Elaborate Pareidolia and other Mysteries

And now, I'll comment on the art of Dr. Fred Ressler, who is I believe an optometrist. It is distasteful for me to this, and I do so with utmost respect for his work, but it has been requested so often that I feel I must, in the interest of fairness. Awhile back on another thread, I wrote:

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Fred, In order to advance that the “pareidolia can be elaborate—is frequently elaborate—hypothesis” it would now seem like a good idea to do demonstration here similar to the one JP Levasseur did in his paper in demonstrating the differences between the Profile Image on Mars and known cases of pareidolia (and other psychological illusions) on Earth (MRB Vol.23 No. 4).

For such an exercise one would want to include: context images, target object at different viewing angles, scales, seasons, and lighting; types of photo enhancements used on object, object imaged with different enhancements, or none, and so on. This is what we tried to do (when possible) with Mars pictures, to advance the theory that they were not pareidolia. Also, can you please give us the source (e.g., photo shop, physical source, any independent verification of the image, and acquisition parameters). As you know of course, going by what an image “looks like” is only the first step in the process. One example: I’m pretty sure this is not yours. When showing a picture of a man’s face painted on a cat’s head, we would like some kind of assurance (other than “trust me”) that the face was not painted on by the cat’s owner.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The only answer I got (but not from Dr. Ressler) was to the effect that such requests for proof were a "strawman" (meaning presumably a diversionary tactic on my part deflecting attention from the "pure science" being presented by the pareidolia camp). Nevertheless, I repeat my request. In the absence of an adequate answer, I present the following analysis.

Here is one of the better examples of Dr. Ressler's art taken from his website.

Untitled.



I note a couple of details: 1- the entire image is blurry with the exception of the face and eye areas. 2- There is good detail and symmetry in the eyes, and both eyes have a similar angularity and artistic quality. The right eye (our view) even has outline, upper lid/lash, white, and iris. 3- There is symmetry in the forehead, cheeks, chin, etc., thus meeting some of my criteria for artificiality. 4 there is good shading in the nose and cheeks but little or no shading in the rest of the image—only blurriness.

Please note, I am not accusing Dr. Ressler of any malfeasance, merely stating that this is art. He has said as much in his website promos. We have no more reason for thinking the above is science than the following:



“Description:
The Wolfhaven Mark 8 Flying Saucer is a state of the art vehicle equiped with the latest in antigrav technology. This vehicle seats a single individual. It is able to fly through the air or underwater with ease. To start the vehicle simply board the craft and say "start". Likewise "stop" will deactivate the craft. To control the craft, simply go into Mouselook mode once you have started it. The mouse chooses the direction you will be going in. Commands ======= 'start' - Starts the Engines (Vehicle goes "physical") 'stop' - Stops the Engines (Vehicle goes "non-physical") PgUp - Vertical Climb PgDn - Vertical Descent Arrow Up - Forward Arrow Back - Backward Arrow Right - Strafe Right Arrow Left - Strafe Left 2 through 9 = 20% to 90% power 0 (zero) = Full Power You have limited movement controls when not in mouselook mode. PgUp (Climb), PgDn (Descend), Arrow Up (Forward), Arrow Down (Backward), Arrow Right (Strafe Right), Arrow Left (Strafe Left). You can not 'turn' the vehicle in non-mouselook mode. It should be noted that this vehicle can not be transfered to nor piloted by other people. It is specific to the owner. If you have any questions about this vehicle, please contact me. Happy Flying!”

Neil- "He who has eyes, let him see." Although not a big bible fan this is one of the most repeated phrases in the bible. Probably only more often repeated by "He who has ears let him hear." i believe in things speaking what they have to say, as they are living speaking "Gods." Words, science, logic mean next to nothing except a vague stab at mechanics. If one is a seer and views the image one can see that no artist could do this as it is perfect in "art work." It must be created by the master Himself (God) merely photographed by a half decent photographer. "Art is a covenant between God and man, and the less it has to do with man the better." (Andre Gide). The "blur," is only part of the pareidolic illusion as is the shading, symmetry, artwork etc. After all these are only natural, photographed un-photoshoped, shadows, of course they are blurry compared to a photo of a human face. One can not prove or disprove anything to a skeptic. To a seer, one has not to do anything for he sees what he is looking at. i already gave you the names of the film developer and the printer. When one views even the 12 or so images i have on the web one can readily see that they show no sign of being created by the same "artist." All "artists" have their rubber stamping style from canvas to canvas. A great artist may have 2 or three syles in different periods of her/his life. My photos have none of that rubber stamping- added proof to a seer that they could only be crated by the master Himself and photographed. As far as lighting angles, seasons etc. they have nothing to do with shadow photos, any more than can be seen and interpreted by any seer. What you see is what you get. Very simple. i started seeing early on that i had captured what artists were trying to capture, and was elated. But i am no more an artist than anyone. Art is a purely political term; and while i take it as a compliment to be called a visionary artist, i realize everyone is way beyond an artist and all similar political mundane terms as all terms are. Words are only useful as hints to get us where we need to go. Words are all defined by other words and one can go in circles forever with them.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by neilderosa</i>
<br />We have no more reason for thinking the above is science than the following:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">?????

First, let me say Fred, great answer. And congratulations on phrasing that in such a way as to defy deletion. You're answer is very much to the point, and not the least off topic.

Second, let me give Neil a couple of guidelines for understanding why I brought your fine art into the discussion. I just finished doing my taxes, so I'll use one of their worksheet type of thinking.

1. Is Fred's Art pareidolia, yes or no? (If "yes", go on to question number 2, if "no", I can't help you other than to suggest that you go up to the mountains and try it for yourself.)

2. Is it at least as elaborate as this:

Untitled:



(If "yes", end of story. If "no", go on to this):

(unknown):



When you answer "yes" to any of these questions (I could go on for hours), then "end of story". No more science needed.

rd

Again from the HiRISE. I call this "Face Soup":

Image TRA_000869_1605, Top Left quadrant.



This is sort of like Da Vinci's stucco wall. The number of faces one can find, is only limited by their imagination and the amount of time they have. Some of them have only a couple of features, but if we let our mind's eye "fill in the blanks", they can be whatever we want them to be. Others have quite a bit of detail, like the two marked by asterisks.

The one marked with the transparent asterisk has:

Two eyes, a shadow under his left eye (our right), nose, fedora hat with band, mustache, mouth with shadow, small beard. He's looking down and to our left.

The one marked with the dark asterisks is a mean looking guy with gotee, eyes, nose, mustache, hair, ear, scowling eyes and mouth.

rd

Face Soup Quadrant 2:



HiRISE TRA_000869_1605

rd

Quadrant 3, The Face Soup



rd