Re: Face crap

Ian Goddard (
Fri, 24 Apr 1998 15:45:02 -0400

At 11:38 AM 4/24/98 -0700, wrote:

>It didn't; there are no five-sided pyramids, because several of the
>'edges' in the Viking images clearly do not exist except as optical

IAN: Even the new MGS images show the sharp edges.
BUT, now, even as they are sharp, they are not so
straight, and that's a key factor supporting a
natural conclusion. I think, as I said before,
the best case against the "face" (including all
things the in area) is that other, clearly natural,
formations have similar features, suggesting a
uniform geological phenomenon. Notice how most
hills in the area seem to have sharp-edged tops
and som fomrations have sharp sudden-rising slops.
These natural features tend strongly to define
most of the theorized to be artificial features.
As such, the "artifical theory" is fast sinking.

If we're to dismiss the artificial theory, we have
to do it properly, not with name calling and such.

One thing I think we can dismiss is the theory
that there's been a cover-up. I think that NASA
has made genuine images available and has responded
to public demand that they do so. Cydonia is the
foremost thing I see mentioned on their pages.

>>>Uh-huh, but most of the 'lines' don't really exist; as far as I can see
>>>they're just optical illusions like Hoagland's pyramid image.
>> IAN: What your saying is just false. I don't
>> know why Hoagland is showing what is not the
>> pyramids, claiming it is, but images of the
>> actual physical objects in question have been
>> made available to you, yet you seem to prefer
>> Hoagland's error over the actual evidence.
>Reading comprehension time: "as far as I can see they're just optical
>illusions *like Hoagland's pyramid image*." How could that sentence
>possibly be referring to Hoagland's image and not the Viking image
>you pointed out?

IAN: You were commenting on my comments of the lines
on the pyramid. The "like Hoagland's image" implies
that the Viking formations you referred to are the
same formations that Hoagland referred to, and since
you rejected the pyramids on the basis of what he
presented, there was no reason to assume otherwise.

VISIT Ian Williams Goddard ---->