The Face on Mars Revealed
Is the face on Mars an artificial sculpture made by alien hands, or merely a natural hill?
Filed under Aliens & UFOs
| Skeptoid #97 April 22, 2008 Podcast transcript | Listen | Subscribe |
|
|
Imagine yourself in a NASA control room, late at night. The coffee's cold and, outside, the rain drums steadily against the window. You start to drowse off in your chair, when suddenly the teletype jumps to life with a loud mechanical bang. You're startled, but annoyed; and as it starts hammering out its latest data, you try to go back to sleep. You've heard this all before and seen a million badly printed images. But then, as it finishes printing the second page, your eye catches that long sheet of perforated printer paper folding into a pile on the floor, and you see something unbelievable. There, in yet another series of photographs from Mars, is a distinct human face.
It was 1976, and Viking I was sending its latest images. Among a number of similar hillocks and mesas in a region of Mars called Cydonia Mensae, one feature stood out. It was a clear rendering of a human face! NASA engineers loved it; they passed it around, put it out for publication, and had all sorts of fun with it. But what they hadn't anticipated was that some in the public thought it was actually an artificially carved human face, despite the accompanying explanation that it was just a hill that happened to have this funny resemblance to a face when the light was at a certain angle. One of it most important distinguishing features, a nostril, was only one of many black dots that actually represent missing data in the image. Before long, to the dismay of astronomers worldwide, there was a firmly established pop-culture belief that there was a real gigantic human face on Mars, carved in perfect detail by aliens.
As the decades wore on, better cameras took better images, finally culminating in the 2001 image taken by the Mars Global Surveyor, with a super high resolution of about six feet per pixel. As you can see on the Skeptoid.com web page, the Cydonia "face" turns out to be merely an unremarkable hill, with plenty of natural random variations on its surface, and no longer looks anything remotely like a face or any other kind of carving. However you can see the general contours that made up the facial features in the original image. While those black dots of missing data in the original image gave the illusion of sharp focus, the image is now shown to have been extremely blurry. Although a two-dimensional view of the hill does have the appearance of some symmetry, the improved image shows that it's nowhere near as symmetric as it appeared to be in the original blurry image.
The popular belief in an artificial sculpture would probably have never emerged if not for the writings of conspiracy theorist Richard Hoagland. Hoagland saw the original image, immediately concluded that an artificial carving was the only reasonable explanation, and wrote the book Monuments of Mars claiming that the Cydonia face is only one of many artificial structures on Mars, including pyramids and whole cities. He claims that NASA has exhaustive photographic evidence of all such structures, but that they cover them up and suppress them to avoid the mass panic that would inevitably ensue should Hoagland's claims be proven. Other claims of Hoagland's include taking credit for designing the plaque that was on Pioneer 10, which was done by Carl Sagan and which Hoagland had nothing to do with; that he first conceived the idea of subsurface oceans on Europa in a 1980 article, even though scientists including Isaac Asimov had been proposing this throughout the 1970's; and that a concept involving trans-dimensional energy that he calls "hyperdimensional physics" is correct and that every educated and professional scientist is wrong about the nature of the universe. Since he has positioned himself as the leading public advocate for NASA's evil coverups and the "truth" about Martian civilization, I recommend that you at least read through the Wikipedia entry about Richard Hoagland to see just how disconnected this guy really is. And then, you might want to reconsider your sources if you take seriously any claims that Hoagland has promoted. Of course, this ad-hominem attack against Hoagland personally says nothing directly about the validity of his claim that the face is an artificial structure, so I'll refer you to the high resolution photos on the Skeptoid.com web site to make up your mind about that for yourself.
Geological features that happen to look like faces, people, or other objects are not rare. In Alberta Canada, there's a figure called the Badlands Guardian that, when viewed from the air, looks astonishingly like a Native American wearing a full headdress and listening to an iPod. In fact, it looks way more like a person than the Cydonia face ever did on its best day. Why hasn't Richard Hoagland claimed that somebody carved the Badlands Guardian? That would be a lot more plausible. He probably doesn't make that claim because it would be testable and easily falsified.
But the Badlands Guardian is only one example. The Old Man of the Mountain in New Hampshire looked just like the profile of a man jutting out from a cliff until it collapsed in 2003. North Carolina has a giant head sitting on a cliffside ledge called the Devil's Head. Sundance, Wyoming is home to the Old Man of the Park, and the Absaroka Range in Montana features an amazingly lifelike face called the Sleeping Giant near Livingston. Pictures of all of these are posted on the Skeptoid.com web site. But, these are all newcomers. From the day the first protohuman looked into the sky, we have marveled at the Man in the Moon, the largest facelike structure known.
Although some of these features are pretty astonishingly realistic, they don't even have to be. Your brain will still say "Face", even if it's as indistinct as the Cydonia face. This is a perceptual phenomenon called pareidolia, which is the tendency for the brain to see order in randomness. The famous Rorschach inkblot test is based on pareidolia. Pareidolia causes cryptozoologists to see crouched Bigfoots in forest photographs. It causes us to see a face made of headlights and grills on the front of a train or a truck, or the face of the Virgin Mary on a piece of toast. Pareidolia means that any two dots and a line, like those on the Cydonia face, will shout "eyes and mouth" to a human brain. Carl Sagan proposed that brains are hardwired to see faces. Without the phenomenon of pareidolia, no drawing less than a Rembrandt masterpiece would be recognizable as a face.
But let's even set pareidolia aside, and just look at the original blurry photograph of the Cydonia face. The face is about one square kilometer. The entire surface of Mars is about 150 million square kilometers. Thus, if we postulate that the Cydonia face is about a one-in-a-million oddity, probability dictates that somewhere on the surface of Mars, some 150 one-kilometer areas bear some equally improbable likeness. How many fist-sized rocks are there in a square kilometer of Martian surface? A million, maybe? If one in a million fist sized rocks bears some resemblance to J. Edgar Hoover, we should expect to find 150 million fist-sized rocks on the surface on Mars that look like J. Edgar Hoover. By the sheer weight of large numbers, it's a virtual certainty that the surface of Mars has natural structures that look like human faces, elephants, and Ferraris, when viewed from certain angles. By the same law, you'll also find these things on Venus, Titan, Pluto, and Halley's Comet.
So let's collect all of our evidence about the Cydonia face:
- It doesn't actually look anything like a face.
- Pareidolia gives us pretty loose parameters to decide what qualifies as a face.
- Probability absolutely requires hundreds of startlingly good faces on Mars, and on any other planet.
- We've never found any evidence of sculptor civilizations on Mars.
So, are the conspiracy theorists right, that an artificial sculpture is the most likely explanation for the Cydonia face? Well, I have to conclude that the evidence for that is pretty thin. A much better alternate explanation is available: That it is a simple natural structure, which when viewed with the details blurred out and with right lighting conditions, can look like a face, much like countless natural structures on Earth. What do you think?
You should follow me on twitter here.
© 2008 Skeptoid Media, Inc. Copyright information
References & Further Reading
Hoagland, Richard C. The Monuments of Mars: A City on the Edge of Forever. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books, 1987.
Morrison, D. "MGS Photographs 'Face on Mars'." Skeptical Inquirer. 1 May 1998, Volume 25, Number 3: 65.
Philips, Tony. "Unmasking the Face on Mars." Science@NASA. The Science and Technology Directorate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, 24 May 2001. Web. 13 Nov. 2009. <http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast24may_1.htm>
Posner, G. "The Face Behind the Face on Mars: A Skeptical Look at Richard Hoagland." Skeptical Inquirer. 1 Nov. 2000, Volume 24, Number 6: 20.
Robert, F., Robert, J. Faces. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 2000.
Sagan, Carl. The Demon Haunted World. New York: The Random House Publishing Group, 1995. 41-60.
Reference this article:
Dunning, Brian.
"The Face on Mars Revealed." Skeptoid Podcast. Skeptoid Media, Inc.,
22 Apr 2008. Web.
10 Sep 2010. <http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4097>
Discuss!
Remember, you should always read with skepticism the comments of anyone too lame to put their real name & city.
I immediately thought of this comic:
http://cectic.com/085.html
And, to link once more to pareidolia (aural this time) to one of Mr Dunning's fellow Skeptologists:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2008/04/12/praydolia/
I wonder if pareidolia effect different people more strongly. I can never see faces in those "There are two people in here" pictures, nor do I see the face on the moon, though I do a certain Disney character.
Of course, the conspiracy theorists are all claiming that the new pictures are faked, to deny the fact government has conctact with martians. After all, we all saw the face didn't we? It must be real!.
I didn't know the black pixels were missing data, I just asumed they were rocky outcroppings, casting shadow. One wonders why they didn't just interpolate them in, before releaseing them to the public?
PS. Brian, your concept of "High resolution" seems to differ a bit from the norm. I wouldn't call 250x250 pixels High resolution ;)
Alcari, Reykjavik, Iceland
April 22, 2008 3:03pm
The biggest problem with the Face on Mars conspiracy theory is the same one with all the others involving NASA somehow concealing life beyond Earth. Looking for life beyond Earth is one of NASA's reasons for existing. Success, or even a plausible facsimile, would mean Defense Department scale budgets for them.
And, frankly, the whole "prevent panic" idea is lame. Who's going to panic if there's an ancient sculpture on another planet? AIEE! Ancient carvings on Mars! Let's go turn over some cars and smash shop windows! Absurd.
Cambias, Amherst, MA
April 22, 2008 5:50pm
Brian said that if the Badland's Guardian were man-made it is a testable claim. How could we test it?
Eugene, Belgium
April 22, 2008 9:21pm
The presentation about the Man on Mars is great and the explanation quite interesting. However, the mention of Wikipedia makes one skeptical about the whole text. Wikipedia should be taken with a lot of skepticism - maybe an article on this web site by the Skeptoid is in order?
J Liard, Gatineau/QC
April 23, 2008 4:52am
You can test the Badland's Guardian by looking for tool marks. Even if they're weathered, you should be able to see some evidence of carving. Also, it'd probably be obvious from more angles than a natural feature that just happened to look like a face.
I have a question. I don't do much remote sensing (read, none). Why do the patches of missing data appear as spots on this picture? Why was there missing data in the first place? The missing data appears to be uniform in size, and random (from a quick glance); I always thought it was just really big rocks lying around.
Gregory, USA
April 23, 2008 7:27am
The Cydonia pic is likely a composite, meaning that the missing data might actually be missing. If it's a composite from multile measurements, then a missing measurement would be the exact same size as the next.
Alcari, Reykjavik, Iceland
April 23, 2008 7:58am
I spent a long email thread trying to convince one guy that Hoagland's claims were bogus. Hoagland has a fancy drawing of the Cydonia region which includes all kinds of fancy numbers and calculations. When you take the picture put it down and try and measure the angles yourself you discover this odd thing. The width of the lines is such that the angles that can be read can by off by as much as two or three degrees (maybe more). The lengths are equally suspicious. Yet Hoagland manages to calculate to large significant figures what the values are. Getting people to understand what 1 pixel = 20ft means is difficult. They fail to recognize that their own vision has discrimination issues. Get close to a television and the screen looks all fuzzy. Backup a a couple of feet and it clears up. The biggest advantage of HD? is that you can sit closer to the television and not see fuzz. Well the ability to see sweat on Kobe's face is useful also.
brad tittle, Bremerton, WA
April 23, 2008 1:07pm
So essentially we're dealing with a faulty sensor (or one with something in the way), such that when you put the pictures together you'd get that repeated circular patch of missing data?
It's the pattern that's confusing me. I'd expect mechanical error to be more predictable than this seems to be. I know one device orbiting the Earth produces a checkerboard pattern of error, for example. I can't think of how to make a sensor error that lacks a clear pattern. I'm sure there is a way, and I'm equally sure that there's some pattern I'm missing, though.
Gregory, USA
April 23, 2008 9:37pm
My favourite book on this for sheer comic relief if "Martian Genesis" by Herbert Brennan. The height of stupidity is reached when he includes in his book a picture of what is obviously a clay model, claiming it to be a 3d rendering made using photoclinometry. I scanned it (sorry res is low) and uploaded it here:
http://wiki.mindcloud.org/w/images/Martiancomedy.jpg
Worth seeing for a laugh. In the book you can see the surface marks on the clay.
Paul, Osaka, Japan
April 23, 2008 10:04pm
obviously the meta-governmental
conspiracy has simply dispatched its ufos and bombed all of the martian ruins in an effort to maintain their cover story. why wasn't this military cover up operation discussed? i even have some fuzzy photographs of the launch. i would show them to you but they are in the post.
just joking. another satisfying episode.
thanks Brian.
adam, toronto, canada
April 23, 2008 11:20pm
Check out the faces on Google Earth.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dto3mB__0Io
Max, Boston, MA
April 24, 2008 12:20am
gregory, i'm not a rocket scientists or anything, but if I had to guess, i'd say the missing was probably unclear data tranmission, or corruption of stored data (by radiation, faulty storage or whatever) not mechanical error.
If anyone knows the real answer, please say so, as I'm really curious as well.
Alcari, Reykjavik, Iceland
April 24, 2008 4:11am
Very funny picture, Paul. LOL
Mary T, Salt Lake City
April 24, 2008 10:51am
I like the Old Man of Hull, formed by the west coast of England:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=54.131869,-0.488892&spn=1.200544,2.570801&t=k&z=9
Paul: That looks suspiciously like the Martian Manhunter. Deliberate?
http://www.superherostuff.com/OtherItems/Action_Figures/images/martian_manhunter_action_figure_jla_classified_series_1_2.jpg
Hrm. If Hoagland honestly believes that panic is inevitable, if his claims are believed, doesn't that make him guilty of inciting riots?
wintermute, Cincinnati, OH
April 25, 2008 4:44am
As hilarious as the likeness is I believe the resemblance is somewhat unintentional. He was constantly trying to claim that all humanity stemmed from the Martian society which was culturally identical to ancient Egyptians, hence I think he was trying to make the face look Egyptian.
I liked the T-Rex face at the end there Max
Paul, Osaka, Japan
April 25, 2008 9:16pm
Actually, the High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment (HiRISE) imaged the 'face' at 30 centimeters per pixel, last year.
http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_003234_2210
http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/iasclient/ares312.jsp?file=PDS/EXTRAS/RDR/PSP/ORB_003200_003299/PSP_003234_2210/PSP_003234_2210_RED.NOMAP.JP2
GuyMac, Tucson, AZ
April 26, 2008 1:37pm
I find it pretty hard to believe it's just random and I don't know much about pareidolia exept what brian said so it must have been carved or made by martians i just don't understand pareidolia so it's got to be made by martians.
Anonymouse, Anonymouse Town
April 27, 2008 2:52am
Pehaps, Anonymouse, it was made by anonymous mice.
Marius Vanderlubbe, Nullabour Plain, Australia.
April 28, 2008 8:08pm
Hoagland is a nut, just do a google search and look at his own website. R.I.P. The Old Man Of the Mountain
NH native, New Hampshire
April 30, 2008 8:40am
J.C People!! " I dont understand it, so it must be made by martians" LOL, Have IQ's dropped radically since I was in school? We are genetically programmed to find faces in patterns, understand? That means we will see a face just about ANYWHERE we look, any cloud, pond, rock, everywhere. What disturbs me more is that scientists wanted to send a spacecraft to mars to find the alien's that carved the face. "stupid is as stupid does sir"
Rick VanHuss, Arlington, TX
May 05, 2008 4:35pm
Hasn't anyone noticed the lion's face in The Cydonia Mensae region ?
Sérgio G. Taboada, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
May 07, 2008 10:04am
That IS a very good lion, isn't it? Anyone else ever notice?
Joe Strickland, Clarksburg, WV
May 08, 2008 4:42pm
Sure the old guy is off his rocker a bit and no after all the evidence brought forward from other mars missions i would also say that the face is just a pile of rocks. However, this article attacks the oldman a little too much. Instead, it should attack his findings. Now call me crazy but i thought we were supposed to be looking for extra terrestrial life along with the facts. Is it too much to think that maybe we once had intelegent neighbors somewhere in our galaxy. Now i dont think mars is the spot to look for it but I would hate to think that we are alone in this galaxy. Think of the billions of stars with planets orbiting them, how many planets can actually produce the same conditions found here on earth. Its hard to think that earth has the only intelegent life on it. Thats pretty well, arrogant. Think about it
Eric Wilson, Memphis Tn
June 03, 2008 2:24am
His push for the world to believe in the face on Mars doesn't rival his belief that there are pieces of stoves and pottery currently on the surface of Mars. He's of course referring to the rocks seen in the pictured snapped by the rovers. Also fun was his "evidence" of cities under the "poof dirt" on Mars he came forward with on Coast to Coast AM years ago. His article and pictures on that are buried somewhere in that mess he calls a website.
Cody, Fort Worth, TX
June 24, 2008 8:04pm
It is a lion, it's a huge lion and it's pouncing on the human. It's a warning from the stars people, cats are evil! They're just waiting for their chance.
Ged, Liverpool UK
July 23, 2008 5:34am
I never got why NASA would give us the evidence that proves that there are faces on Mars, and then deny those faces.
Morgan Z., Tracy, CA
August 28, 2008 8:55am
Wow! This is amazing! Is it true and can you guys try to put really good ones on this page?
This is awesome!
Natalia Merison
Natalia Merison, UK
October 12, 2008 8:10am
Morgan Wrote: "I never got why NASA would give us the evidence that proves that there are faces on Mars, and then deny those faces."
They never did publish proof the face on Mars. They circulated a photograph of something that looked like a face around other scientific circles. They had a good laugh. When the public saw these photos, they started to believe cover up.
Joseph Furguson, Brawley Ca
November 04, 2008 7:42pm
I am very disapointed in the lack of profesionalism on this site. Firstly the 3d image quoted as proving the face is just a hill is not a fair example as it is of a much lower resolution than the 2001 mgs image. Secondly the true history of the argument for the face being artificial arose not from a claim that their was a perfectly carved 3d face in cydonia, but that their was details on the image that seemed to indicate at least one nostril on the face, and what apeared to be round eyes within the eye sockets. The latest mars images taking by the new orbitor in 2007 seem to show, two iris features within the sockets, with what apear to be a pupil at the centre of the iris, combined with the two nostrils and eliptical eyelid revealed also, I am begining to wonder if maybe this feature really is artifitial after all. I say this being aomeone who is an unbeliever in the artificiality theory.
Thomas, seaham england
December 12, 2008 4:23pm
Thomas, England, said:
"The latest mars images taking by the new orbitor in 2007 seem to show, two iris features within the sockets, with what apear to be a pupil at the centre of the iris, combined with the two nostrils and elliptical eyelid revealed also, I am beginning to wonder if maybe this feature really is artifitial after all."
That 3d image is the first picture that NASA has was the first photo on this site. So he got the most accurate and up to date picture.
Are you sure that it was a face? It kind of looks like a shield to me.
Joseph Furguson, Brawley Ca
December 21, 2008 10:24am
There's a structure on Mars that looks like a face. So what! I'm sure if we explore the solar system in as much detail as Mars has been we will find many more 'anatomically similar' sites. This doesn't mean, however, that they are artificial. It happens through chance and because our brains make us see familiar objects. People are too quick to accept the easy option and far too slow to question what's around them.
Andrew, London, England
December 29, 2008 8:58am
When I look up to the clouds I see lots of faces, animals and maps of different countries. Does this mean clouds are artifical?
Tom Tervoort, IJmuiden, the Netherlands
January 02, 2009 8:32am
that face on mars is kreepy
austin, mborro
January 27, 2009 8:59am
I remain unconvinced! I suggest we all repent and ask forgiveness for ever doubting the existence of our martian overlords.
Oh wait...I think I see a bunny in the clouds. Hail, oh great leporid!
Carl Setzer, St. Paul, MN
February 04, 2009 10:23am
To everyone wondering about the circular missing data spots: This is really common in maps of this sort, of earth as well as mars. The picture we're seeing is a composite of many photos, and wherever the camera failed to record in time, the light was wrong, etc., we get a dead spot. This kind of thing is really irritating doing geomorphology, but for 1976 from orbit, seems like a good job to me. What you often get working with maps like this on earth are spots where the surrounding area shows summer greenery and one section is in the middle of autumn, due to sticking different data sets together, which looks much odder than black spots.
Siobhan Duffey, Northampton, MA
April 01, 2009 5:00pm
ALL YOU'' HAVE NOT DONE THE CORRECT HOME WORK AT ALL THE REAL FACE CAN BE SEEN FROM TOM VAN FLANDERN ARTIFICAL LIFE ON MARS 1/AND 2 PARTS, JPL IS A CORRUPT SIDE OF NASA YOU CANNOT TRUST EVER COVERING UP THE REAL PHOTOS NEVER TRUST THEM,
wake up, in texas
May 22, 2009 12:20am
NASA loooooves their air bushing. And I bet none of you have heard or seen the proof of structures on the moon either. Like towers. yes
Chris, Connecticut
May 23, 2009 6:21am
Hi, I have read Hoaglands book. personally I feel that he brings a high level of accuracy to the subject. First of all the 2001 imagery had a large portion of the data missing! lets say we took a picture of your face and took out 40 percent of the data. it may not be recognizable. Second don't forget about the IR data that shows what appear to be foundations deep under the ground. Anyways the face is not the only point of interest there is a 5-sided pyramid! Come on even if its not real why send the rover in a completely different direction? the first thing to do when you see a possibility is to investigate not say its nothing or shadows or dis-inform the public. Look up the brooking report that states that the evidence of ET artifacts are a matter of national security a.k.a don't worry about it. Top secret, in fact there are 36 levels of top secret. THE LIE IS DIFFERENT AT EVERY LEVEL!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mr. moon, chicago
June 08, 2009 12:45pm
Why would NASA cover up a face on mars? If they could prove there was life on mars would their funding at least triple over night?
Claire, Melbourne, Australia
July 09, 2009 7:06pm
Concerning the Cydonia, on google mars, the problem is not, on my point of view, that the face of mars is or isn't a monument, but that below, a wide band has been erased manually ; can we find another photo w/o the erased zone ?
incredoulously, Nice/France
July 21, 2009 5:30am
You idiots can be smacked with TRUTH in the face and you STILL wouldnt beleive it...Towers on the moon? Faces on Mars? PLEASE!
You make it like NASA would cover up LIFE on other planets in the PAST? Jeeez!
Just like Claire said, MORE MONEY for everyone...
Just like the UFO nutts that they are in cooperation with Governments around the world OR that they are built in Brazil from German and Brazilians...You people REALLY need to step back and ask WHY WOULD THEY HIDE THIS? Especially today in America and around the World were MORALS and TRADITION went down the Toilet...
OHMYGOSH, New York, NY
August 16, 2009 12:31pm
Would NASA hide the existence of extraterrestrial life from the public? Of course, they would, as will all other governments of major nations. Why? Fear of social chaos. Ever heard of the "Proposed Studies on the Implications of Peaceful Space Activities for Human Affairs"? Requested by Congress and prepared by the Brookings Institution in 1961, it warns of the breakdown of social order is the world of other life were released. You can read the report and good overview/synopsis at Hoagland's website: http://www.enterprisemission.com/brooking.html.
Bob, Alabama
September 07, 2009 9:39am
National Security, panic, disorder, loss of religion and potential threat from outer space. Humans are not yet ready for this as deemed by their govts.
You know and we all know the face was built by ancient aliens.
Oh by the way, I think you should write a article about how the world is flat and we are the only planet that has life in this universe lol
All the evidence is there, wake up and stop being so ignorant.
http://www.mars-earth.com/newface.htm
Annunaki, Planet X
September 13, 2009 2:15am
its ignorant to shoot down the possibilty of this "face" and its also ignorant to state is as a fact that it is a sculpted structure...bottom line is that none of us have been there for ourselves so nobody has a proffessional opinion....then only voiced opinion is the mainstream medias...and we know how non-credible they are with their biased ways.......the belief of this man made face exceeds further beyond into many other paradigms of beliefs....to even have an opinion on it, u must also have hundreds of other opinions on other things....you cant just look at this and decide yes or no
j, toronto
November 23, 2009 6:27am
awesome
johnny, honululu
December 11, 2009 5:28pm
Wow! i have never been told that there is a man's face on mars until the 28th of December, 2009. I was soo shocked! But to confirm what I heard on the internet. My mom and I was soo interested in it that I said I want to own a telescope and see if I can see the face on mars myself,but the only problem was that I couldn't tell which planet was mars.But one day I might get to see mars.You never know.
Dhaara Goran, Barbados
December 29, 2009 11:06am
Just goes to show, your mind always finds order in chaos. I even see a large Cat like image staring at the "Face of Cydonia". Maybe Martians are cat-like creatures? Check out these images (copy and past address into your address bar), one is the original, the other highlights the area that looks like a cat. Enjoy!
p.s. I'm not an artist, so don't poke fun at the image I edited... :)
http://www.inselpix.com/images/davehaz/cydonia.jpg
http://www.inselpix.com/images/davehaz/cydoniaedit.jpg
Dave H., Brownsburg, IN
June 30, 2010 6:19am
Check the cover of Lennon's album cover, Mind Games released in 1973...
Bill, Manchester
July 04, 2010 12:44pm
So if an alien sees Mt. Rushmore, because there aren't 150 million more Rushmores that they will say it is a naturally occuring structure? Because they can only see a dozen pyramids in Gizza, that Pyramids are also naturally occurring? Because there is one Statue of Liberty, there must be 150 million more? Get a life and if you are going to try to make a point, then support it with scientific data. Anyone can "assume" and "opine". If 2 were 4 and 5 were 7, then would 2 + 4 equal to 6, 7, 9 or 11? And then because you want the answer to be 7, you would say it is 7 and expect people to believe in it?
Ta ta, later..
Jimmy, Clearwater, FL
July 30, 2010 11:43am
Jimmy, if you look at mount Rushmore from a wide variety of angles it still looks like Mount Rushmore. If you look at it from a reasonable distance away you can evidence of the stone being worked. Neither of which is true for the face on Mars.
The face on mars just doesn't look like a face when seen in any other picture. Especially in higher resolution images. It is simulcra. But if you still believe it's aliens then i have a tea stained pillow to sell you. On blot looks exactly like Elvis in profile. I jest, but the point is serious; simulcra is common. Common enough for fortean times to run a cool simulcra corner every issue.
Tom H, Kent, UK
September 01, 2010 2:11pm
I don’t know about anyone else but I know I can see the face
Maybe it’s a fake for more funding for NASA or Goggles trying to get more people to sign up who knows. Anyway check out my Face of Mars and make a comment all comments welcome.
If you dont see the face seach my name on youtube I urge you to try it for yourself. Anyone thats able to make it with the volume of the mesa would be most wellcome.
Danielwaerea1, Melbourne
September 03, 2010 9:29pm
Make a comment about this episode of Skeptoid (please try to keep it brief & to the point). Anyone can post:
You can also discuss this episode in the Skeptoid Forum, hosted by the James Randi Educational Foundation.
Join the Skeptalk email discussion list.
What's the most important thing about Skeptoid?
![[Valid RSS]](/images/valid-rss-rogers.png "Validate my RSS feed"){kind=small}
At the very least these are all rare examples of pareidolia that aren't automatically Jesus or the Virgin Mary.
Jeremy Lindgren (vita10gy), Eau Claire, WI
April 22, 2008 11:28am