The story of the "face on Mars" has been kept alive by the tabloids and UFO believers, who always see what they want to see, and disregard solid evidence to the contrary.

"Had I been in charge of the Mars Observer Program, the Cydonia region would have been one of my priorities for a high-resolution scan."

Arthur C. Clarke



Due to popular pressure, NASA wasted valuable resources by using the Mars Global Surveyor to take another picture of the formation in 1998.


Well here you are, Mr.Clarke!


http://www.suppressedscience.net/mars.html




That picture once and for all revealed the formation to be a natural landform. No scientist takes the "face" seriously.

NASA would be first to bang the bongos if they find something on Mars with a sufficient possibility of being artificial. If they could find such a thing, they would get more money for funding a massive Mars program than they could handle.

You should really watch the movie Mission to Mars once if you into this kinda stuff

That was 7 years ago, you don't think Mr Clark and most people know about that by now?
Indeed originally it was just a bad blurred shot with coincidental shadow formations. Although the latest is that the 'new' hi res shots actually make it evident that it is actually a Lions head. I don't know where they come up with them.

Yes.

This is precisely the issue, is it not? Frustrating to me is that, despite asking many times, I never got an answer to how anyone could determine 'intelligence' or 'artificiality', from any (kinds of) observations.

The problem here is that "proponents" fail to explain what kind of criteria they are using the determine that something is "anomalous" in natural geology.

The "proponents" rely upon their discovery of "anomalies" in satellite images of Mars. I assume what they mean is that the feature in question is anomalous with respect to natural geologic processes, thus implying an artificial, or "intelligent" origin.


Most will tend to suggest that the presence of symmetrical or geometric shape implies something other than natural processes.

But we know for a fact that natural terrestrial geology is replete with symmetrical shape and regular geometric form. So how is it "anomalous?"

My god... I just looked at the "proof" and "analysis" of the Cydonia "Face". All I can say is that people still believing in the validity of the Face are grasping at straws here. The "analysis" shows nothing except the analysists desire to actually see something. It's pathetic.

Mars is a weird place. No one argues that. I think the argument might be over just how weird Mars is. For example, does Mars host a species of giant glass worms, 50 meters across and kilometers long?

I'm guessing no.

Ask Richard C Hoagland and the answer will be -YES!

This is the guy that started AND made money on the "face on Mars","alien bases" on almost every planet in our solarsystem.
CHECK THIS OUT.

http://www.enterprisemission.com/can.htm







And here are the new pictures from the Mars orbiter.

http://www.raygirvan.co.uk/apoth/nirgal.htm

Not that this would stop or even slow his outlandish ideas down one bit.

Well, to me they look like sand dunes.

Mars is a very sandy place, and has lots of wind. I've spent some time on beaches, and I know that wind + sand = sand dunes. In fact, Mars is littered with sand dunes. That does not necessarily mean these features are definitely sand dunes, but it's the most likely explanation.

Of course, a lot of pseudoscientists are saying these features cannot be dunes. Nicks says this in his page on Hoagland's site. On that page, he actually says he tries to be fair, and includes comments from someone saying that these are dunes.

Nicks then dismisses that, saying that the winds could not possibly follow along the winding formation. But he's saying that because he thinks it's raised above the surface, CONVEX, and not a channel.

http://www.enterprisemission.com/can.htm


Sure, if that feature were a long windy worm coming up out of the surface, no wind could blow along it. But it's not a worm, it's a carved depression in the surface. Winds can easily flow into and down such a channel, following the winding, meandering depression. That would naturally form dunes.


And dont get me started on Hoaglands fake credentials.


For example, some Planet X proponents brag that they have no education in science. They claim it allows them to think "outside the box" when in reality it only allows them to say blatantly incorrect things about even the most basic scientific facts.