Nefertiti's Family

<i>Originally posted by me:</i> "What we once thought was the girl's hand is really the mother's hair in the highlighted areas of it."

I just re-read Rich's post about the "hand" corresponding to the area of the mother's "forehead." I stand corrected, he's right.

Neil

Anyone find it strange that all these faces you see are on the photos with head up and neck down. try turning the original picture upside down and see how many faces you see.

<i>PheoniX VII writes</i>: "try turning the original picture upside down and see how many faces you see."

Try turning a picture of <i>yourself</i> upside down and see what it looks like. With all due respect, that is very much beside the point.

Neil

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
<br />If new images from a different viewing perspective, or new images with different lighting, made the impressions we have go away (as it does for faces in clouds and landscapes on Earth), most of us would agree that artificiality is falsified.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Unless of course, that was the intent of the artists. That is to say, unless the artists made these things to be viewed in one way only. As in a hologram, or some type of three-d image, rather than ethings.

I'm not trying to setup a situation in which I can't be proven wrong, but rather to suggest how me might try to re-create these images from later images, to prove whether or not they were really there.

To me, what I'm suggesting is no more fanciful than the fact that we actually think these are real images created by an ancient civilization, etched on the Mars Surface. If they really came from a civilization that has at least a three million year head start on us, then that seems like a reasonable thing to consider.

I think the stuff that Emanuel is posting may also be real. Like Neil said, we noticed alot of this stuff too, but pretty much stuck with the humanoid family grouping. But Emanuel's images may be just as real.

But, I think there's a pretty good chance that alot of this stuff "goes away" at higher resolution.

rd

I was a sceptic of the artificiality claims, to be honest, up until yesterday, meaning I leaned towards a natural origin. I say this despite having the deepest respect for Tom, and having read his proof regarding the original "face." I guess to me the "seeing" aspect was missing. But after seeing Neil's "key" to the man facing Nefertiti, I thought to myself, "this would be a huge coincidence to have such a perfectly proportional man's face right next to Nefertiti (which I have always considered the most perfectly proportional of the mars faces to date, and thus the most persuasive).

So this inspired me to do what I thought I would never do, which is start combing MGS strips to see if I could find more. And I thought, "why not start with the two Nefertiti strips? After all, if these are real there might be others nearby. So I first looked at strip E0501429.jpg, and as I said before, the "warrior twins" sort of jumped out when I reduced the size. Mostly it just sort of looked "in harmony" with Nefertiti below it. It was a profile, and it was located just to the left, longitudanally speaking, from Nefertiti, so if brought together their noses would be touching. This by itself was not convincing, but it was suggestive, I thought, so I posted it with a key (above) asking what others thought. Go back up and look again at the first image I posted, and you'll see what I mean. It's not totally convincing, like Nefertiti/Man is down below it, but the fact that it was in the same strip and had some balance with Nefertiti gave me reason enough to post it.

So then just after I posted that, I downloaded the second Nefertiti strip (M0305549.jpg), the one that's diagonally oriented, in order to see if the warrior twins appeared on that one. At first I was disappointed, because it became clear that the camera sweep by-passed that part of the ground where the twins were located on the first strip, due to the diagonal orientation. But then I thought, "hmmm, the M0305549 strip probbaly captured a groud shot just east of the twins. Let me put the two strips side by side and see if there is anything right next to the twins.

Imagine my surprise when not only was there "something" right next to the twins, but it was a Nefertiti-like profile or a face facng the twins! Not only that, but it was the exact same size and position north-east of the twins as the "man" is south-west of Nefertiti! It's like these two pieces of art belong to each other, are part of the same overall design! Now this just can't be a coincidence, I thought. And I still think so.

The thing is, you have to combine both strips into a composite in order to see them. Give me a few minutes and I'll create one that makes it easy to see both pieces of art in their full at the same time.

Emanuel

Ok, I just spent an hour and a half working on a better composite of the two Nefertiti strips. I rotated E0501429 a few degrees counter-clockwise which corrected the alignment, and this time I included the middle section too.



And here is a close-up of both the upper and lower composite images:



I also made a new key, showing both upper and lower images, and as I was making it, I noticed that there appears to be another man behind the one facing Nefertiti. I am not 100% sure of this, but I thought I would include it in the key anyway, so you can see what I am talking about. Note the rounded head on second male profile, matching the first one. If this is indeed a second man facing Nefertiti, it fits the overal design pattern even more, given that there certainly appear to be two warrior profiles in the upper image.



So our eyes can play tricks on us, but can they play tricks this elaborate? I mean two profile collages in the same area of mars displaying such strikingly similar design patterns?

Emanuel