2006-09-22 20:52:31 · 6 answers · asked by exploringplanetearth 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
The face is simply a rock formation, nothing more. In normal light it does not even look like a face.
A myth
2006-09-22 20:59:14 · answer #1 · answered by andyoptic 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Wouldn't be worth it to send a Rover. The Rover is very small, and would end up WAY to close to see any features. Sort of like "can't see the forest for the trees".
The Mars "face" is a large mountain escarpment that has collapsed/eroded in such a way that, when the light hits it at just the right angle, it makes shadows that, when viewed by a human or a camera from orbit, can be interpreted as a human face. This is an example of the tendency of humans to "see" patterns where there are none. More recent photos are much more revealing of the real appearance. Check out the following websites for more detail:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20060921/sc_space/marsfacemakeovercontroversialformationobservedfromnewangles
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/09/22/mars.face/index.html?section=cnn_space&ref=google
http://www.dlr.de/mars-express/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-207/1616_read-4790/
2006-09-23 08:17:43 · answer #2 · answered by Dave_Stark 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I remember seeing the photo of this formation. I also remember seeing a rock which appeared to have had the initials 'BG' engraved on it. After further inspection in various light conditions, both turned out to be, well, nothing at all.
andyoptic is correct, give him the ten points.
2006-09-23 04:05:48 · answer #3 · answered by abeginsberg 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Apart from the photos taken by satellite, the rover moves very, very slowly. And it couldn't see all the surface features at once.
There are remnants of craters all over the earth, but almost all of them were not recognized as craters until very recently. though people were walking over them and around them.
Likewise, there are patterns in the Plains of Nazca that were not recognized (by outsiders) as pictures of animals until airplanes flew over them.
The satellite photos are pretty conclusive. If people don't want to "believe" them, fine ... they'll just have to wait until they can go there with their own eyes.
2006-09-23 04:13:50 · answer #4 · answered by Luis 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
if you're willing to pay for it, in your taxes, then hay, go ahead, but you may be on your own. It costs loads of money, and recently some of the rovers that landed on mars were never heard of again. so, it probably won't happen.
myth anyway.
2006-09-23 05:21:06 · answer #5 · answered by fatal_essence 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
that cost money
2006-09-23 04:05:26 · answer #6 · answered by captain ron 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋