There ya go again...saying things that are obviously not true.

This is a science board, and if you expect to be taken seriously here, then you will have to provide evidence that your "faces" are something other than imaginary.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

If I understand this correctly, the claim is that there are other images aside from the well known one showing "facelike" features. If that's the case, MR, then please pick one of your examples and please provide a reference to the original, official image for comparison purposes. I'd like to do a side by side comparison. Thanks.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

I would join Van Rijn in this request.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

Why does MR keep saying that there are three faces? There's only one face. Where on Mars does he think these additional two faces are located?? I've read the whole thread, but I never saw a place where he actually gave the location on Mars where he claims these faces exist. Did I miss that part? Did anyone else see him give us the location?

Look, here's a map of Mars.
http://www.google.com/mars/

It would be easy to show where those two additional faces are located. He could at least give a general location.

No. I was having some trouble with his posts so I previously didn't read this in great detail, but I recently read through the thread, and all I see are some unofficial images in the OP. If these are supposed to be separate images of separate "faces," they not only are very similar but remarkably also have very similar shadows, indicating they were imaged at the same angle. Before we get into what people might or might not think they see in the images, we need to know the details about the original images, and what (if anything) was done on them.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Well, there's this one:
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Exp...TFNFGLE_1.html

__________________
"The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head" Terry Pratchett

If something is in the data, it is in the data!

That's not how investigation works.

Now there are 3 more to add that same logic to. What will reinforce the other?

How many bunny rabbits? Did you even look for bunny rabbits? How about helicopters? Figure eights? Did you look only for faces, or did you look for all examples of familiar objects that "appear" on Mars?

Pareidolia biases toward seeing faces. There is a reason for that. Simply saying you see lots of faces is not at all convincing. As I said, you have the burden of proof to rise above that which is explained simply by a well-known aspect of human vision.

Science is applied by theorizing based upon what one sees...

No. Science is applied by ruthlessly excising all that is the product of perception, preconception, supposition, and interpretation and laying bare only that which is objective. The entire purpose of the scientific method is contained therein.

Besides Jay what I said was referencing to the Viking Image data raw files which I am pretty dammed good at processing them. ;-) Thank you very much.

I doubt that. Where did you receive your training in digital image manipulation and image analysis? I was trained (and trained others) at the University of Utah, one of the best schools for it.

That is enough to chew on a while.

No it isn't. As has been said to you ad nauseam, you owe more than simply, "Look at the pictures; they're faces."

...all is being biasedly attacked.

The purpose of scientific inquiry is to challenge claims to see which stand up. Yours don't, and you've decided to take that personally.

Where's the bias? Simply disputing your belief doesn't constitute a bias.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

MR...in the OP you said...

So what's the "hold up"?? Why have you not given us the image numbers?? Why have you not told us where these "other faces" are located??

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

Unfortunately those maps aren't very high resolution so aren't much use, at maximum zoom the original "face" is very hard to pick out and if I am understanding MR's stuff correctly the "new faces" are significantly smaller than the original one.

__________________
"Any Sufficiently Analyzed Magic is Indistinguishable from SCIENCE!" -Agatha Heterodyne

"Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it." -Florence Ambrose

I believe that everyone deserves a second chance, and you're never beyond forgiveness, so welcome back, Mars Revealer, let's have the polite, in-depth scientific debating that BAUT is known for.
However, I must say:
There is no face in Cydonia. There is a butte. I like your Medieval spelling of "multiple", though.

__________________
I want to go back to the moon.
I don't care which rocket you use, whichever one you pick, I'll like it, I swear.
"If you think the LHC will create black holes, you might as well believe Hobbits are at the bottom of your garden."- Dr. Mike Inglis
Rovers forever! - ToSeek

Can someone tell me what "new" thing this guy is saying? Is he bringing the old Hoaglandish argument that it is a face on Mars?

His posts seem very "dfrank-like". One has to wonder why he was unbanned too...

__________________
A slight inclination of the cranium is as adequate as a spasmodic movement of one optic towards an equinine quadruped utterly devoid of any visionary capacity.

Just fyi, Dfrank was and remains Banned For Life.

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

I am bringing forth the idea, & the pictures seen through which they were given, that there are 3 new Faces of Mars never seen by the public before.

3 OTHER Faces of Mars like it's BROTHER there in Cydonia. Wether or not it was originally a mesa, or butte, before it was sculpted/designed/done up, is an interesting concept. One I NOT disagree with entirely.

Using landmasses by intelligent beings, like on our planet is also helpful & can be useful. However it is not much of our way of doing things. But it has been done before, which we utilized landforms on Earth to transform it into something else.

I also am suggesting that these NEW Faces are either the same size, or relevant size, or bigger than it's Brother in Cydonia.

It is NOT The same Face in Cydonia that is as being seen in these other images neither! They are showing mulTiple OTHER Faces that what was excused as given officially as being the only one, was NOT the only one after all. ;-)

So the reasonings behind the Initial Official Reaction by NASA, to the public regarding the MERE Face at Cydonia, cannot hold up to that rationale of which POLICY has enforced The routine for the mERE Face. It does NOT apply anymore, bearing in mind & seeing mulTiple Faces designed, & laid out the same way as showing relativity to connection of intentional designing!

I have one image number... so far. I am working on getting the others, as well as ALOT more information than I have already. That is what I was told. ;-) I like to have ALOT more information. But information is ok, but NOT enough. I need all my ducks in a row to present this case being built.

Some of the questions you have is ones I also have, & am acquiring that information that I need & will answer with, once I have all I need. I am close now.

That is the reason for the heads up. Because when I do get all I need, there is gonna be a rumble In Da Bronx!!! ;-)

I also am told I will have co-ordinates for them also. We will see. But I am taking strong confidence in what I am told I am going to get as it is coming from someone that knows,,, someone that was there... & KNOWS some of the secrets. As he was once not able to speak much about.

Not ask for any names, because I will not reveal my source/s.

No worries... when I have all I need, trust me,.... again,.. you will certainly hear about it. ;-)

This is NOT Richard Hoagland's work or theories. BUT... he is fingerpointed at being involved.. regarding these images, in more ways than one.

There is more to go on than by simply saying they are Faces. ;-)

There is attributes, connections, & testimony. (as it were)

There are far more than Faces to see on Mars! Structural shapes with artscapes all these things sit on & near, & all use land formations in many regards to be apart of the bigger picture that was laid out all across Mars surface. NOT Just at Cydonia!!!

Van Rijn shows the MOST sense in his statement!! Not only are they similar to what he sees as obvious, but they each have different Facial features than each other! Seperate entities if you will?! Yet same concept in design.

& Van Rijn.. I will be providing these.. as soon as I am secured in my needs to be met 1st. ;-)

I already have a battle plan as it is essential to how to handle this the right way that makes the most impact. because it will have impact! ;-)

Especially to those who know & those who want this to remain secret!

But THE MARTIAN REVELATION COMETHS!!! I am it's official REVEALER!

As youz will see... Indeeed.

MARS REVEALER

If I understand the claim correctly, the images linked here:

The 'faces' Of Mars!!

are supposed to represent separate "faces" aside from the well-known one. If this is the case, they seem to have extremely similar lighting and imaging angle. each one showing only about half the "face."

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

my bold..
you just had to bring up the infamous MER "bunny rabbit", didn't you. was it Spirit or Opportunity that "discovered" a white bunny rabbit at it's landing site?

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

...and that number is????

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

So, by this, it appears these were not all cropped from the same image. That is, they were from different images taken at different times?

I think you're missing the point of my statement: Not only do these "faces" look extremely similar, but so does the lighting, down to only the left "side" being visible. Even the original "face" doesn't look the same if imaged from different angles or at different times in the local day. Such similiarity in lighting is incredibly unlikely for separate images. This raises the obvious possibility that these images were manipulated. If you received these images from someone else, what information did they give you?

What needs to be secured? Before you came here with this claim, you should have had references to the official images and background information. I don't see much point in going further with this discussion until you provide the official images.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

IMO, The best way to see if the image of the face is the same face (Hoagland) or some other is to check the surrounding areas and see if it matches.

So I take it, MarsRevealer that you are saying the three "faces" are:

1. http://www.martianrevelation.com/NewFace1.png
2. http://www.martianrevelation.com/NewFace2.png
3. http://www.martianrevelation.com/NewFace3.png and http://www.martianrevelation.com/NewFace3b.png
   

And do these include the face Hoagland tells everyone? If so which one is it?

Where are these "faces", as in what area on Mars(latitude, longitude)? Do you know?

How did you get access to this "private" data? How come these images were not released public? Or were they, and if so, where can we find them?

__________________
A slight inclination of the cranium is as adequate as a spasmodic movement of one optic towards an equinine quadruped utterly devoid of any visionary capacity.

If you provide a valid source for the pics, the possibility that 3 o 4 mesa formations have so similar features, characteristics, and shadows, representing a face in the surface of mars, probably makes it the discovery of the millenia. Or not.

But you must provide a source.

If these are the three "new" faces according to MR (MR - please confirm), and we are playing "looks like a face to me". I see absolutely nothing in those pictures other than the original "face" that looks like a face to me. I don't see anything distinct in the the circled areas.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

Swift, that confused me as well. I originally thought he was saying that he thought he saw other face-like things in the image of the well-known "Face." Of course, I didn't see anything even vaguely interesting around the "Face." But I think (and, yes, MR, please confirm) that he really is saying that those are supposed to be separate images with separate "faces" that just happen to look so similar, right down to the lighting.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

MarsRevealer, tell us which is which.

Which faces are the same?
Which are different?

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________
A slight inclination of the cranium is as adequate as a spasmodic movement of one optic towards an equinine quadruped utterly devoid of any visionary capacity.

The Sesame Street Song is playing on my head when I saw that pictures.

__________________
Jean
-----
"The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing." - Albert Einstein

"The good life is inspired by love and guided by knowledge " - Bertrand Russell

Whale, whale, that reminds me, the NHL season has started. Go Whalers!

Meanwhile, one wonders which will happen first, the NHL playoffs or the presentation of actual meaningful, applicable, objective, verifiable evidence by MR? It would be kind of ironic if the first Ducks we saw lined up in a row were from Anaheim.

BTW, here are some pictures of some real faces on Mars.

First a real Martian. Why little or no resemblance to a human face? Because their biology was based on iron and silicon. But they shared a weakness for fancying themselves up: note the stylish, ceremonial headdress.



There were FeSi dogs on Mars too. Here's one:



Note the long ears, wet(!) nose, and drooling tongue hanging out.

These are from Mars Global Surveyor pictures taken of dust-covered buttes in the Aeolis region.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

I also am suggesting that these NEW Faces are either the same size, or relevant size, or bigger than it's Brother in Cydonia.

Data?

...seeing mulTiple Faces designed, & laid out the same way as showing relativity to connection of intentional designing!

I have said before there are tests for the likelihood of artificial construction over natural process. Have you applied them?

That is the reason for the heads up. Because when I do get all I need, there is gonna be a rumble In Da Bronx!!! ;-)

On the one hand you say you aren't finished with your analysis. On the other hand you're publishing the conclusion and making claims about its likely repercussions. What would happen if, upon completion of the analysis, your conclusion doesn't hold?

You're doing it backwards. If you have enough analysis to publish the findings, then publish the analysis. I don't accep that you're still working on it. If, on the other hand, the jury is still out, then you're committed at all costs to your published findings.

That is not science.

Not ask for any names, because I will not reveal my source/s.

Then we have no reason to suppose they exist.

This is NOT Richard Hoagland's work or theories.

No, your Piltdown Man is an entirely different Piltdown Man.

There is attributes, connections, & testimony. (as it were)

Is there anything that isn't purely subjective?

There are far more than Faces to see on Mars!

That's how we know the "I see faces" argument doesn't hold. People have been seeing things in other things since time immemorial. What they see depends largely on what they want to see, or what they are accustomed to seeing elsewhere. Catholics see Mary. You see alien faces. Religious fanatics see angels.

That's why we have evolved methods of photographic interpretation that help us reason about what is actually there and what we're reading into it. If you don't apply such methods, you won't have proven anything.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

I've looked once again at these images. More than once, in fact.
And I still do not see what MR wishes to show me.

All that's there is the original face, which is known to just be another geological feature, and not a real face at all.

So, what's to see here?

__________________
This is no fantasy. No careless product of wild imagination. - Jor-El

Godspeed, John Glenn. - Scott Carpenter

And these atomic bombs that science burst upon the world that night were strange even to the men that used them.
- H.G Wells, The World Set Free

To the conspiracy crowd, radiation is a big Boogey Man that inspires terror and death in all who encounter it. - JayUtah

I do not know what you mean by turning Earth landforms into something else, unless you mean tunneling through mountains, draining lakes and the like. And the Cydonian butte has never been anything 'butte' what it is today- a mesa.
(Well, yeah, it was part of a bigger rock mass before it was erroded out, but that's not what I mean.)

__________________
I want to go back to the moon.
I don't care which rocket you use, whichever one you pick, I'll like it, I swear.
"If you think the LHC will create black holes, you might as well believe Hobbits are at the bottom of your garden."- Dr. Mike Inglis
Rovers forever! - ToSeek

I found the "C" picture interesting.



Note how the general lighting of the picture is approximately from the direction indicated by arrow 1, whereas the lighting for the "face" is from the direction indicated by arrow 2.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

This is the funniest thread I've read in a long time. My favorite part is where MR questions whether Dr. Plait is qualified as an “extraterrestrial archaeologist”.

Hard as it may be to believe, I'm rather unimpressed with the doctored photos and promise of some Really Impressive Evidence, which will be forthcoming Really Soon Now. The idea that these formations were created by extraterrestrial beings is laughable on the face of it (sorry), and even more so when combined with conspiracy theories alleging NASA cover ups. I was tempted at first to jump in with a few questions for MR, but decided against it because, frankly, I lack the patience to wade through the convoluted wording, poor spelling and grammar, and abuse of punctuation and capitalization to try to figure out exactly what he's saying.

__________________
"Scientific progress goes 'boink'?"
-Bill Watterson

Rubber Duckie, you're the one,
You make bathtime lots of fun,
Rubber Duckie, I'm awfully fond of you;

I don't see the connection.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple