Face on Mars Gets a Make-Over

Alien54 writes "ESA's Mars Express has obtained images of the Cydonia region, site of the famous 'Face on Mars.' using the High Resolution Stereo Camera. After multiple attempts to image the Cydonia region from April 2004 until July 2006 were frustrated by altitude and atmospheric dust and haze, the High Resolution Stereo Camera (HRSC) on board Mars Express finally obtained, on 22 July, a series of images that show the famous 'face' on Mars in unprecedented detail, with a ground resolution of approximately 13.7 metres per pixel."

Comments

Primary Goal of the Mission

[eldavojohn]

Taking these pictures of the face was the primary goal of this mission. ESA was sick of listening to its citizens bitch about there being a 30 year "pictures of the face on Mars" gap (that's a rough translation from European).

But seriously, it is the first goal of the Mars Orbiter:

The Mars Express Orbiter will:

• image the entire surface at high resolution (10 metres/pixel) and selected areas at super resolution (2 metres/pixel);
• produce a map of the mineral composition of the surface at 100 metre resolution;
• map the composition of the atmosphere and determine its global circulation;
• determine the structure of the sub-surface to a depth of a few kilometres;
• determine the effect of the atmosphere on the surface;
• determine the interaction of the atmosphere with the solar wind.

The Beagle 2 lander was planned to:

• determine the geology and the mineral and chemical composition of the landing site;
• search for life signatures (exobiology);
• study the weather and climate.

I guess I would rather see something more than just regular images come from a mission. Right now, I can see all these things on the ESA's site that help the user see all these pictures of Mars but I don't see any maps of mineral composition, atmospheric movement, etc. I've seen pictures, these are some great high quality images with 3D detail that are great screensaver material. But, for the love of science, when do we get the rest of the data from the mission -- you know, the stuff that is, like, going to alter the way we view Mars? Is the public never going to see these results?

Re:Primary Goal of the Mission

[mustafap]

> (that's a rough translation from European).

Thats a very broad brush :o)

Go on, say something in European.

Re:Primary Goal of the Mission

[rmccann]

Something else in European: "Health care for all. True multi-party democracies"

Re:Primary Goal of the Mission

[Yvanhoe]

Uh? The "face on mars" only looks like a face on the 1976 Viking's photographs. There has been numerous pictures of this region at higher resolution ever since :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_on_mars

I remember the 1998 Mars Surveyor pictures. I wasn't surprise, but who can say honestly that he was not a bit disapointed ? ;-)

A face huh?

[celardore]

If that's meant to look like a face, it's a hella ugly one.

You think this will quiet the conspiracy nuts?

[p51d007]

I doubt it......the Roswell types will say that the image was doctored to distort the truth bla bla bla. It is a formation of ROCKS....period. Same as the "old man on the mountain" in Georgia. Heck, as a kid, you ever see "things" in clouds?

Re:You think this will quiet the conspiracy nuts?

[DrXym]

Yes, but Richard Hoagland wouldn't sell any books if he just said it was just a rock formation. No, it's a CONSPIRACY and will be as long as there are people stupid enough to believe him.

Re:You think this will quiet the conspiracy nuts?

[starseeker]

There is no evidence that will quiet those people. Any contradiction to their already formed conclusion will simply be part of the "conspiracy".

It's the same with anyone who has already made their decision without the need for evidence - more evidence doesn't do a thing to them.

I have a feeling you could take some of those people who think NASA faked the moon landing to the moon IN PERSON and they would still conclude that it's an externally imposed delusion, because they are starting from the basic premise that they are right. Facts will need to fit that preconception. Same thing here.

Re:Well Done

[LiquidCoooled]

Firstly, this is done by ESA (European Space Agency) and is not a NASA mission.

Secondly, its an orbiting space platform and has nothing to do with rovers (unless you mean the ill fated Beagle 2 which was carried on this mission).

But having corrected all that, you are right its a job well done.

Today's vocabulary word is "pareidolia"

[greg1104]

See http://www.skepdic.com/pareidol.html for a definition. A commentary on this particular image (along with some wicked cool visual illusions) is at http://www.michaelbach.de/ot/fcs_face_on_mars/inde x.html

Please excuse me, I have to return to searching my toast for the Virgin Mary now.

Other cool facts about the mission

[YA_Python_dev]

Mars Express contains 7 different scientific instruments and, amongs other things, it has already:

• discovered aurorae on Mars;
• transmitted back gigabytes of beautiful images with a resolution of up to 2 meters/pixel;
• discovered a huge subsurface water ice lake, with a thickness of 1.8 km and an extension of hundreds of kms;
• collaborated with NASA, receiving data from the Mars rovers and transmitting it back to Earth (yes: they use the same communication protocol!).

That's no face...

[Anonymous Coward]

Look closely at this image of cydonia. Now look closely at the torso on this image, that's proof positive that intelligent aliens with hyperdrive technology have travelled through this galaxy. For the doubters, here's a larger image. I just can't believe that world governments have managed to keep the truth covered up for so long!

The world needs to know!

Link to the old, low-res version

[PeeAitchPee]

In case of slashdotting: :-o

There are many faces on Earth too

[mrcgran]

For instance, see this one in Peru:

http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=-16.341133,-71.9652 69&spn=0.155239,0.240704&t=k&hl=en

Re:It's human nature...

[thesandtiger]

When looked at from a particular angle, with particular lighting, then yes, it can look like a human face. But pictures shown from other angles or with different lighting don't look anything like a human face.

Heck, if you get the lighting right and go from just-so an angle, even Keith Richards seems to have a human face.