Have you seen photographs of the face on Mars- and if so, what do you think about it?

Question

Do you think it really looks like the face of a person?

What are the dimensions of it- how wide, how high, etc.?

And since erosion occurs on Mars (perhaps the dynamics there are quite different from erosion on earth), then why hasn't the face either been obliterated or at least distorted by dust storms?

Could it be that we are seeing too much into the face- that perhaps it really is a caprice of nature?

Answer 1

Yes, I've seen the old photos and the new ones.

The old Mars Lander photos from the 70s had terrible resolution and made a little hill with craters look like a face.

Fast forward to the recent orbiter photos and you see it as nothing more than a hill.

No one has the dimensions, just photos.

Answer 2

What you are seeing on Mars is not a face. If it was a face it would be huge. It is mearly an odd shaped land formation on the Martian surface. Perhaps the erosion and dust storms created the face formation. People would like to believe that it is a face but it's like the people who see the Virgin Mary in an animal cracker. You gotta wonder about those people.

Answer 3

Have you ever seen a face in the clouds? ever heard of the horse head nebula? we always associate structures with what we recognize and know. Go to pictured rocks national park in Michigan's upper peninsula and you will see naturally occurring rock formations that resemble many things. As far as Johns assertion that there is no erosion on mars, get a clue. Mars has the largest dust storms in the solar system, ever see a sand blaster work?

Answer 4

Opitcal illusion. Saw a photo of the same feature on a different day (with the sun facing a different direction) and it didn't look like a face.

By the way, there's very little erosion on Mars. The atmosphere is very very thin and there's no liquid water so things stay pretty much the same.

Answer 5

Yes, I have seen the pictures of the face on Mars.

Not sure of the dimensions but not sure it matters.

Don't know about erosion rates but I doubt there's been much erosion since first NASA missions photogaphed Mars.

Humans have a inherent abilty to recognise human faces. Under certian situations humans have been known to recognise faces in all kinds of bizarre situations.

Answer 6

The earlier photos are truly startling and thought-provoking. But the latest ones are totally unremarkable. You can see both versions along with a lot of discussion about "The Face on Mars" at this website ==>
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast24may_1.htm

Undoubtedly atmospheric processes on Mars have been at work on the weird landform, but there's no reason to assume that it should be totally erased by them. Erosional processes are more extreme here on Earth, but there are still lots of buttes, mesas and mountains everywhere.

Answer 7

I read somewhere that there are alot more strange and wondrous things found on mars and kept secret by the government, but then everybody loves a conspiracy. But that face is too good to be mere luck in erosion.

Answer 8

Yes, I have seen the pictures. NASA's explanation seems a bit contrived. I'm not saying that they are wrong, but it does seem that they came up with their explanations quickly, rather like the explanation of a weather balloon fooling a career Army Air Force officer in Roswell. Could be, but...... The only way to find out is to go there and check it out, and if you notice, we haven't been back to the moon in 30 years. A coincidence? Could be, but............

Answer 9

Nonsense..
Just a picture of a natural formation taken from an angle
which made the shadows look like a human face..
There are newer more current photos and you can see
clearly that it is not a human face...

Answer 10

I've seen the earlier pics of it (70s) and the later ones. Only in the first ones does it look like a face. In the higher resolution pics, it looks like a normal rock. Just coincidence.