Planet of Art..

Trinket,

I see an animal head in the middle of Sol 574. Where did you do the pencil work? What is the id number on this image? If you are going to add pencil work to make something more visible it would be helpful if you would post the original unpenciled image for comparison.

There are alot of forces that influence the landscape of a planet.. wind, volcanic activity, ice being redistributed over time ect.

There may have once been life on mars but I think looking at low res pictures and reading things into them is a little premature.

Maybe in the next decade we will land on mars, or atleast have more data from probes that will shed more light on the planets past.

-11

Trinket,
Could you please give the source for MRO?
Thanks

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Recently while helping a colleague with a quite famous Image within the community..,and discovered I believe by the late great "Wilmer Faust"...

I decided to use an inverted digital elevation map and got this result... I thought it interesting at least..-- Trinket<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I posted these a few months ago on Wil's site. This is the "Warrior" or "Guardian" looking over Parrotopia.
M1402185

S20-00165d




Right click to "properties" to see the image numbers.

rd

Since there is very little discussion on possible artifacts in this thread, on the "last man standing" premise, I'll make a couple/few of comments.

1. A few of the artifacts found over the years and this past year can reasonably be argued for artificiality, with further research required to confirm/prove these finds.
2. I agree with TVF that the best method of proof, as it pertains to images at least, (as opposed to “on the ground” tests) is the a priori test. Probably because it’s the only way you can make some kind of statistical calculation for predicted “secondary features.”
3. I agree with RD that at some point a posteriori proof becomes valid because otherwise we would never be able to rely on our senses to tell us if a real face is real, such as when we look at Mt Rushmore, for example.
4. My own most important points have been two: we must be able to substantiate images’ authenticity, and we can gage artificiality, at least in our initial hypothesis, by the amount of detail, etc. (elaborateness), we see that corresponds to known forms, in this case faces.

That said, I see nothing in this thread with the exception of the “Guardian” from the :”Parrot” mosaic, posted by RD. All else appears to be pareidolia by all the above criteria, and sometimes one can not even see a pareidolic face.

Neil

You know Neil..

Some people still think Saddam Attacked NY on Sept 11..

I've talked to many of these people.. There is no convincing them otherwise..

It's all about where they get their news.. What their focus is on. Their understanding of the past and present. What their belief structure is based on.. How trusting they are of our governmental agencies like IRS or NASA.

Pareidolia a psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus but used in threads here to claim that humans "can't" determine reality from the imagined ? I don't buy this logic.. Never will..

Planet of Art .. (my belief)

If I am right .. that would have to mean that everyone else is "absolutely clueless"

This seems to unintentionally anger the common majority before the conversation can even begin.

I have studied Mars "full time" these last three years and although I have not provided my most compelling works here for yours and others scrutiny I have provided some quite good ones , I believe you have not understood the intent or focus of any of the images I have displayed ..

42 craft to Mars .. (maybe it's not the engineers but the researchers)

I have been trying to get people to look at my backyard but they constantly focus on my screen door, thinking that it's my backyard. What a dilemma .