large Mystery face found carved into remote Canadian Island

a reply to: Sublimecraft

nifty picture, but a few questions...how far away was he from this and what type of camera was he using and is there any video?

That's my friend Larry's face.

He carves it wherever he goes.

He started out tagging.

His street name is Joker.

a reply to: Thorneblood

This island is not near Vancouver, its on the west pacific facing side of Vancouver Island. The old story you quote Is not from That area. Reeks Island Is part of the broken group and is probably very difficult to get at considering the rough seas there. The island is extremely remote, and if it is a carved face,it speaks to the old tribes that used to populate these areas much more than they do today. i.e. Before disease wiped them out.

Regardless of how high up the cliff the thing is, one should be able to photograph it from various different angles if it's real.

I'd need to see other angles in order to accept it as anything other that pareidolia.

With only a single angle, it can be assumed that the face can only be seen from that angle, which would indicate that it is not actually there.

Harte

just ONE more pic please..

You have a knack for finding cool stuff, Mr. OP.

I've seen a few similar faces while hiking in the Pacific Northwest woods, but assumed that they are natural phenomena created by erosion. Some look like a Sasquatch and I did specu late that Natives carved them for ceremonial purposes or perhaps squatch carves a bunch of them in order to fit in the scenery without being noticed.

As a matter of fact my icon is a picture from a unique place that has a few items on the rock faces that may be carvings.

originally posted by: verylowfrequency
I've seen a few similar faces while hiking in the Pacific Northwest woods, but assumed that they are natural phenomena created by erosion. Some look like a Sasquatch and I did specu late that Natives carved them for ceremonial purposes or

perhaps squatch carves a bunch of them in order to fit in the scenery without being noticed.

Harte

This is intriguing.

However, this photo from 2012 is closer, and makes it appear more natural than man-made:
www.panoramio.com...

Curious that it's a different color of rock than the surrounding mountainside rock.

It can't be matrixing. IT would have to be within a pattern of features, but this face IS the only feature within that area if you see what I mean. Someone probably carved this a long time ago, and being on native land, it is likely.

To be honest, if this is not a natural formation (or Photoshop wiz) then I think it's new, as it would have been noticed previously had it been ancient or old.

given the evidence presented - i can form no opinion on its nature or origins

BUT - the lack of initiative shown in the " investigation " is simply mind numbing

" reeks island " is only 1100m long by 350m wide

it is 13km from one port and 25km from the next nearest port

there are scores of inhabited settlements etc closer

the fact that it took 7 years to get one picture is simply WTF ????????

it is not remote // hard to get to // dangerous etc etc etc

the " investigators " are simply incompetant , not trying or deliberatly not investigating

2 competant people could investigate this in a single day

the fact that it is 15m up a cliff is no problem - use rope access from the top or trad climbing from the bottom and actually investigate

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
2 competant people could investigate this in a single day

Of course they could, if there were something to investigate. I strongly suspect the 'face' to be a natural formation that only resembles a face from one angle (hence the single photo of it), and someone is just trying to get their 15 minutes of fame with the story.

this was found on an island near Yonaguni..looks much more like a human colossal head..



www.japanupdate.com...

ok, in this foto it looks much more like a natural formation..

just a trickery of rocks and shadows..

Looks a bit like the Mona Lisa Extraterrestrial, I think.


sbeckow.files.wordpress.com...

originally posted by: anti72
ok, in this foto it looks much more like a natural formation..

just a trickery of rocks and shadows..

After seeing the picture you present, it definitely does NOT look like anything but a natural formation, and less like a face. That is, a real face. Another thing, it only looks like one half a face if at all.

originally posted by: anti72
ok, in this foto it looks much more like a natural formation..
just a trickery of rocks and shadows..

Even still, it is likely regarded as a sacred spot by the FN...it would be worth looking in the area for pictographs as they tend to accompany such natural features.

Whoever the artist was.. was he trying to Picasso the thing? The eyebrow is terribly off.. but that's ok, because it goes into the space of the broken nose that is skewed to one side. ; )

The biggest issue I have with stuff like this (and faces on Mars), is that look at even ancient carvings that are known to be statues. Even those crude carvings have much more accurate features and symmetry than these odd finds. It's easy to claim there is a statue or face.. when you are not too picky about placement of features or shape or anything else.