Actually the place where the ear is suppose to be would be more to the left, following the jawline and align with the bottom of the nose, its more
like that road is on the back of the neck, but its still cool none the less.
Natural or not, I like it and think it will make a nice oil painting addition to anyone's wall.
In the spirit of H2G2, I think Slartibartfast might have done it:
Slartibartfast is a Magrathean, and a designer of planets. His favourite part of the job was creating coastlines, the most notable of which were
the fjords found on the coast of Norway on planet Earth, for which he won an award. While Arthur Dent and Ford Prefect were on ancient Earth, they saw
Slartibartfast's signature deep inside a glacier in ancient Norway
Not bad... you actually 'see' the sleeping dog... Maybe he is getting through to you.... (I'm having a little trouble with the
Okay then here is the problem... there is no doubt that in the distorted images that vze2xjjk is posting that what he sees is actually there... no
doubt at all...
its the interpretation and the method of making the images thats the problem
Here is BB I took only the one 'face' that is easiest to spot... Almost has an Easter Island totem look to it
Here is your 'sleeping dog'... Thing I want to point out is that YOU did see the dog no matter what you think of it... the other 'face' is the
one in the lower left of the original image..
The other point is that they are not really obscure... because when you clip them the proportions in the face or the head of the dog are RIGHT...
Now vze2xjjk and rik are seeing these in the micro scale... while others can only see them in the macro scale... like the 'Egyptian statue' the
focus of this thread...
The point here is that we ALL see the 'statue' skeptic and believer alike... its not a vase, or an animal its a rock that LOOKS LIKE an Egyptian
statue... The only difference is skeptics say its a natural phenomenon while believers say "Its man-made.." (or Alien )
Like the Ipod Indian and the image below on Mars... there are many macro examples that everyone can clearly identify... and they ARE THERE no
Now I have found many amazing images on Earth... many rock faces on cliffs and many of these have been marked as sacred places by the Native
Sure this could be because they assumed that the "Great Spirit' made these as markers...
but WHAT IF there really is some cosmic force at work putting images into nature for us to spot? Many say we have the ability to recognize
WHAT IF there is a reason we have that ability?
All over the planet there are symbols that ARE man made that can only be recognized from high altitudes... many native cultures in many lands have
done this... there has to be a reason
Also oddly enough I find a Military base near many of these markings like the ones in Pine Gap... I call them the Nazca Lines of Pine Gap... look at
the full size link below to see the scale..
I think its funny when faces, or other remarkable shapes, which are not questionable in first place, in places (mars or a rock) or situations you dont
expect them in a "normal" point of view, are almost always explained by "skeptics" as "pattern recognition". They use it as an argument to say
like: There is no face or nothing out of the ordinary.
You cant use that as an argument IMO. Pattern recognition is a main abbility of humans to actually recognize for example humans or animals etc... in
first place. Pattern recognition is NOT an argument to proof or disproof something.
Everything has to do with the point of reference and which patterns you know and how to explain them. Do I accept things could have a totally other
origin then for example meanstream sience says or the bible etc... Then I can look further then someone who only want/can understand whats normal in
their eyes. Stuck in their reality.
Total reality goes beyond human perception... You can try to look further and get to know a lot more or just stay where you stay.
The question: how do you explain "pattern recognition" anyway? Has a lot to do with this perception of reality.
This is an image taken in Arches National Park.
Pattern recognition helps me to conclude it looks like some sort of feline.
Hard skeptics will now use pattern recognotion right away as an argument. Stating they also see faces in clouds, so this rock, with this remarkable
shape in it, is infact a rock. Well, yes, of course it is...
But now I am curious... is it made by nature? Is it artificial (in this case I dont know, but thats the whole point) How did it come in that place,
and why? Thinking a litle out of the box...(oh damn, its so hard.. )
Oh wait, I forgot, its just pattern recognition, its nothing in first place.
The wonderful thing about 'pattern recognition' is that the pattern is the same
I do not see a dog or a car I see the cat...
For a Religious person to accept that God or any other deity created this to look like a cat is an easy enough stretch... God simply made a rock look
like a cat...
But for the atheist its not so easy..
WHY does a Cat look like a cat? What random molecules decided that this gtouping of the same molecules that make up everything will look like a cat?
There are many species of cats... yet we clearly see them as cats...
So what if the same forces that gave shape to everything else in life also give shape to rocks?
Of course that thought would require belief in SOME higher power...
The question: how do you explain "pattern recognition" anyway?
People see in random patterns that which they are familar with. ie what they recognize!
Example I've always been amused by the gentlemen who find all sorts of things on the Moon and Mars. Interestingly, I see a lot more because I'm
familar with Japanese and Arabic "lettering". I see those letters and words everywhere where they see nothing.
People tend to see that which is important to them or what they see a lot of - which is why faces are so common.
In the Arabic world lots of words from the Qu'ran are seen in desert sand ridges and eggplants - because both have in them cursive lines.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.