We're all very familiar with the arguments surrounding the face on Mars.
After the new ESA images came in everyone said well thats that ....but is it ?
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEM09F8LURE_0.html
It seems that in the new images the face has suddenly sprouted a hornlike structure on the purported forehead area .....This unfortunately has only created more questions than answers ....the main one being if this structure was there all the time...why hasn't it shown up in any of the other photo's taken at any time....not even a shadow from it....Very very curious...

Have a look here and see what i mean.

http://posthumanblues.blogspot.com/2006/09...ace-images.html

First of all does resemble a face when the lighting is correct, second they say it resembles structures here on earth like the sphinx but it doesnt you find no faces facing to the sky on earth they face forward not up

The issue is this though.Where was that "horn" all along ?.Theres no sign of it in any of the NASA images taken at ANY time !
So WTF is going on with the face ?

Bogey, what I think we clearly have here is a case of trying too hard to debunk, which calls the motives into suspicion. The imaging should be pretty simple for people who do it for a living. But, the first major debunking attempt was the infamous JPL catbox. How many people still try to claim that as real, even though it's the only image to ever make the face look like a 2 dimensional phenomenon? Now a mysterious sprouted horn. It's clearly either an artifact of the ESA's technology, or another attempt to debunk the face. If there's nothing there, why continue to put out wildly different images in an attempt to make sure everyone believes there's nothing there?

Here's another link from Mac Tonnies blog, this one linking to an image processor's(Lan Fleming) and optical physicist's(Bruce Maccabee's) views on the subject.

http://posthumanblues.blogspot.com/2006/09...dates-have.html

Mars Face = debunked no matter what you beleive or want to beleive it is fact.

Whats going on with the image ? Where did the "horn" come from ? Why doesn't it show up in any of the NASA images ?

You obviously didn't read the links. If this "horn" is real, where is it in any past images? Why did JPL show the face as 2D? What's the reason behind so many varying images of the face? You'd think after imaging the area so many times they'd have an actual image of it by now, but instead, we see many different images from many different imagings. Why so many?

Most those elevation maps arne't very accurate and usually only pick up on tones of color in order to make hills. Even in my attempt with it, i got the exact same results on the face section which means they didn't use very high tech mapping to show it. I find its fairly inaccurate for the hight data alone, so until they get even closer in i doubt it can live up to the photo detail itself.

In my attempt at putting it in a map program it reveals very similar shape for the face, so i just think it needs a better data feed based soley on elevation rather then contrast of an image.


example.

doesnt look like a face and with the light correct you can always make somethng look like something else....surely

There never was a face on mars.... plain & simple

I don't know about that ''i'',...it's been said that our ancient ansestors once lived there, and migrated north to Earth as the weather became too hot to bare. The planet sucome to some cataclismic heat wave on a globle scale, which would have wiped out everything off the ''face'' of the planet.
So they decided to bring only one of each of every living creature(male & female)as there was no room in the flying Ark(UFO)for much more.
Also leaving behind what was impossible to to take with them,....eg the face on Mars.
I hope that clarifys the mystery for you just a little.

Um, how do you create a whole new world with only 2 of each creature? How many kids could you pop out with only your mate? And who do your kids mate with? But I digress;

The image on the surface of mars just looks like a face. Its not really a face. If you think you see a face in the clouds, its not really a face. If you think you see a face in the wood grain of a park bench, its not really a face. Its called a pattern. People are programed to try to pick out patterns. When you were a newborn and your eyes werent fully developed, all you saw were big blurry faces in your little baby field of vision. THAT is why you look for faces in indistinct images.

The first picture they had was more convincing.

There is no more a face on Mars then there is Jesus's Face in this nebula



As for the new horn... Perhaps there is still some volcanic activity occuring on Mars. I realise there is little evidence that there is still volcanic activity but Mount Olympus Proves that it was once active. Perhaps this new "horn" is just a case of this.

People still care about this? I had completely forgotten about it till I saw this thread.

ESA 13.7 meter resolution. Nuf said.

Mar's is much like Earth, They have storm's and other natural reason for the face to change over time....This is a land mass that has moved with the sand storm's and wind..There's nothing to prove it's anything more....

If you look at our desert's and ocean's and ice cap's you will see they change to due to the weather.....

Blaze
I understand what you're saying here BUT the images are accurate enough to define the perceived "eyes" for example ...so for a protrusion this size we should at least have seen a shadow cast from it in previous photo's ?
Yet in any of the photo's from NASA there is no indication whatsoever that this "horn" is there at all.
The resolution should have been good enough to pick up on it in at least some of the NASA photo's ...so where is it ? and where has it come from all of a sudden ?

How did Adam & Eve manage it?
Mabe Adam was of good stock,...i guess.
And how bout o'l man Noah he new the score.

I dare you to take a compass, go to mars and head "north"... or just head "south" here on Earth. I'm quite sure that heading in that direction will never take you off the planet...




Maybe if you had some evidence...

Its also been said ancenstors came from neptune rather than mars so whose to say who is right when ... its been said?

And 1 in 3 pigs will figure out how to build a wolf-proof house.

We arent talking about fairytales, here. We are talking about science. Even your priest will tell you that one man and one woman cant make a planet full of people. At best, by their great grandkids you wouldnt have viably reproductive offspring. I mean, I THINK hed say that, unless religion says its ok to sleep with your family the bible protects you from hereditary birth defects...

But on to more realistic, topic related points:
Why would this highly advanced civilization on mars create a monument that could stand the test of countless time, and yet NONE of ANYTHING else they built could do the same? This is a race that supposedly was advanced enough to leave its planet, yet the only mark of them ever being there is a giant rock that kinda looks like a face? And dont say everything else got buried, or anything else like that, because so would this "face" have been buried too. Its a rock that looks like a face because we look for things that look like faces.

This thread is far from being scientifical but rather more on the lines of science fiction and fantasy. Most dont emphasize on the scientific but more on "accepted" imagery. If it was scientific then ufo does not equate to extraterrestial lol ufo equates to being unidentified flying object, plain and simple.

Its called Pareidolia and it describes a well known and understod psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) being mistakenly perceived as recognizable. Common examples include images of animals or faces in clouds, seeing the man in the moon,etc.

The Face on Mars is a phenomenon that succeeded the Martian canals, both eventually attributed to pareidolia, when the "seen" images disappeared in better and more numerous images.

Here is more.

Face perception.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_perception

thank you Hazzard!

I have been trying to explain that phenomenon on this and other similar threads but, not actually knowing the name made it very difficult.

Pareidolia is absolutely a real phenomenon. However, that fails to explain why NASA, JPL and the ESA are so fascinated with the Cydonia region on Mars. It fails to explain why JPL has put out so many different versions of the face many being obvious attempts to debunk the entire idea. It fails to explain why, just now, the ESA was hyping this image with a mysterious horn, and now we find out, that they have other images on their website that don't have the horn! Why didn't they put out press releases all over the place touting that view? There's a whole section of Cydonia images on the ESA website now, which include the face looking very face-like again suddenly. I don't see any press releases about that. The point is...I would have no argument that paredolia is real, but why the cover-up about the images coming from Cydonia?

Check out the latest info in this post linking to the ESA images, and linking to Mac Tonnies blog containing the latest info on Mars images.

You could'nt of taken that bulls*** serious could you 'Stellar',...naw...no way :huh
I'm just try'n to ad a little humour to a thread thats already passed it's used by date.
itsnotoutthere knows that itsonlyajoke.

'Shadamaun',you need to lighten up, that reply was a joke between me & itsnotoutthere.
Duz my profile indicate that i believe in any of that bulls***.
Come ooonnn.......

I agree, people need to lighten up. This topic has been thrashed out all over this forum, with no real conclusive evidence of anything, only ever spectulation upon spectulation with just a few computer graphic enhanced images popping up from time to time telling us absolutely zip.
It's become as stale as three month old bread.

Firstly I do not believe our ancestors are from any planet other than Earth.

I would suggest that the more advanced a society, the less likely structures will survive the test of time. As advancements are made, cost is an over-riding factor. It is very unlikely anyone would construct anything to last beyond their lifetime as investment is a company, people and product rather than a structure.

New York is an advanced city. Computers, skyscrapers, cars etc...., but would any of these last thousands of years without maintenance?

Im sorry, guys. I didnt realize you were already over this thread that you seemed to be taking part in. I didnt mean to assume what you said was anything to be taken seriously.

No sweat Shadamaun, thanks.

I actually aimed the original post at itsnotoutthere, ilikestirringhimup.

Come on, first every "face on Mars" believer wants better pictures of Cydonia and when you finaly get the new ones, you see a conspiracy in that too. You cant have it both way you know.

If you look at a picture of say 200 pebbles on a beach, I guarantee that you'll find one of them looks like something other than a typically shaped pebble. And if you look at an entire planet like Mars with all those hills, one of them are bound to look like something interesting to someone.

Here, this is from the ESAs website.


Cydonia
http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEM09F8LURE_index_1.html#subhead5


Cydonia - 3D anaglyph and other images.
http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEM9WG8LURE_index_0.html


Here is more....a 'Happy face' crater on Mars.
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEMMTFNFGLE_0.html

Come on, it's a frigin mountian. Look at our own planet, does it have faces? Of course it does, and that is just it(.)
When someone pays thousands of dollars for a piece of grilled cheese that has a bite in it, it just proves that people can, and will see what they want.

Faces in rock formations can be found right here on Earth.

Why is it that the same people who demand "scientific proof" for everything they read or see on here do not blink an eye when the ESA puts out pictures of the "Face" that are hugely different to the ones NASA have been putting out for years.....and dont give me that resolution BS ...if that mound was there all along it would have shown up on some of the photo's ,there would be shadows.......Since our recognised "sceptics" wont even question this because it comes from "the man" ....someone must question it.
I still have not seen one answer as to where this mound or horn suddenly appeared from.....

Ummm, that's my point. Thanks for making it. Just like "face on Mars believers" you're quick to jump on any data that seems to support your belief. However, in this case, it just so happens that the data is wrong. Didn't stop you from "believing" did it? If there's nothing to the face, fine. I'm not a "face believer" as much as I am curious as to why the ESA and NASA keep putting out wildly different views of the area in an attempt to, seemingly, cover something up. Don't you find that suspicious?

The ESA publicizes these new great 3-D analyses of their data that supposedly show a new horn growing out of the face. However, that's never been seen on any image before. Where did it come from? Rather than release their data that led them to that conclusion, suddenly some new images very quietly show up on their site that make it look like a face again. Explain, please.

Everyone also seems to think that you can find anomalies like this everywhere. But:


http://electrobus.com/wordsmith/face2/

Also, lets not pretend that the face is the only thing there. The entire Cydonia plane is full of anomalies. The point I'm trying to make that no one wants to hear is the cover-up part. Why the wildly differing views? Why all the expense of analyzing over and over. Do you really think the ESA and NASA do it to prove "face believers" wrong? Heck no. They spend so much time analyzing this one little spot on Mars because they're interested too! Believe what you want about the face, but demand more accountability for the space programs YOU pay for. If with all of this technology and great resolution they can't get two images from Cydonia that look similar, there's something seriously wrong with the analyzers, or they have an agenda. Simple as that.