get as much coverage as the paid celebrity selfies! That’s life I guess.

Comments are closed.