Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Apparently some think there's a massive face at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean. While I realize it's impossible to prove a negative, I'm personally satisfied that the Pacific "face" is naturally occurring and, moreover, not all that face-like. But it catches my interest because it helps provide a systematic way to gauge the archaeological merits of similar surface features, both on Earth and on Mars.

If the Pacific "face" is a simulacrum, as I'm betting it is, we can bring our understanding to bear on a number of supposed geoglyphs on the Martian surface. Like the vaguely defined likeness deep below the Pacific, most of the "faces" (and animal likenesses) on Mars are seen solely in profile. While this doesn't automatically discount them from the artificiality debate, it makes objective assessment surprisingly difficult; after all, our own planet is littered with asymmetric artificial formations that could easily pass for natural hills and mesas if not for extensive aerial and on-site analysis.

(Click here to see your host bravely clambering atop ancient Indian burial mounds.)

4 comments:

Carol Maltby said...

Lloyd Stewart Carpenter's notions about this "face" are batshit crazy on every possible level.

I'd suggest that changing your phrasing to say "'faces' (and animal likenesses claimed to be on Mars," so as not to lend them a legitimacy they do not earn.

Lloyd Stewart Carpenter is not even competent enough to have his colorized version congruent with the actual contours of the area he's pointing to.

Look at the supposed jaw and teeth on the colorized version, and then at the sea floor area he's referring to. If that were a face, the hideously malformed mouth slashing down toward the jaw would be better found on a baby with terminal birth defects from depleted uranium exposure. He moves the mouth line up and out on his colorized version to make it look better.

Mac, I listened to what I could of your interview last night on Fate magazine's radio show (it was listed at The Daily Grail). Hard to understand you, there was way too much echo. Loved your description of how RCH "dramatizes science."

It led me to wonder who has the audio rights to ATMA, and whether it might be a good idea for you to do a podcast version of that, or at least of maybe an hour's worth of condensation on the subject of Martian anomalies.

Carol Maltby

parrish said...

weeping, eh? i'm weeping, too.

W.M. Bear said...

This looks to me suspiciously like part of a subtle (or maybe not-so-subtle) disinformation campaign to discredit analysis of possible Martian artificial formations. The similarity of Lloyd Stewart Carpenter's analysis to much of the published "Martian enigmas" materials is to striking to be merely coincidental. The idea seems to be this. Appear to seriously propose a similar "theory" (the Face in the Pacific) that is so patently absurd on the face of it (so to speak), that no one can possibly credit it. Using "guilt by association," this whole disinformational process will serve its purpose to discredit ALL "face theories" including (especially) the Face on Mars.

Lest anyone not credit THIS theory on the basis that it's "conspiracy theory," let me just say this about that. The routine and automatic discrediting of ideas as "conspiracy theories" is itself the result of a similar kind of disinformation campaign -- to wit, proposing patently absurd conspiracies theories (the idea that a missle not an airline hit the Pentagon on 9/11 is possibly one such) in order to discredit ALL conspiracy theories.

All right, then, who undertakes these disinformation campaigns? Clearly, whatever secret elements in the government whose interest it serves NOT to have the correct view of reality (for example, that the Face on Mars is real evidence of an ancient Martian civilization) taken seriously. Why? Because there is likely a secret U.S. government protocol forbidding the discovery of ETI to be made public and mandating that, in fact, it be classified at the very least TOP SECRET.

Make sense? Probably not -- BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN CONDITIONED TO AUTOMATICALLY DISMISS **ALL** CONSPIRACY THEORIES OUT OF HAND. But folks, it's a provable fact that history runs on conspracies and that some conspiracies, at least, are real.

Anonymous said...

зеленый лазер
электрошокер
товары мини камеры
товары народного потребления