Curiosity Takes Picture of Pharaoh-Like Statue!

reply to post by fatdeeman


Are you sure that that isn't a NASA-doctored photo? Many of them were.

That really does look like a statue. Great find!

Remember people that if everything was Pareidolia we wouldn't have Archeologists, because everything they found would look like rocks. Use your brains peeps. Sometimes a rock is a rock and sometimes it could be something more.

I feel sorry for the debunkers.

They spend much of their lives saying, "Rock. Rock. Rock."

But so little of their lives actually rocking.

reply to post by Aleister


I have seen you post those clouds before and I still fail to see your woman's, are you single and looking for one by any chance? Just a friendly joke but really I cannot see anything in your clouds

I wanna see it too

Indigent
reply to post by Aleister

 

I have seen you post those clouds before and I still fail to see your woman's, are you single and looking for one by any chance? Just a friendly joke but really I cannot see anything in your clouds

I wanna see it too

Ah, then you will. I'll u2u you, but I don't want to take the thread in another direction (other than proving that we can see unexpected recognizable things in natural formations).

Indigent
reply to post by WanDash

 

Look at the evidence i present, are you suggesting my brain made an image of a frog in what you presume to be a wheel???

Madness

Simple answer is yes we always try to make sense of the world by looking for patterns which aren't there.. We do it all the time here are some natural formations what do you see?

reply to post by Aleister


Hi, and thanks for the welcome - I'm sorry but those photos have come up real grainy - I can't make out a thing! I don't doubt it though. I must refine what I meant - when I said nature, I was refering back to the natural rock formations only - should have explained myself better. Rocks are kinda less transient than clouds (!) and I would posit that many many more (different) clouds have been viewed on this planet compared to rocks - thereby largely increasing the likelihood that faces are seen and captured.

Also rocks are not prone to shape-shifting as clouds do. Really sorry, but I accept that faces in clouds crop up alot.

The angle of viewing of the Cydonia face also comes into play, apparently the effect disappears at a different angle, but I am not convinced that these photos have not been doctored either.

I also saw this video, and in it the idea of a spirit of the sky crops up. I wonder if this has any impact on the matter. Jump to 31:00, but you'll have to watch from a few minutes before to put it into perspective. www.youtube.com...

reply to post by g9000


So one nasa photo is credible and genuine enough to form the basis of your entire argument but when a different nasa photo threatens to disprove it you suggest it's doctored?

Apparently you CAN have your cake and eat it.

dragonridr
Simple answer is yes we always try to make sense of the world by looking for patterns which aren't there..

I do not disagree with this statement. It is both normal and necessary that we look for, or attempt to discern and identify "patterns" - of all kinds.

dragonridr
We do it all the time here are some natural formations what do you see?

Question - How do you know that these are natural formations?

underpass61
Does anybody else see the other tall-hatted gent chiilin' right below Pharoah #1?

I Did! I Did! I Did taw a Putty Cat! Just yankin your chain. I see it too.
Reason for edit; spelling

reply to post by WanDash


Oh common now, they are from Google, and everyone knows Google doesn't lie

doorhandle
reply to post by WanDash

 

Oh common now, they are from Google, and everyone knows Google doesn't lie

Is a google -
(1) a flock of geese...or
(2) something divers wear to keep water out of their eyes?

reply to post by fatdeeman


Okay - the truth of the matter is no-one really knows, but it also cannot be dismissed out of hand. The first NASA photo in lower res, is I believe undoctored. The second higher res one is doctored IMO.

www.google.co.uk...=moon+photos+project+clementine

Project Clementine (from what i remember) generated about 1.5 million photos.

I just found the video I watched - maybe you want to view it then think again

www.youtube.com...

Jump to 16:50 to see the relevant segment - he explains about that picture you had being doctored and shows what the REAL image was at 22:20. Please watch that segment.

Definitely eyebrows.

ignatio
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

This picture was taken by Left Navcam B on 533. As you can see, it is a different time of day, but the rock in question can be seen quite clearly in the middle left area of the image. The different sun angle here throws more light on the 'face'. While it is most definitely an interesting formation, it looks far less like a carved statue without the high contrast shadows in the other pictures.

However, I am still not convinced that this rock formation, and the others near it are not worth closer inspection. The 'column' formation behind the 'face' seems to have even greater detail in this sun angle then the other.

Maybe this risky 'jumping the dune' is to get a better look?

I'd like to know what is protruding out of the sand dune at the bottom of the photo in your link.
It looks like the corner of something metallic ???

MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by smurfy

 

yet not a single pipe in that pic...

Epic fail smurfy...

Oh! You want pipes too? I do beg your fecking pardon, I thought you were having trouble grasping the idea of bluberries!



You shoulld remember that one...Hoagland's pump, you were on that thread too.

look very, very closely at the centre of the rock.

Another thing, don't try to pigeonhole people into one category or another, I am as open minded about these things as anyone else, if you look at one of my first posts re, the 'head' you will see just that. Other times, you need to use the old common.

Aleister
reply to post by g9000

 

Hi, and welcome to ATS, and gave you your first star for both coming aboard and for a good concise post. First of all, the face/statue in question is a collection of several rocks. And secondly, I've been reading on this thread about faces in clouds, and now your question of can a face created by nature have so many human characteristics. Yes. Here are several pics from a thread on many faces in the same cloud. The photo of the cloud is in black and white, but I've colored these faces so they can be quickly seen (but did not change any detail besides color and contrast).

Here's one which has a perfect right eye with iris and eyelashes:

A very cute woman holding up a flaming torch and wearing a tiara:

And a face with eyes closed:

All three are almost photogenic in quality once you see them. They are all from the same photograph. And there are many more faces and images in this same photo, several of those are very apparent once you spot them. Nature is sometimes a harsh mistress, but at other times, as playful as a bunny.

edit on 7-2-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-2-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-2-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-2-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

I don't see a thing...but it could be due to my partial color blindness.

Has any one mentioned the beveled edge of the stone behind the debated face structure.... I noticed everyone hadn't highlighted it on their close ups, it looks like part of a few of the rocks on the left.... and... a seemingly destroyed building foundation in the background. Rocky background and a square hole of sand with foundations surrounding it, parts of its foundations slipping into natural curvature of the foreground which the main disputed artifact seems to be orientated to, the same dip and falling landscape.

It must be said without it becoming a dig site (humans with brush and trowel) it's all conjecture... speculation.

Some compared the image to the "V for Vendetta" mask. Here's a side-by-side:



There are some surprising points of symmetry. More than you'd find in an average face.

reply to post by Moresby


He's missing a key one though, the long mustache coming out of V's nostril and curling up under his cheek. That's a pretty big omission to call him V. The eye fits well, and some of the other stuff.

amazing
That really does look like a statue. Great find!

Remember people that if everything was Pareidolia we wouldn't have Archeologists, because everything they found would look like rocks. Use your brains peeps. Sometimes a rock is a rock and sometimes it could be something more.

That's true sort of, the first time I looked at the 'head' I thought yup! it's a head, but then if a head, it's both human looking and deformed looking for no particular reason, while looking at the deformed part as a continuation of a rock formation seems reasonable. The light and shadow adds to the reasonableness.