Continued
Continued
6-17-01
The Face on Mars: Morphological Peculiarities
Both sides of the Face mirrored to produce apparent "simian" and "feline" likenesses.
The new frontal image of the Face on Mars strengthens the hypothesis that the Face is an artificial structure. The "feline" half of the Face, as discussed in detail on the previous page, appears in keeping with Richard Hoagland's "split image" hypothesis. Rather than detracting from the case for artificial origin, the details seen on the eastern side of the Face raise powerful questions that demand credible answers if NASA is to continue flaunting its "conclusion" that the Face is a naturally occurring "hill."
Cydonia researchers have puzzled over the strange "terrace" visible in the angle-shot of the Face acquired in 1998. This feature appears on the northeastern portion of the symmetrical "headdress." Prior to the apparent confirmation of the "hominid-lion" hypothesis, I had wondered if this was perhaps a drainage channel designed to keep rain from eroding the Face beyond recognizability. The lack of a corresponding terrace on the "hominid" side of the Face mesa made a possible aesthetic interpretation hard to accept. However, "mirrored" views of the Face lend credibility to the idea that the "terrace" was designed to symbolize the "ear" of a lionesque feline.
The columnated "channel" leading up to the "ear." Image courtesy Chris Joseph.
The Face, in its entirety, reveals a discrepancy of surface composition most likely attributed to wind erosion.
The aesthetic merits of the "Martian Sphinx" demand professional archaeological and anthropological analysis. Unfortunately, the contemporary planetary science community is unequipped for the presence of possible extraterrestrial artifacts. Thus, mainstream science suffers an inherent inability to make the leap from geology to intelligent design. This inability typically manifests in scoffing public dismissals presented in the guise of objective science.
Properly assessing the Face is made doubly confounding by NASA's refusal to release the ancillary data from the latest Face overpass. Lan Fleming of the Society for Planetary SETI Research warns that constructing an accurate rectification of the Face is difficult, if not impossible, without unobstructed access to Malin Space Science Systems' planetary imaging data.
The "nostril" and "harelip."
JPL's attempt to orthorectify the new Face image may have resulted in slightly displacing key features. Perhaps the most obvious of these is the formation known as the "harelip." The "harelip" in the new, "definitive" image appears slightly off-center when compared to the properly contrasted 1998 Face image. This discrepancy raises the possibility that we have yet to see an accurate photographic likeness of the Face.
Viewed in isolation, the "harelip" itself is enigmatic. Running perpendicular to the trench that forms the western "mouth," it's composed of two fairly well-defined triangular formations joined at their tips. Examined in light of Ron Nicks' erosional model, in which the western "humanoid" half of the Face is the most highly abraded, the "harelip" may have inadvertently served as a windbreak. Indeed, close inspection of the terrain east of the harelip suggests structural precision while the western portion appears severely abraded.
Chris Joseph's shape-from-shading derived model of the Face's "feline" half, as viewed from near the Martian surface.
View of the Face from the direction of the City. Compare this digital rendering with Kynthia's analog sculpture, below.
Mark Carlotto's animation dissolves between an SFS-rendered profile (Viking) to a more detailed Mars Global Surveyor SFS profile. Compare with Chris Joseph and Kynthia's renderings (above).
I suspect that the harelip was intended to mark the Face's centerline as well as contribute to the eastern half's feline anatomical impression. But in the new image, the "harelip" appears too far west when compared to Mark Carlotto's digital analysis of the 1998 image. Based on this apparent discrepancy, I predict that when and if NASA deigns fit for the tax-paying public to examine the "missing" ancillary data, we will find that Carlotto was right all along.
In addition to the symmetrical harelip, the Face exhibits a curious rectangular gouge on its southeastern edge, near the "chin." The floor of the gouge is marked by parallel striations. These terminate abruptly, quite unlike the "rays" of debris expected from windblown material. Hoagland and others have argued that the gouge, far from an intentional feature, is evidence of a partial collapse, implying a hollow interior accessible to future on-site explorers.
Terrestrial Artist Proposed "Face on Earth" in 1947
Sculpture to be Seen from Mars, 1947.
Explore the megascale art proposals of visionary landscape sculptor Isamu Noguchi.
6-19-01
Mark Kelly: New Image Confirms Old Observations
Graphic designer Mark Kelly, who produced the Face reconstruction seen on Tom Van Flandern's Meta Research site, has created a convincing rendition of the newly reimaged Face as it would likely appear under Viking lighting conditions. To view the interactive animation, click here.
Mark Kelly's new graphic shows the new Face image under lighting conditions identical to those in Viking frame 70A13.
Kelly also notes a hexagonal "crater" above the Face and proposes a geometric relationship. To view it, click here.
6-24-01
The Enigma of the Western "Eye"
Three-dimensional rendering of western "eye." Geometric cells can be seen in the foreground.
The west-facing side of the Face on Mars features a disturbingly life-like "eye" surrounded by radiating cells. If artificial, then the cells' geometric appearance may be due to a durable structural mesh stripped bare by Martian wind.
The Face's western "eye" as seen in January, 2001. The impression of a pyramidal "cornea" is lessened by detail available in the new image. Note disk immediately above "iris."
Hand-drawn interpretation of western "eye."
In the image above, SPSR's J.P. Levasseur has traced the essential eye-like features, based on the partial overhead image returned to Earth early this year. Note the curved edge of the "iris," now confirmed. Heavy contrasting tends to lessen the impression of curvature. In reality, the "iris" (sometimes referred to as the "pupil") seems to be a broad, faceted cone.
Taken in context with the "nostril," "lips" and other facial characteristics, the "eye" is especially tantalizing evidence for artificiality. Even if the "eye" appeared in isolation, geology would be hard-pressed to account for its elongated shape (inconsistent with impact craters) and internal detail. As Tom Van Flandern has repeatedly pointed out, the "eye" feature was not at all visible in the original images of the Face on Mars. Its discovery -- right where an eye should appear if the Face is in fact a deliberately sculpted visage -- constitutes statistical evidence favoring intelligent design.
Above the "eye" is a degraded-looking "disk" with at least one clearly discernable semicircular curve. Could this be an aspect of the theorized "headdress"? Since no such disks appear on simian or human faces, the it suggests decorative function.
The deep shadow seen in frame 35A72 is produced with the help of an angled discoid feature that may be surviving detail from the Face's hypothetical "headdress."
6-26-01
Kurt Jonach Addresses the "Eye"
Kurt Jonach, brains behind the the ever-vigilant Electric Warrior website, suggests that there may be more to the "disk" (see installment above) than meets the eye:
"I'd like to suggest that this feature may not be purely decorative. Even artistically speaking, form often follows function.
"Understand I'm just 'brainstorming,' but I get a very strong impression of a larger circular area, which runs along the bottom lip of the 'almond' feature, and also encompasses your 'discoid' feature.
"So, I'm wondering if this might be intended to represent an eyeball? I think we all understand how a spherical eye is enclosed inside a protective socket, and covered by an eyelid.
"I've drawn a few ellipses on the last two MOC Mars Face images so you can see what I mean. I don't think either of these two images were taken directly overhead, and that may be why the 'circular' areas are distended in these views."
