Uhhh, A.DIM, Lan Fleming (in the link
you posted) references
Mark Carlotto "as if" he were some kind of photographic expert. And to be "kind", Mark Carlotto is hardly what I would consider an objective observer. Or to put it bluntly, he's out to sell books.
What's always amazed me about this "face stuff" is the fact that
if NASA hadn't taken the 76 Viking images There would be
no face controversy. But what has happened is this...
Analogy time!...
It's
exactly as if I went to the DMV, and tried to read the eye chart
without my glasses. I look at the chart and "see" a "T". I then put on my glasses and realize that it is actually an "F". Do I then INSIST that it
in reality is a "T"? I'd never get my license that way.
That (IMO) is
exactly what Hoagland and the rest are saying. That even though it's PAINFULLY obvious from the HIRES images that there simply is no "face", they would rather "leave their glasses
OFF".
That's NOT how you "do" science.