How valid is data based on measurments like this?
Thom Quinn wrote:
> All I will say is this: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary
> proof. His data is all based on some substandard original photos! We
> need better data before anyone can claim anything.
>
> Using Occam's razor, the null hypothesis (it is natural) is the winner.
> However, Cydonia might be proven real too. The new data will be very
> helpful.
>
> Thom Quinn
>
> =- deluxe -= wrote:
> >
> > This will probably make me sound like more a quack than I already am, but
> > how many people here have heard Richard Hogland's presentation about this
> > set of structures?
> >
> > Not being a scientist, I felt his ideas compelling. Does anyone know who
> > or what I'm talking about??
> >
> > (-:
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > ps-
> > If you scroll to the bottom of his site:
> > http://www.enterprisemission.com/stores.html you can order his video
> > and/or buy his book which have more details. The video is what I
> > experienced, but those who read the book said that it was difficult to
> > turn away from his calculations.
> >
> > mark@unicorn.com wrote:
> >
> > > lunarchy@ncfweb.net wrote:
> > > > Well, what do you think of NASA's announcement that they will
> > > >have an orbit which allows for Cydonia to be imaged?
> > >
> > > I think they'll either fail to get images of the 'face' and then the
> > > face-fanatics will claim that it's a cover-up, or they'll get images
> > > which show it's natural and the face-fanatics will claim they're fakes
> > > or that careful analysis of single pixels shows that they're still
> > > artificial.
> > >
> > > > What do you
> > > > think the chances are of it being an artificial structure and why?
> > >
> > > At least 10:1 against; there are many face-like rocks on Earth and I'd
> > > have been very surprised if there wasn't a single one on Mars.
> > >
> > > So I think the 'Mars Face' is just a fantasy... the Io Rubber Chicken
> > > (http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/galileo/ganymede/082796.html), however...
> > >
> > > Mark