Originally posted by Discotech

Someone with the condition would see your avatar but would not be able to recognise (remember) that your name is associated with it.

True - that is one of the symptoms associated with Prosopagnosia.

But that could also be forgetfulness/poor memory, and not necessarily prosopagnosia...

If someone looked at Armap's avatar and was unable to determine that the cartoon representation of a face was indeed that of a face - they would be suffering from Prosopagnosia.

Furthermore, they might even vehemently deny the presence of a face in Armap's avatar when confronted about its existence. Some may respond with cries of "Pareidolia. !" to those who can clearly recognize that there is indeed a face in Armap's avatar.


The symptoms of this disorder vary in severity and type from one individual to the next. In some cases, individuals cannot even imagine what a face look like, let alone recognize it when they see it. Artistic representations of faces are also often not perceived as being faces by those suffering from Prosopagnosia.




[edit on 19-8-2009 by Exuberant1]

Oh well another crop circle found on mars, oops, no, who is in charge of masking the mars images and why was this allowed to stand as it is.


Either way, unless you are told by the media it is what it is, you and everyone else will be left wondering what it is. Don't you enjoy how the whole project and 50 plus years down the track is still as strong as it originally intended.

The thing that really bugs me about these types of "finds" is that you find this feature in the middle of nowhere with nothing around it for miles and miles and miles.

That doesn't show good enough signs of civilisation to warrant building a statue.

However, the counter to this, which I am fully aware of is; "you don't know how aliens think."

This does indeed look like a Statue to me. Of course from this view and angle it could very well just be a rock formation. One of the previous posters mentioned; why build a statue there in that isolated location. Although that's a great point. The other side is how long has that been there--thousands, Millions of years? Maybe there was lots of stuff around there. But consider also the Giant Buhdas in Afghanistan that were destroyed by the Taliban. They appeared to be isolated and alone where they were as well. This is not a case of Pareidolia although I see that frequently in many martin threads. It is possible that life existed on Mars at some point in the past. However slim, it is still possible that, that life was intelligent and evolved. If a rock really really looks like a statue or a face or something else, it is ok to point that out without sounding like a kook so that "All" of us can look at it and make our own opinions.

Great find! Thanks!

Originally posted by amazing
But consider also the Giant Buhdas in Afghanistan that were destroyed by the Taliban. They appeared to be isolated and alone where they were as well.

Only on the images that show only the statue, the whole area was dotted with houses and the signs of the thousands of people that went to the place during all those years.

Nothing like that is visible on this photo.

If a rock really really looks like a statue or a face or something else, it is ok to point that out without sounding like a kook so that "All" of us can look at it and make our own opinions.

Yes, not looking is the best way of not finding.

This is what I like about ATS great pic. threadster.

Originally posted by AlienCarnage
I must ask though, if the lighting was changed so you see different shadows, would you still see this same "statue"?

That's an excellent question because lighting obviously plays a large role in the appearance of the Mars "face", under one set of lighting conditions, it looks like a face to me, but under different lighting, it doesn't.

If we had high-res topographical (altitude) data on these features we could pluf that in a 3-D model and then move a lighting source around in the model to see how lighting affects the objects appearance. We might even be able to view the object itself at different angles though any side views would merely be extrapolations of the altitude data.

Maybe someone has already done that, however I think our hi-res topographical data on Mars is limited to only specific areas so it may not encompass the feature in the OP? Does anyone know?

Um.. vz can see a picture with 37 rocks, and he'll see 37 faces / aliens / bits of cryptic technology. I guess that's what happens if you delve too deeply into trying to prove this sort of thing is real.

There are many natural objects on our own planet that form into shapes we are familiar with. I've seen ipod-wearing Native Americans, an island that looks like a pair of lips, and more. Why don't we question THOSE objects?

Why is it "normal" to have this sort of phenomena on Earth, but NOT on Mars? Just because something looks vaguely statue-like doesn't mean it's actually a statue. Why is there nothing else there? No roads, structures, other statues? Why is it in the middle of a cliff? I'd think it would be easier to carve somewhere else.

I still think that if we ever do find definitive proof, we'll know it. There will be no question at all. This imo, until further proof is given, is just a cliff face.

theres alot of shapes the eyes want to believe/ gets tricked on to wanting to see. ...sorry for breaking ur hearts.

Hello! I have read up to page 11 and have some comments:
It is wounderful to get to see these photos and speculate...very exciting.
The rock cliff looks like the grand canyon, expanse, not small. Someone wants to throw off everyone. Anyone who gets really angry and starts screaming hoax has an agenda, Government Spies / NASA workers.
You wounder why they keep reading and are interested in the first place. People who would think its a hoax would move on immediately, out of boredom.
Simple rule: IF THERE IS SMOKE.... SOMEWHERE THERE IS FIRE!!!! This applies to alot of logic, and makes life simpler.
The chinese would probably love to get to mars first. Seeing how massively overpopulated they are. Back in the mid 1980s they were implementing the one child policy, I saw the movie documenting that in sociology. That was over 24 years ago. The two photos of creatures/ stutes look like reptilians, who says they're dead? Maybe posing for the photo. The one statue has breasts. The one with the arm held up.
Other civilization factors/ artifacts/buildings may be under the sand like Egypt gets covered up. Maybe there was a war on mars, buildings were blown up. The lanscape screams explosions. Sand with rock bits scattered all around from past explosions? No evidence of other creative work there? Well maybe the artist died. People just do that at random for various reasons unexpectedly. Last thought, why did the President spend 75 minutes in the Great pyramid? Why won't he release the UFO document files? Why does Nasa hide all the good photos? The government supposed to be working for US the taxpayers. Why doesn't Nasa have a weekly T.V. show tell all? They could get advertiser sponsers to help pay for the space programs. We all know ET is real and has been here for thousands of years, too much SMOKE everywhere. Too many secrets, Fire! Fire! Fire!

Originally posted by frugal
The rock cliff looks like the grand canyon, expanse, not small.

That cliff is inside a crater, and considering that there aren't any very deep craters on Mars (at least nothing like the Great Canyon), that cliff cannot be that big.

Also, it's easy for NASA (and anyone else that knows how to do it) to know the size of that cliff, the rovers do not limit their work to simple photo taking, they also send to Earth 3D information about their surroundings.

The two photos of creatures/ stutes look like reptilians, who says they're dead? Maybe posing for the photo. The one statue has breasts. The one with the arm held up.

If they are not dead at least they did not move during all those hours, the one with "the arm help up" was photographed on Sol 1364 and 1367, in exactly the same position, this "Egyptian statue was photographed on Sol 1167 and 1167.

Other civilization factors/ artifacts/buildings may be under the sand like Egypt gets covered up.

Then why did the "statue with the arm held up" did not got buried? And why do we see only "statues", "fossils" and "machine parts" and never things that look like buildings?

Maybe there was a war on mars, buildings were blown up.

But not these small "statues"?

The lanscape screams explosions.

Not to me, to me it looks like a natural landscape, marked by several craters, but mostly (at least where the rovers are) it looks like sedimentary rock, something like a lake or sea bottom.

Sand with rock bits scattered all around from past explosions?

Those can be the result of meteors hitting the surface, no need for artificial destruction.

No evidence of other creative work there? Well maybe the artist died. People just do that at random for various reasons unexpectedly.

And why consider it a "creative work"? It looks natural and not out of place, in both cases there similar features that do not look like statues or creatures, so they do not attract the attentions of most people, but they are there.

We all know ET is real and has been here for thousands of years, too much SMOKE everywhere.

Maybe what you think is smoke is just fog, with no fire.

So you think small fairy folk live on mars? I saw all the leprechan houses on Arran Ireland this summer. They insist people live in them, and the magical people went underground when the celts showed up 6000 years ago to build ring forts, 400 plus in the Burren alone. There are rocks every where there, but people made them stand up for fences, wedge tombs, ring forts, sarsans, orgam stones, bee hive huts, etc. The point of building a ring fort in a stoney place means it blends in with the surroundings (camoflag of sorts.) The burren has limestone carved out by rain. Those rocks laying on Mars look like leftovers from something blowing up. Good point on my other questions . Thanks.