Have there Been Any Recent Revelations Re: "The Face on Mars"?

Question

The face on Mars and the definte geometric patterns outling a possible city-like configuration; stirred the imaginations of countless visionaries and skeptics alike!

What has become of that fascinating "discovery" ?
There was a flurry of News a few years back? A few books were written, especially by the brilliant, Graham Hancock, but is there any fruther evidence aside from dismissing the whole incident as a quirk of light?

It seems NASA should make that a top priority on their list instead of the opposite creating all sorts of speculation and continued distrust.

Answer 1

One of my favorite pastimes as a child, and even occasionally as an adult, was to sit back, look up at the sky, and watch the clouds rolling by. It is quite a game to pick out the shapes of familiar-looking animals and objects in the clouds. Who hasn't heard a child or adult exclaim, "I see a horse, there's an elephant," or "do you see the bird?" We take enjoyment out of creating recognizable-looking features out of clouds and indeed, even in other natural formations in the world around us. Just as we can look at the clouds and identify the familiar, so can we look at features of other worlds and relate them to our own experiences. Even planetary scientists play this game.

One of the most widely recognized features on a world other than our own, is a mesa of resistant rock located in the Cydonia region of Mars. It has a strikingly resemblance to a human face, especially in older images taken by the Viking Orbiters. The Cydonia region is located along an escarpment that separates the relatively crater-free planes to the north from the heavily cratered terrain to the south. JPL scientists made the discovery of the "Face on Mars" in July of 1976 while searching for a landing site for the Viking 2 Lander. Wanting to give the public a familiar looking feature, JPL released the image to the right.

Based upon the low resolution Viking images (which was the best the Viking spacecraft could do), several people claimed that the "Face" was artificial and not a natural geological structure. They also put forth the proposition that other features in the area proved that an intelligent civilization once lived on Mars and created the formations. This became fuel for a small number of conspiracy theorists that asserted that NASA was trying to cover up evidence of ancient intelligent life on other worlds. This argument is preposterous, especially when one considers that NASA has always been faced with budget cuts. The best thing that could happen to NASA would be the discovery of ancient life or technology on another world. This would give them an overwhelming argument in convincing Congress for a large budget increase dedicated to further space exploration. I am not aware of any planetary scientist who believes that these features are anything more than natural formations.One problem with using the Viking images as proof of something is that they are low resolution. At such a resolution the images do not reveal crisp surface features. But a number of laywriters seem to be able to interpret quite a bit from these low resolution images, and some have published books and "supermarket tabloid" reports about their impressions, flawed as they may be. At maximum resolution, the face measures 46 pixels wide and 56 pixels high. The next highest resolution image was approximately 40 pixels wide by 48 pixels high.

Fortunately, on April 6th, 1998 NASA's Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft imaged the Face from a distance of 444 kilometers (276 miles). The image had a resolution of 4.3 meters (15 feet) per pixel, which is ten times sharper than the best Viking image of the region. The face is about a mile across and a few hundred feet high. What some imagined to be eyes, a nose, and lips, now appear to be nothing more than peaks and ridges. Even though the Face has now lost much of its facial appearance, it is still fun to identify features that resemble things that we know. The following are a few other fun familiar-looking features to explore.

Answer 2

Nasa DID make it a priority. The Space Agency went out of its way to photograph the mountain from a different perspective. (Some complained that precious spacecraft time was being wasted on stupid stuff, but the administrators of NASA decided that to give the public what it wants, a clear answer.)

The new pictures show nothing at all like the Emoticon face in the earlier shots. It's just an illusion caused by perspective. Clearly, the mountain is no more a face than the Man in the Moon, or the images of the Blessed Virgin Mary that are regularly reported in fast food restaurants,

Answer 3

I think nasa or such group dummied/canceled it down to just a mountain with shadows giving it a face like appearance. Just one of the many wonders of the world/space time continue forward stuff.

Answer 4

Recent photographs with better resolution show simply a mountain.

Answer 5

I.) you adore the luscious, gooey feeling of somebody else's saliva on your epidermis. you start to rub it throughout your physique... definite... heaven. How ever, if it wasn't a warm lady, i might l.) different, press costs.

Answer 6

mars has never harbored life, we found ice on Mars, but not liquids water, the erosion that seemed to be cause by water is made by liquid Co2.

Answer 7

we have

to wait until they got it again


then brush low res the pictures again:)