OldTimeRadio said:Jerry_B said:The problem with all this sort of 'evidence' is that it doesn't seem any different from the 'evidence' that used to insist that there were canals on Mars. Or that there was a 'face' on Mars.
Some current theories still insist that the Face exists, only that it is MUCH older, and therefore much more weathered and eroded, than previously believed.
But the "Face" question to which I've never received a really good answer is how the NASA enhancer managed to turn a jumble of rocks into such a convincing human face. Was the enhanced PROGRAMMED to LOOk for Faces? The enhancer all by its lonesome shouldn't have recognized the difference between a face and a Ferris wheel.
"Accidental" doesn't seem to cut it, since everybody not only recognized the Face on sight, but apparently the SAME face. (I ran some informal tests on this back in later 1976 with people seeing the Face for the first time and not having the slightest idea what to expect). NOBODY saw a duckie or a horsie. And, to answer the next question, nobody saw just an outrcropping of rock.
Its not some NASA enhancer that is programmed to look for human faces, its the human brain. Which is why we can find faces in clouds, rocks or any random pattern.
The 1976 picture was so low resolution compared to more recent pictures that it looks obviously like a face (eyes, nose, mouth) that I'm not surprised everybody sees it the same way. Everybody is programmed to assemble those elements as a face rather than say a weasel*.
*Hamlet, Act III, Scene II:
Hamlet: Do you see that cloud, that's almost in shape like a camel?
Polonius: By the mass, and 't is like a camel, indeed.
Hamlet: Methinks, it is like a weasel.
Polonius: It is backed like a weasel.
Hamlet: Or, like a whale?
Polonius: Very like a whale.