Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1997 -> Nov -> Re: Mars Face

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Ufojoe1@aol.com [Joe Murgia]
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 12:10:12 -0500 (EST)
Fwd Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 15:53:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Mars Face


>Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 04:18:16 +0100
>From: Don Ledger <dledger@istar.ca>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Mars Face

Don,

How right you are regarding the press and "The Face on Mars". If you can
believe it, the article in question is one of the BETTTER ones done to date
in the mass media. I can't believe they actually mentioned one of the
independent researchers(Carlotto) by name.

> >From the Austin Chronicle, Thursday 27 Nov, 1997, Page A38
> Austin, Texas

>Much of the interest in the face on Mars has been stirred up by
>Boston-based engineer Mark Carlotto.

Not true in my opinion. While Carlotto is one of the most qualified
researchers, with regards to photo analysis, to get involved with the Mars
research, his name is not the one that usually comes up when people mention
Cydonia. Richard Hoagland, no matter what you think about his other theories,
is the person people usually think of when they hear about Cydonia.  Stanley
McDaniel is a close second.

> >Some < believers > claims there's a full-blown conspiracy in
 which NASA is purposely shielding the public from the truth.
 Carlotto suggests that NASA scientists are just too skeptical and
 stubborn to take these structures seriously.

I believe Hoagland is behind this conspiracy theory that has circulated
around the web. In his defense though, he never has claimed that NASA is
behind the "conspiracy", he has said that he believes a small group of
higher-ups within NASA may be calling the shots as the regular NASA workers
do their jobs honestly.

>Malin said the new photos, no matter how good, still might not
>settle the issue. < The hill might still look like a face. >

>What an absolutely brilliant line. He saying well of course it
>"looks" like a face, we agree about that, but that as far as it
>goes. It will always be a hill that "looks" a face.

Actually Don, As far as I know, Malin has never even admitted that the "hill"
looks like a face until that statement. He has claimed, along with all of the
other debunkers and NASA for that matter, that a trick of light and shadow is
responsible for the hill's apparant face-like image. In "The Martian
Enigmas", Carlotto does a great job of showing that this is not the case.
Even the late Carl Sagan said that NASA's trick of lighting statement was an
"unfortunate error".

> Between Albee and Faye Flam, the two have done an absolutely
>fabulous job of putting paid to the Face in Cydonia.

What else is new?

>I picked on this story because I'm tired of reporters who have
>their tongues so firmly jammed in their cheeks while they write
>these story that they haven't got enough skin left over to get a
>figurative hard on for anything that requires imagination.

I'm past the point of frustration.

Here is a part of the story from the Tampa Tribune that the other
papers edited out.

"Much of the interest in the Face on Mars has been stirred up by
Boston based engineer Mark Carlotto, who came to the University
of Pennsylvania last week to spread the word that the
somber-looking face and nearby bumps in the landscape are
artificial structures."

Bumps? There's a lot more than bumps. If you read Carlotto's
book, you will have doubts that he is spreading the word that
these objects ARE artificial. He says throughout the entire book
that he believes that the objects MAY be artificial and that they
deserve to be looked at closer. Of course, I wasn't present at
this lecture but I doubt Carlotto has changed his tune after all
of these years. He's been very careful about what he says
regarding Cydonia.

"In a lecture sponsored by Penn's bioengineering department, he
said he had long pleaded with NASA to take a closer look using
the high resolution camera aboard Global Surveyor."

At least the U of Penn's bioengineering department has an open
mind. I'll write Carlotto and see what he thinks about the
article.

Joe Murgia
Tampa, Florida