Mro--First Looks

<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 />So it is easy for me to see this as a real face embedded in natural foliage, then softly blurred and contrast-stretched to make that less obvious.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> That's a very interesting statement. I didn't notice it before. Yes, if it's possible for someone as objective as you to make that statement, think what it would mean if Fred could prove that wasn't the case. After all, that would mean his creation is so good, that a famous scientist thought it might (or could) actually be a real person, softly embedded in the tree shadows.

I can already see a marketing scheme for that.

rd

rd- Many people think that there are real faces imbedded in my photos somehow and don't believe they are purely shadows. One girl asked me if i could take a picture of her embedded in a shadow like that. i told her only if one ever showed up by itself. Another guy said, "i see you like large breasted women," after looking at twelve images he picked on that one because that's where his focus was. i told him i just shoot whatever shows up. A "Jesus freak," said "they all look like Jesus to me." It's amazing how one sees ones own, and other peoples unconscious mind in this process. All my images seem like deja vu, and archtypal images to me, from things imbeded in my unconscious. Many people have a hard time believing real live people are not involved at all. i believe i see a lot of pareidolia because i am fairly near sighted and don't wear my eyeglasses. When i look at trees, i see patterns instead of individual leaves, because the leaves are "blurry," so i'm not distracted by seeing the clear separate leaves. When one sees clearly, one sees what "is." When one sees blurily one sees what "isn't." Thanks Tom, i always take it as a great compliment when people have a hard time believing there are no people involved in the photos. Try imbedding a real person and bluring it with foliage. i guarantee it would look like a hodgepotch, and not have the perfect taoistic flow lines in naturally formed pareidolic shadow images.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by pareidoliac</i>
<br />Many people think that there are real faces imbedded in my photos somehow and don't believe they are purely shadows.... One girl asked me if i could take a picture of her embedded in a shadow like that..... Another guy said, "i see you like large breasted women," ..... A "Jesus freak," said "they all look like Jesus to me." <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> Yes, but did you ever have a "former Head of the Celestial Mechanics Branch of the U.S. Naval Observatory, and a world authority on orbital mechanics" say that?

rd

rd- originally posted by rd "Yes, but did you ever have a "former Head of the Celestial Mechanics Branch of the U.S. Naval Observatory, and a world authority on orbital mechanics" say that?"
To answer your rhetorical question, of course not, but there is still no real communication going on here. Communication is not "talking," or even another person saying "yes," and agreeing, but both sides doing something about it and moving the world in a positive, needed direction.
i realize that Mr. Flandern is perhaps the only person in a position to head up a team to deeply study pareidolic images and perform the necessary statistical analysis to demonstrate that these images are in no way random or chance, that there is meaning in them, that they can be used to show that what has been called metaphysics can be incorporated into, and is not separated from physics. It would also have deep implications to quantum physics. Deep serendipity led me to these photos, and deep serendipity led me to this website after my name was first mentioned here. i am convinced that pareidolic images can be used to prove that we are not separate from our environment. That these images are projected from our unconscious at the same time they are projected to us from the highest "spiritual" source. That they are here to demonstrate this solipsistic hologramatic nature of the universe as described by David Bohm. If this new paradigm were to be accepted, to replace the present dualistic Descartian model, people would have no "enemys," there would be no "evil," the whole world would change from a war based society to a unified world, as it actually is underneath it all.
As it is, i have communicated with no one, including Tom, and know that no one else has communicated either. i know that the combination of your (rd), my, and Tom's parts with the rest of his team, could be put together to create a project that would demonstrate and communicate this sacred phenomenon that has been supressed and opressed by the ongoing (for at least the past 8,000 years), church, state, military, industrial, educational, crime, pseudo-crime fighting systems which are all based on the dualistic Cartesian war/peace world;( peace, having led to war more than any other concept).
If Mr. Flandern would start the undertaking of such a study, i would be impressed and honored. As it is, i am no more impressed by Tom's observations (in fact less so, as he is in a position of supposed knowledge and authority) than the people i previously mentioned who thought real figures were embedded in the photos.
If one can prove to any degree that the Cydonian face is created by Martians, and that the speed of gravity is faster than light by billions of times; it seems that the thesis i propose would be a "piece of cake to prove," and meaningful communication could begin. Thanks for the opportunity to present this remote chance of communication, fred.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">… pareidolic images… can be used to show that what has been called metaphysics can be incorporated into, and is not separated from physics. It would also have deep implications to quantum physics. Deep serendipity led me to these photos, and deep serendipity led me to this website after my name was first mentioned here. i am convinced that pareidolic images can be used to prove that we are not separate from our environment. That these images are projected from our unconscious at the same time they are projected to us from the highest "spiritual" source. That they are here to demonstrate this solipsistic hologramatic nature of the universe as described by David Bohm. If this new paradigm were to be accepted, to replace the present dualistic Descartian model, people would have no "enemys," there would be no "evil," the whole world would change from a war based society to a unified world, as it actually is underneath it all. [Pareidoliac]

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">


When I was a boy of ten or eleven, I went to the county fair, the “Mineola Fair” we used to call it. The games and rides were fun in those days. One game was a wooden bacci ball suspended from a string directly over a standing bowling pin. The man (the “carney”) would demonstrate how easy it was to swing the ball away from the pin with his hand and have the ball return back and knock down the pin. Then he would wave people in to try it—for a quarter. <i>“It’s easy!”</i> he said.

But nobody could do it. They always lost their money. If they spent many dollars trying, they would get a trinket as a consolation prize, and new “customers” would be attracted by means of the carney’s demonstration of how easy it was, plus his polished sales pitch.

I was just a kid then, but I had a few quarters to lose too. I watched the man carefully for awhile, and also all the customers’ failed efforts, and I noticed something. There was a difference in the way they swung the ball. The customers would always hold the ball steady in front of the pin and then give it a push, far enough away from the pin so that it would not hit the pin on the way out. Well, I didn’t know about Newton and Galileo at the time, but I suspected that the ball would always have to return on the other side of the pin at the same distance from the pin that it passed on the way out—and the customers would never, could never, hit the pin. But when the carney did it (you had to watch carefully because he did it fast) his index finger lingered on the ball for a second, along side of, and past the center of the pin, just long enough to give the ball a slight flick directly away from the pin. This caused the ball to swing back and knock down the pin.

Once I knew the "trick," I was sure I could do it too. So I paid my quarter and swung the ball and knocked the pin down. <i>”Oh, a wise guy ay?” </i>said the carney. <i>“Gettataheeer, before ya feel my size thirteen boot!!”</i> Of course I didn’t argue. He was much bigger than me. I’ve grown since then.

I'll leave the moral of this little story unspoken. The readers of this website are quite intelligent--they can figure it out for themselves.

<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 />We're now trying to get a handle on the frequency of elaborate pereidolia in nature.<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Tom- It takes about 7 hours looking and shooting at images till i get one high quality. On average 6 shots one comes out high quality. I shoot anything that looks anything like a face. These images change as one looks at them. The first showed up by chance. The second i looked for showed up in ten minutes. In 4 years of shooting i got 500 pretty good images. Only on sunny days. About 4 hours a day. 200 days a year. All estimates. pareidoliac<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> Tom, I thought this was somewhat of a loaded question, because it depends on whether or not anybody is looking in the first place, and in what frame of mind in the second place. But, Fred's answer here gives us something to work with. Basically, he gave us a crude formula to work with: 4 hours a day, 200 days a year, equals roughly 125 elaborate pareidolic images in a year, (or in 800 man hours). That comes to roughly 10.4 per month, <b>or 6.4 manhours per pareidolic image</b>, which is roughly what Fred said. Plus, remember that he's not working every day, but only roughly 200 days a year.

Now, since Fred could be one of the only people ever to try this with shadow art, let's see how this compares with Neils and other's Martian pareidolia, that's been posted since Mar 1, 2006.

I went back to page 7 of the "T or E" topic, and counted all the pareidolic images from that point forward, including all from the "Faces" topic, a few from "MRO", and came up with 92. I might have made some slight mistakes in counting because there were a lot of multiple posts of the same images showing up once in a while, but my count is fairly accurate. Plus, I added the few that me, emanuel and Trinket have posted. So, let's just use the round number of 100 Martian Pareidolic images posted since Mar 1, 2006, in 8 months. That's 12.5 a month. If we assume that Neil has worked on finding his pareidolic images for roughly 16 hours a week (not unreasonable), and the sum total of the rest of the posters was 4 hours per week, and we approximate just using 4 weeks a month (2-3 days a month off the project), we come up with 80 manhours per 12.5 images, <b>or 6.4 man hours per pareidolic image, just like Fred said</b>.

And that, as they say, is that.

What this means is that if someone is looking for them in the proper medium, is open to the idea that they exist, <b>has the skill to spot them</b>, he should find (on average) approx. 1 every 2 days.

If the person(s) <b>don't </b> believe they exist (as in Neil's objection to Fred's shadow pareidolia), they (a) won't look in the first place, and (b) probably wouldn't find many even if they do look. It's all about being in the proper state of mind.

rd