[QUOTE=jjimm]
Minor correction: Noelq’s link is one of those bastard aggregator sites that takes advantage of misspellings. The correct URL is actually: http://www.googlesightseeing.com/
[/QUOTE]
I apologize profusely for my error! I swear it was right when I typed it in… I blame the martians…
Yellow_Rights, the supposed “faces” & “pyramids” on Mars are just wind-eroded rock formations, seen in shadow. Debunked ages ago.
But if you want Life, in our Solar System, there’s a better bet than Mars.
Jupiter’s moon, Europa.
It has oceans. Oceans of water!
OTOH, Farflung did have a great song about Cydonia on their 25,000 Feet Per Second album.
My interest in Cydonia also become piqued when I found a mound shaped like a human skull, and another shaped like Pac Man.
[QUOTE=Noelq]
I apologize profusely for my error! I swear it was right when I typed it in… I blame the martians…
[/QUOTE]
I reported it so a mod can cut the link.
In my view, the whole “Face on Mars” thing would never have happened if there hadn’t been a data error leading to a black dotright where the nostril would be. Without that nostril, sure it looks a bit like a face, but it wouldn’t have had the “wow factor” it originally excited.
Put it down to a big fluke.
Hoagland’s first book was actually pretty interesting. There is one picture that looks convincing with the face and several pyramid like shaped hill’s near by. Hoagland stated at the end of the book that higher resolution photos would either show the site to be extraterrestrial or a huge pile of rocks. Now that the high res photos of piles of rocks are available, Hoagland still can’t let the idea that they were built by aliens go. So much for scientific impartiality.
Thanks for the input guys, those conspiracy sites make it sound so convincing lol.
And as usual, everyone ignores the other face on Mars.
[QUOTE=Colophon]
In my view, the whole “Face on Mars” thing would never have happened if there hadn’t been a data error leading to a black dot.
[/QUOTE]
Interesting, I hadn’t heard that before. Are all the black dots data errors? There’s a row of dots making an apparent hair line. Is that also a data error?
[QUOTE=RJKUgly]
I will say it looks like it was carved by water run-off . . .
[/QUOTE]
That would be a fact of monumental importance if it were true – it would prove that Mars once had not only free, nonfrozen water, but a whole lot of it, enough for a heavy precipitation cycle.
[QUOTE=Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor]
Yellow_Rights, the supposed “faces” & “pyramids” on Mars are just wind-eroded rock formations, seen in shadow. Debunked ages ago.
[/QUOTE]
But the canals are real!
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
That would be a fact of monumental importance if it were true – it would prove that Mars once had not only free, nonfrozen water, but a whole lot of it, enough for a heavy precipitation cycle.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I agree.
It does look like to me something that would come from water swirling around, but I’m not even a partially educated layman when it comes to erosion and geology, so I’m probably way off base there. Most likely caused by wind and sand.
But wouldn’t be cool if there had been that much water?
[QUOTE=Peter Morris]
Interesting, I hadn’t heard that before. Are all the black dots data errors? There’s a row of dots making an apparent hair line. Is that also a data error?
[/QUOTE]
Yes, absolutely. They’re all over. Look at the larger picture here. All those same-sized black speckles are blank pixels caused by data dropouts in the original tranmission from Viking 1.
[QUOTE=Colophon]
All those same-sized black speckles are blank pixels caused by data dropouts in the original tranmission from Viking 1.
[/QUOTE]
See what I mean? Data dropouts everywhere.
