Re: Jaynes and Hoagland findings related??

Richard Spear (
Tue, 17 Jan 1995 17:55:03 PST

In article <3fgvot$> rhuss+@EDRC.CMU.EDU (Robert Huss) writes:
>From: rhuss+@EDRC.CMU.EDU (Robert Huss)
>Subject: Re: Jaynes and Hoagland findings related??
>Date: 17 Jan 1995 17:46:05 GMT

>In article <3f8oci$>, (Ted Holden)
[deletions ...]
>The face: A mountain, half in shadow, which has two smaller shadows,
>suggesting an eye and a mouth, with the peak of the mountain situated where
>a nose could go. How can you say this is a monument with a humanoid face
>on it when you can only see half the surface? We are very good at filling
>in details in our minds and imagining complete images where none exists.
>I predict that when we eventually get an image of the other half, ruining
>the face image, Hoagland and others like him will suggest that it
>must have been damaged over the eons.
[more deleted]

Bob, I agree with your analysis ... I too looked at the pictures. I have to
disagree with your last sentence above, though - Hoagland and the others will
claim that NASA altered the image (and the reality) to "hide the truth"!

Regards, Richard