Face on Mars True nature revealled

In summary, a discussion about the possibility of an artificial face on Mars reveals that while it may not be a constructed face, it still has unusual lines for a natural formation. Some individuals suggest that it is simply a coincidence and should be left alone, while others contemplate the idea of a Martian civilization and the role of science in generating excitement and wonder. The conversation also touches on the topic of image analysis and the concept of symmetry, with some challenging the idea of finding a natural object on Earth comparable to the symmetry of the Face on Mars. Ultimately, the conversation evolves into a debate about the validity of the Face on Mars and the evidence presented.
  • #1
Nereid
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
3,401
3
Face on Mars! True nature revealled!

Is it less exciting that it's a mesa? Doesn't the pursuit of science generate its own excitement, wonder, and awe?

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap031214.html
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Even though it's not a face, it still has some unusual lines for a natural formation, but so do some natural formations on earth.
 
  • #3
It would be nice for people to simply say that it's a coincidence and nothing more, and just drop it.
 
  • #4
Nereid - Yes and yes...not that I ever believed it was a constructed face of course!

I think this topic will be more at home in the debunking forum...
 
  • #5
Looks like the Phantom of the Opera to me. Who knew Martians are Frank Lloyd Wright fans.
 
  • #6
Well, it seems clear to me that Nereid has airbrushed out the real face; just more lies!
 
  • #7
Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Well, it seems clear to me that Nereid has airbrushed out the real face; just more lies!
Airbrush?

Didn't I tell you? I flew there one night from my usual, cold home. With marcus and wolfram's help, we *chipped* away the perfect features first carved by the suruasotnorB on their journey away from buluxcihC, just moments before that fateful day a long time ago now.

Russ doesn't know it, but he helped too; remember that Martian probe that went AWOL? It would've shown the astonishing skill of the much lamented suruasotnorB, but it didn't make it to Mars orbit. Why? Well, there was a defective line of code, ... :wink:
 
  • #8
I knew it!
 
  • #9
That face on Mars is a little plain. Someone needs to airbrush a moustache on it. Or to make it interesting, an afro.
 
  • #10
See http://www.mactonnies.com/cydonia.html [Broken] for a collection of supposed Cydonian images.

Carlos Hernandez
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
I quite agree Quantum and Phobos!
It's no different to looking at clouds and seeing all manner of shapes.
 
  • #12
Lion/Man Hominid

Have a look at both halves of that image separately, and in isolation. Then “fold” each over (mirror image) – ala Hoagland’s UN Briefing), and you have DOUBLE the coincidence!
The left-half “folded over” gives a “Protohuman”, the right-half “folded over gives a “Lion”.
The Sphinx (on Earth) is a Lion/Man Hominid.
The coincidences compound, don’t they?

Ridicule all you like people, but TRY IT first…

This image strengthens the case for artificiality.
 
  • #13
Perhaps we could try a 'double blind' "face" recognition test? Or a "protohuman + lion" one?

Ivan will select ~100 photos, approx x% of which will be of "protohumans + lions", the rest just interesting rock formations (e.g. in the Simpson desert, on Mars, in the Antartic, etc). Phobos will then process these images, to give the 'target' images the same sort of 'rocky' texture as the real rock formations, and to degrade the resulting 'statues' to account for 'weathering'. He will pass them to me, without revealing which are real rocks and which are "protohuman + lion". I will then show them to you, and you will pick which is which.

Of course, it doesn't have to be Ivan, Phobos and Nereid; it could be John Howard, GW Bush, and Tony Blair, or wolfram, Evo and SelfAdjoint, or ...
 
  • #14
Show Me JUST ONE IMAGE from Earth?

Find me ONE SINGLE IMAGE of anything natural on Earth, which is comparable to the symmetry of the Face On Mars.
You talk a lot, now let's see some action...
 
  • #15
Best we take a somewhat more objective analysis Dogon - in terms of image analysis, what constitutes 'symmetry'?

In terms of your challenge, try http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/volc_images/north_asia/fuji_shadow.html [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #16
That Is SO WEAK

If that is the best you can come up with (which I expected).
Well...I consider my point WELL AND TRULY PROVEN.

Gee, it looks like a pyramid. Gee, there is some cloud cover and haze (and perhaps some smog), giving this illusion.

That is as weak as anything I have ever seen put forward to support the Admin object in 15 years of looking into the subject.

ANYBODY out there think they can come up with better than that tripe?
 
  • #17
Nommos Prime (Dogon) said:
[emphasis Nereid] Find me ONE SINGLE IMAGE of anything natural on Earth, which is comparable to the symmetry of the Face On Mars.
You talk a lot, now let's see some action...
If that is the best you can come up with (which I expected).
Well...I consider my point WELL AND TRULY PROVEN.

Gee, it looks like a pyramid. Gee, there is some cloud cover and haze (and perhaps some smog), giving this illusion.

That is as weak as anything I have ever seen put forward to support the Admin object in 15 years of looking into the subject.

ANYBODY out there think they can come up with better than that tripe?
I believe this is called something like "shifting the goalposts".

Perhaps you would like to try write an objective criterion for the symmetry you seem to find so interesting?
 
  • #18
A nice, symmetrical, natural object in Australia, which also looks somewhat like an evil eye? http://www.ahc.gov.au/publications/geofossil/wolfe.html [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

1. What is the "Face on Mars"?

The "Face on Mars" is a geological formation on the surface of the planet Mars that resembles a human face. It was first photographed by NASA's Viking 1 orbiter in 1976, leading to speculation about its artificial origin.

2. Is the "Face on Mars" a natural or artificial structure?

While the initial images of the "Face on Mars" gave the impression of an artificial structure, further high-resolution images and scientific studies have confirmed that it is a natural formation. The resemblance to a face is due to a combination of shadows and erosion patterns.

3. What evidence supports the natural origin of the "Face on Mars"?

In addition to high-resolution images showing the erosion and geological features of the "Face on Mars", scientists have also studied the surrounding area and found similar formations that are clearly natural. There is no evidence to suggest that the "Face on Mars" was created by intelligent beings.

4. Are there any theories about the formation of the "Face on Mars"?

Some scientists have proposed that the "Face on Mars" was formed by a combination of wind and water erosion, similar to how similar formations are created on Earth. Others believe that it may be a remnant of an ancient volcano or impact crater.

5. Why is the "Face on Mars" still a topic of interest?

Despite the scientific consensus that the "Face on Mars" is a natural formation, it continues to capture the public's imagination and is often used as evidence of extraterrestrial life or government cover-ups. It also serves as a reminder of the vast and mysterious nature of our solar system.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
801
Replies
1
Views
767
  • General Discussion
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • Aerospace Engineering
2
Replies
64
Views
11K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
867
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
13
Views
2K
Back
Top