My pareidolia knows no bounds.

Remember, it shouldn't be this hard. That's the point I've been trying to make for months now. If there was something to see, we'd see it.

rd
[/quote]

Rich, and your point is well taken re. difficulty etc.

What I'm trying to do here is a little experiment because what <i>I</i> am seeing, I grant you is very difficult to see but I want to find out if you see this without my "description" impute. I will direct you...so the condition is most prominent at the lowest "terrace" at the bottom of the image.

Malcolm Scott

Malcolm, yes I understand what you're trying to do. It makes sense to see if someone else sees the same thing you see (without a key) since that would represent a stronger confirmation.

The problem, though, is that it's very difficult to be precise about where to look. I could be off by a little or a lot. It's not just that I don't know what I'm looking for. I don't know where I'm looking.

rd

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rderosa</i>
<br />Malcolm, yes I understand what you're trying to do. It makes sense to see if someone else sees the same thing you see (without a key) since that would represent a stronger confirmation.

The problem, though, is that it's very difficult to be precise about where to look. I could be off by a little or a lot. It's not just that I don't know what I'm looking for. I don't know where I'm looking.

rd
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Rich, the image is a clip from a video I have produced. Here is the link. As you will see, typical of all my video's, the speed is very slow. This should allow enough time to focus one's eyes and focus the brain and ultimately, connect the both (the tough part). From my perspective, the "squinting" is not so much in the human eye but the human brain. Seeing something for the first time which "does not compute" as it were, is a process that will (all being well) culminate in a new experience. But like all new experiences, (especially where it breaks with expectation) can be a tumultuous experience.

I'm not saying here that this will happen to you but to be honest, it <i>has</i> happened to me....and I have a very good eye!

This may take several runs of this video before it brake's ground. The trick is to "place oneself into the 3D environment" or "being in the picture".

drive.google.com/file/d/0B--tam0uh-oiYUt...aWs/view?usp=sharing

Malcolm Scott

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Marsevidence01</i>
<br />This may take several runs of this video before it brake's ground. The trick is to "place oneself into the 3D environment" or "being in the picture".
Malcolm Scott
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> Malcolm, while your videos are interesting, they don't help with the problem I'm describing. As a matter of fact, it makes the issue worse, because not only do we not know where to look, it takes a lot of time and you still never really know what you're looking for.

"Several runs?"

I don't think so. Give me an arrow, and tell me what it is you think you see, and then I'll see if I see it.

rd

I don't think so. Give me an arrow, and tell me what it is you think you see, and then I'll see if I see it.

rd
[/quote]

Hmmm...well this is not so easy to explain but I'll give it a try.

What I am seeing in the 3D images (this is not possible in the 2D images) is...quite frankly, a phenomenon which I have only seen in SciFi books and some SciFi movies.

For quite some time now, I have been challenged you might say by the many so-called "terraces" that frequent the surface especially in the Hebes Chasma region. They did not "sit well" with me with respect of their "expected natural construction". They seemed contrived. This is quite evident when under close magnification, they appeared to be formed with structural "figurines and cartoonized designs or patterns" in the vertical buttress of the face of each. This represented to me artificiality...certainly an "un-natural" occurrence with respect to anything here on Earth. And I did my homework and found nothing comparable.

Analyzing their design in 3D with some new software algorithms allowed "depth of field" to come into play which confirmed my suspicions.

What you will see (and you will need to adjust your view perception)is that these terraces are not terraces at all but "floating anomalies"and Quite artificial!

In the video at 6.12 stamp, from the top left hand corner, you will see a good example of this...almost a "cave-like" canopy appears where one can see quite clearly the depth of field going UNDER the canopy above. This area is a huge example of the many smaller instances but none the less, a canopy. You can almost see the underside of the roof.

Now....once you get that, things will start to get a little easier in viewing the other similar "terrace" canopies. Most (not all) bare the same properties.

Bring into your mind's 3D focus (and this IS the trick) that "at the base of each terrace" the terrain immediately in front of the terrace wall is; for want of a better description "floating underneath" the buttress face!

Rich, let's move slow here and let me know IF you can adjust your eye to grasp the 3D....indeed the "multi dimensionality" of this phenomenon. If you get it, we can move on and take a look at some awesome renditions of what I believe are true Alien designed anomalies.

Cheers,

Malcolm Scott

Rich, I suggest you D'L the video and open it up in Windows Media Player as there is a nifty little brightness and contrast control. Right click (not in full screen mode) and scroll down to in the "right click applet" to "Enhancements" then to "video settings" which will bring ups a small "contrast and brightness" interface.

You may need to drop the brightness down as I have set this quite high for older monitors. You want to get "as much grey scale as possible".

Malcolm Scott