Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books 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 Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> Here

From: Lan Fleming <apollo18@swbell.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 21:18:31 -0600
Fwd Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 20:28:24 -0400
Subject: UpDate: The MGS 'Face' In A Different Light


I've posted an evaluation of Mark Kelly's orthorectified "Mars
Face" enhancement that Tom Van Flandern put on his web site. My
evaluation is at URL:

http://www.vgl.org/webfiles/mars/face/newface.htm

The enhancement was intended to show what the Face would look
like at the resolution of the MGS camera but at the lighting and
viewing angles of the lower-resolution Viking images. The Viking
images were acquired under more suitable conditions for viewing
a face than the half-profile illuminated from beneath the "chin"
that was actually imaged by the MGS.

While I point out in my evaluation what I see as some flaws in
the enhancement, I think the overall work is valid and the
result is powerful: a representation of a humanoid face that is
undeniable. Based on comparisons with the Viking images, I don't
see any justifiable way to jiggle the lighting or proportions of
the MGS Face image in a way that could arrive at a depiction
that differs significantly from the Kelly enhancement. This is
not the result of digital trickery. Kelly neither added features
not in the original image nor removed features that were
present. The match in lighting and positions of features with
the Viking images is good.

While some people will deny that this enhancement can be valid,
I don't think that they will be able to say exactly _why_ it
isn't valid. No doubt, it will be claimed that it is the result
of wishful thinking. That was my first reaction to it as well,
and that was exactly the reason why I decided to compare it to
the Viking images. But I saw no specific discrepancies that I
would attribute to wishful thinking. I don't expect anyone else
will be able to find any, either.

I think the Kelly enhancement may eventually have an explosive
impact on public opinion. It may even motivate NASA to acquire
additional images of the Face as they've promised to do, if only
to refute Kelly.