Similar Rock Formations in Mars Rover Images
The Mars photo referenced in the AI upscaling post features several rock formations exhibiting the same bulbous and unusual shape as the supposed Tic Tac object. When viewed from different angles and zoom levels, these rocks appear much more naturally integrated into the larger rock formation. It’s important to remember that this imagery comes from the Mars Rover, which is capturing close-up images of rocks, rather than from a satellite. You can see the raw image here: Mars Raw Image.
In this raw photo, the Tic Tac is circled in the lower left, while a very similar formation that’s clearly part of the larger structure is circled in the upper right. 
Here’s the same rock formation captured from a slightly different angle and zoom level, just moments before the one in the initial post. In this view, the formation seems much less unnatural and integrates well with the surrounding rocks. The quality is decreased because of the wider zoom: Alternate Angle Image.
In this image, the Tic Tac appears again in the bottom left corner, but it looks more like a natural part of the rock landscape this time: 
.
In my opinion, this object is not hovering, and it definitely does not resemble a 20-foot-long fighter jet as suggested in the original thread.
You make some valid points regarding the context of the images and the interpretation of the formations in the Mars Rover photos. It’s important to consider the surrounding structures and the angles from which the photos are taken. The bulbous shapes could certainly just be natural rock formations that have been shaped by environmental factors, rather than something anomalous or extraterrestrial.
Also, the variations in perspective and zoom can significantly change how these formations appear. The fact that they look more connected and natural at different angles suggests that some of the initial interpretations might have been influenced by a desire to see something extraordinary where there might not be.
Your use of the raw images from NASA to support your argument is appreciated, as it provides a clearer understanding of the formations in question. In any case, it’s always good to approach these intriguing images with a healthy dose of skepticism and a focus on the science. Thanks for sharing your insights!