So let me get this straight, NASA is underfunded, or at least would like more money, yet many believe NASA is involved in a conspiracy to hide evidence of life on Mars. This makes no sense. If NASA had any shot at even a speculation that there may once have been any form of life on another planet (i.e. the meteor from couple years ago) they are going to hype it the the extreme. Belief in extraterrestrial life = more public interest in space exploration = more money for NASA.
One of the hallmarks of a good conspiracy theory is that it makes sense only until you actually get down to the level of real-world detail. (Cf. Holocaust deniers.)
Just let him have his little dream…
If the Egyptians wanted to tell us a meteor shower were coming, they could have just written it in heiroglyphics, rather than coding it in the pyramids, sphynx and all that hubbaballoo…besides how would the Egyptians know a fatal meteor shower were coming every 35 thousand years unless they were in it (and thus obliterated and unable to build pyramids)
Carl Sagan basically did not believe the “face” was anything more than a mountain.
Consider this: as Mars has been uninhabitable for millions and millions of years…if it ever WERE habitable…some alien race would have had to have designed that face pointed at the Earth in the off chance that something resembling a human (or primate) were going to evolve some millions of years in the future. Ask yourself:
Why the heck would they bother…we aren’t building pyramids of Ganymedians in the off chance some alien species evolved on Ganymede in the future…like us, any Martians would have been focused on themselves or at least existing specise. This whole “Human Face” on Mars things evolves from a huge human egocentricism…that Martians could not be help but be fascinated with us, even though we hadn’t even evolved yet.
Small clarification here. As a good skeptic, Sagan didn’t necessarily have any concrete conclusions about the face one way or another. He hadn’t seen it with his own eyes, and the evidence was ambiguous. However, as a scientist, he believed that the most likely explanation would be that it was a natural formation. This is very different from what the conspiracy types say, which is that “Sagan thought it was possible!” Rather, although Sagan hadn’t ruled it out, he thought it extremely unlikely.
The recommendation above, to read Demon-Haunted World, is heartily seconded.
Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor, you saw a smoke trail from a helicopter and now you claim to be an expert on the surface features of Mars? By that line of reasoning, I’m an expert on the genetic coding of Neandertal Man because I have observed a postcard of the jackalope.
JoeBlank, I am familiar with a good many Mars conspiracy theories and the whole POINT of most of them is that the U.S. government is controlling NASA by keeping this information secret from the public for reasons of national security (the odd chance that there is evidence of advanced technologies on the planet) and prudence (keep everyone calm and keep our credibility intact until such a point as we are 100% certain that life was once there).
I do not buy into ANY conspiracy theory I have heard. Like I said, I am leaning towards believing that some of those Martian structures are artificial. I find it hard to believe that they were built by an advanced alien civilization or distant ancestors to us, but I also find it difficult believing that all those giant, symmetrical structures in that little area were formed geologically and/or eroded naturally. Scientifically, I can not fully believe they are artificial until I see some decent, multiple angle & altitude visible & IR photographs or am actually placed on a manned mission to the red planet. Since neither of these are likely to happen any time soon, I will continue dreaming.
It’s great science fiction to imagine that intelligent life was on Mars, building vast cities and towering monoliths and the truth is, most great science fiction spurs public interest in the sciences and advances real science immeasurably. Without dreamers, science would stagnate.
Fortunately, back in the days when NASA was fully funded, we managed to prove that the Man in the Moon was not an alien artifact. At least we don’t have to worry about that.
Sake, and anyone else who feels qualified to comment, will you take a look at this page for me if you haven’t already? I’m particularly interested in the rotating .gif of the “face” in profile, the last image on the page. Are you satisfied with the techniques used to create that image, and could you explain to me how the shadowed area of the “face” was rendered? I’d like hear detailed explanations as to why these enhanced images are or are not credible evidence for or against the case for the face.
I should add that I misspoke in my earlier post. The region the face is located in was photographed numerous times; only two of them are at a resolution below fifty meters.
I’ve been on that page before - they do a good job of warning people not to rely too heavily on enhanced images (particularly those enhanced using bicubic interpolation).
I’ve never been all that interested in the face because I am dubious of heavy manipulations to very poor initial photographs. Any photograph taken from 1200 miles in orbit around Mars and beamed thousands of miles to Earth is bound to be unclear and full of random bit errors. It’s a far cry to claim that it’s a face, a footprint or the ghost of Elvis.
I’ve seen the latest photos of the face, but does anyone have a link to any photos taken of the surrounding formations?
Oh, yeah, avalongod, the prevalent “theory” is that those Martians were our ancestors, not some unrelated alien species.
Er… So are you suggesting that I should abandon my life’s work? But the Ganymedians need the information I can tell them! And I’ll lose that really great bulk discount on concrete the building materials supplier’s been giving me!
First, you palliard; I was citing the smoke thing as an unusual item that I saw on a photo. Second, the camera that took that photo has a lens the size of a dinner plate & creates negative that are 1 square foot in size. Under a magnifier, you can easily pick out tooks dumped into the back of pickup trucks; tell cows from calfs or bulls; and locate individual bricks on a brick sidewalk. This ain’t no Brownie, chum.
Third, without hard-headed skeptics, the dreamers would turn science into fairy tales & nonsense–nothing more.
Bosda: I already like you. 
Yeah, God forbid we live in a fairy tale! That would be simply intolerable! :rolleyes:
I am a palliard? You, sir, are a vaunting, attenuated milquetoast!
And your little sidekick, Cervaise, too.
Sir, I’ll have you know I use beer and not milk to make my toast.
Further, I am not ashamed to be called “attenuated”. It means thin or misty; i.e. : not dense.** I am definitely not dense**.
Your posts, however… more mass per cubic centimeter than depleted uranium. You are definitely anti-attenuated.
And , when you think about it, most of the stuff that happens in a fairy tale is horrifying! Grandmas eaten by wolves, kidnappings, poison apple–yeesh! :eek:
The scariest thing I can think of is a fairy tale come to life! If Little Red Riding Hood happened in America today, it would headline on CNN longer than OJ.
bump
If anyone cares at this point in the thread, according to Sagan the ‘eye’ of the martian face is a cluster of lost data which is shown as a black circle.
I sure don’t buy the conspiracy theory, NASA has everything to gain from a civilization on Mars. The press and PR would be unbelievable and NASA is dying to get the funding to goto Mars. It would be a perfect marriage.
Lets not sing the praises of the self-styled Skeptics, most do nothing more than maintain the status-quo. Truly objective people are a rarity and wouldn’t go around labeling themselves in the first place.