Monday, February 25, 2008





My new SETI essay, "The 'Face on Mars' and Pareidolia," has been posted.
Posted by at
Labels:

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good luck Mac and thank you for pushing this subject over there. It will likely be met with hostile grandstanding but what the hell do you have to lose?

I'm personally very tired of "the brush off" that this important subject receives. I know I'm not alone in that frustration.

Denny

5:48 PM
Anonymous said...

I personally find the "Nefertiti glyph" and that unnamed anomaly that (in my opinion) carries an uncanny resemblance to Osiris to be much more convincing of articiality.

-Ken Y.

5:54 PM
Anonymous said...

As always, your approach is carefully measured with a wise choice of words. I find your ability to present sensitive subjects in a rational and non-emotional fashion to be always refreshing.

Michael

6:10 PM
Mac said...

Denny--

Good luck Mac and thank you for pushing this subject over there. It will likely be met with hostile grandstanding but what the hell do you have to lose?

Let the SETI purists complain if they like. I'll be the first to thank them if they can point out any factual errors.

Ken--

I find "Nefertiti" quite Nefertiti-like but, alas, not very suggestive of artificial origin. But it's definitely cause for debate.

Michael--

Thanks for the kind words. I've always thought the subject deserves better than the usual "conspiracy" treatment.

10:48 PM
Anonymous said...

What I find, in part, convincing about the possible artificial origin of the Face is not just the precisely placed features (though those too) but also the "frame." If that's a natural "mesa," it sure as hell is a highly symmetrical one.

Also, has anyone proposed, as a kind of thought experiment, just assuming for moment that the Face IS artificial. What would that imply? It not only implies that there were ancient Martians (a philosophical slam-dunk if there ever was one). It also implies that the ancient Martians -- whether indigenous or colonists from another star -- were HUMANOID. Do we really want to accept this implication? That they looked like us (more or less)?

7:32 PM
Anonymous said...

w.m.bear,

If the ancient Martians were indeed humanoid, IMO the most plausible explanation for it would be that _they were in fact human beings_. But how did human beings end up on ancient Mars??? The ultimate enigma!

Ken Y.

9:48 PM
Mac said...

Who said a humanoid face on Mars implied that the "Martians" were humans? They could have modeled the Face on a human ancestor here on Earth.

12:07 AM
Anonymous said...

"Who said a humanoid face on Mars implied that the "Martians" were humans? They could have modeled the Face on a human ancestor here on Earth."

Of course that's possible, but I think it's relatively implausible. The probability that the Face -- if artificial -- was built by human beings is far greater. I'm sure you've heard of the Fermi Paradox.

-Ken Y.

7:47 PM
Anonymous said...

Or, that the "ancient Martians" were our either our predecessors after migrating to Earth, or became today's cryptoterrestrials.

A plethora of potential possibilities, probably.

3:58 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)