New Images Of Cydonia Face

Thorgal writes: "NASA does it again! Thanks to fine people at Malin Space Science Systems we have best yet image of Cydonia Face, with pixel resolution of 1.56m per pixel and excellent angle, again leaving no doubt about what the "face" really is (hint: a mesa). There is also a perspective image generated from laser altimetry data and even a hiking trail designed for future Mars explorers. Definitely a must see!"

Comments

They miss the point

[Anonymous Coward]

They basically show the face with a different lighting/viewing angle and say "Gee, it doesn't look like a face to me!"

Nothing surprising here.

They have a 3D model of the "face", so what I'd like to see is how best they can generate the 1976 picture from 2001 data, by varying the lighting/viewing angle.

THEN, they can say: "see, you only get a face if the lighting/viewing angle is in these range, and you see an ordinary mesa otherwise". THAT would be interesting. Not just 5 or 6 new pictures with different viewing parameters, but an analysis over the WHOLE parameter space.

Them Pesky Aliens

[Alpha State]

It's obvious the aliens have been monitoring our media, and they have had plenty of time to alter their face to look like a normal plateau. Perhaps they simply camoflaged it when the orbiter went over. Obviously a manned mission is the only way to be sure, as their technology can fool any of our instruments.

Cydonia Face, and tell that you love me...

[human bean]

I'll Cydonia Face and tell you I love you, too... :p

Funny how most representations of extraterrestrial aliens are bilaterally symmetrical and have foreheads.

"Ah, Earthman, you surprise I speak your language so well..."

It's really pretty obvious

[localroger]

If you look at the 1976 picture next to the 1998 or 2001 pictures, you can easily tell how the 1976 image resulted.

The totally unfacelike dropoff was in deep shadow, the unfacelike sharp small features were blurred by the low resolution of the image, and the basic outline of the side that wasn't in shadow in 1976 is easily recognized in the 1998 and 2001 images. It's the same feature, and it's obvious why it looked that way in the 1976 lighting. You can even tell the lighting direction in all the images pretty well by checking the shadow directions.