Keys

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by neilderosa</i>
<br />Here's what starjim (Jim Miller) actually said:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">We all say many things. I'm quite sure that was one of them, as was what I said he said. It may have been on his site that he said his wife mentioned the baby.

rd

Here's the "better half" image of the Viking Face.
89-


And the famous D&M Pyramid should not be left out of any index of Keys. Again, background noise is minimal so the white-out procedure is not needed.
90-

91-


We should also not forget the excellent keys in Tom's Slide Show, which can be readily found by clicking on "Home" above. And there is a short paper on the "tube-like structures" on the MR website, but I have not figured out a way to make realistic keys of them, though there is an artistic rendition of them by John Bejko.
metaresearch.org/solar%20system/cydonia/...act_html/default.htm

Neil

Here is an example of the process. Image with a lot of background noise, enhanced somewhat with B&C.

Key, 92- Maybe beard could be shorter, and we are not sure of the nose.

Version 2. As you can see, the discretion (and subjectivity) is limited to non-essentials. 92-2

(Nothing new, just fixed #42; 12/12/06)
Neil

I just re-did #42 key with my newer photo editor package, (the original was made with "Paint"), and I noticed something. I know people vary in their ability to see detail, and that monitors vary in quality, but if you can, look closely at #42 again. I had thought there was just a small black dot at the tip of the “nose,” and for the left “eye” (our view). Now I seem to see more detail. The whole "nose" now appears to be hewn in the rock with clean angular edges, and the "eye" seems to be outlined around the dot.

If so would this be considered an "a priori prediction" or at least a further confirmation of artificiality? Or maybe I've been staring at these things too long.

Neil

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by neilderosa</i>
<br />would this be considered an "a priori prediction" or at least a further confirmation of artificiality?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">No. The information must be unknown and unknowable at the time the prediction is made.

Moreover, to be persuasive, the prediction must be of something unique to the hypothesis and very unlikely to arise by chance. In this instance, you have no objective way to estimate chance. For example, the Cydonia Face (by contrast) lies on a flat, featureless plain, and the predicted secondary facial features are unique in that they have the right size and shape and are at the right location and oreintation, <b>and</b> there are no other features on the mesa or its surroundings that could possibly qualify as such features, allowing our minds to pick and choose random shapes that fulful our expectations for a face. Any of your images spotted in a noisy background are automatically suspect on that account.

Rich is right when he says that virtually all your finds can add nothing to the case for artificiality. But if they are artificial rather than pareidolic, then they might prove important in helping us figure out what is going on -- who made them and why. -|Tom|-

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">But if they are artificial rather than pareidolic, then they might prove important in helping us figure out what is going on -- who made them and why. -|Tom|-<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Thanks for the feedback. I guess I'm not surprised at you reply. Only time will tell what is artificial and why. My sense is that the whole story of earth and Mars history will be completely re-written sooner or later, and that some of your deductions will turn out to be true.
Neil