To: blam
There's actually less to the "face on Mars" than meets the eye, or more specifically, the camera technology of twenty years ago.
Wait for the animation...
Skeptical Inquirer, April 1998
16 posted on
03/15/2007 8:51:51 PM PDT by
jiggyboy
(Ten per cent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
To: jiggyboy
There's actually less to the "face on Mars" than meets the eye, or more specifically, the camera technology of twenty years ago.
Not really. The "newer" shot has been significantly more fiddled with using computer processing techniques.
18 posted on
03/15/2007 9:01:05 PM PDT by
aruanan
To: jiggyboy; aruanan
The main difference between the two shots is that in the earlier shot, "The Face" is made up of about three dozen pixels. The Face on Mars is indeed an artifact, but it is merely the artifact of the Viking orbiter camera resolution.
22 posted on
03/15/2007 10:22:23 PM PDT by
SunkenCiv
(I last updated my profile on Sunday, March 11, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson