Letters To The Editor

The Face Behind the 'Face' on Mars

Thanks to Gary Posner for the discussion of Richard Hoagland and the Face on Mars cult ("The Face Behind the 'Face' on Mars," November/December 2000). I can provide some additional perspective on Hoagland's March 20, 1990, speaking engagement at NASA Lewis (now Glenn) Research Center in Cleveland. First, it is worth noting that of all the NASA Field Centers, Lewis (which specializes in research and development on space propulsion and power technology) is probably the least likely to have any planetary scientists on its staff, or to be sensitive to the issues surrounding the Face. Hoagland's own rather breathless description of these events in The Monuments of Mars (epilogue to the second edition, 1992) tells how NASA Lewis staff quickly back-pedaled after his talk, presumably reflecting discussions with better-informed people at NASA Headquarters. It is also interesting to read how Hoagland discusses his "PBS interview" at Lewis. As noted by Posner, this was not a PBS interview, but an interview to collect ma terial that might be used for a NASA Lewis series of television productions that were made available to stations that wanted to use them--mostly small cable outlets.

Shortly after the Lewis talk, Hoagland arranged an invitation to NASA Ames Research Center in Silicon Valley (which does specialize in planetary science and exobiology). His approach was, I think, interesting. Ames has a meeting room seating about 60 people in an "off-site" location within its visitor center. This meeting room was sometimes made available to staff on a noninterference basis. Two of Hoagland's supporters reserved this room for a "Mars meeting" and invited him to speak. The Ames Center management and Public Information Office did not know about this talk until announcements appeared a few days in advance on bulletin boards around the center. Wishing to avoid a repetition of the fiasco at Lewis, Ames withdrew the use of the room in the visitor center.

The issues here are complex. NASA has no wish to deny Hoagland or other pseudo-scientists the opportunity to speak and publish their ideas. There is also something to be said for the educational value of controversial speakers, a justification used for his invitation to speak at Lewis. However, it is not desirable for such people to infer NASA endorsement or use supposed NASA connections to legitimize their ideas, as Hoagland has done in the case of his speaking engagement at Lewis Research Center.

David Morrison

Saratoga, California

Richard Hoagland is a great speaker and with his background sounded incredibly believable on his theories about the Face on Mars. I even made the terrible mistake of purchasing the video about the Face on Mars for $29.99. Now that it was discovered that the Face of Mars was truly a trick of light and shadow, I want Richard to send me my money back. But I know that will never happen. It doesn't surprise me to learn that Hoagland takes credit for the greeting plaques on Pioneer 10 and 11. I salute Carl Sagan and Frank Drake for being the true designers of the plaque. I hope Hoagland rakes a long hike up the Himalayans and doesn't return for the next twenty years, but with our luck he'll claim he found Shangrila. SKEPTICAL INQUIRER Vol. 24 #6 issue makes the perfect Christmas stocking stuffer!

Paul Dale Roberts

Chief, LADWP Unit/CLASS Help Desk

Department of Community Services and Development

Elk Grove, California

At the risk of soiling an icon--St. Carl Sagan--I would like to report that Richard Hoagland perhaps inadvertently got some backing from Sagan, who did not stop at referring only "metaphorically" to the so-called "pyramids of Mars." On page 130 of the hardcover edition of Cosmos, Sagan does, indeed, describe the structures as "beckoning pyramids" in the text--but in a footnote he says the following: "They seem eroded and ancient and are, perhaps, only small mountains, sandblasted for ages. But they warrant, I think, a careful look."

Note he does nor say that they "might" be something artificial; he says they "might" only be natural eroded features. A slip of the typewriter, perhaps--but one can hardly blame people of the mind of Hoagland for grabbing this ball and running with it.

Michael L. Nardacci

Albany, New York

Had author Gary Posner spent as much rime and effort on examining aspects of the 1998 Mars Global Surveyor image of the "Face" as he did on exposing the character flaws of the "gifted speaker and author" Richard Hoagland he would have discovered the following: a) the high-pass filter used by JPL in this initially released enhancement (Figure 2 of Posner's article) removes visual cues to the true height and shape of the object. (The high shadow-producing central facial features thus look like they have been smashed by a giant foot. To get a clue of the true height of those features, SI readers, look at the long shadow displayed in the Viking image given by Figure 1 of Posner's article). b) the image was taken through a winter haze producing a low-contrast image... c) the Sun was from the southeast under the "chin," further distorting the image. (Recall the effect on a facial image of a flashlight directed from below the chin.) d) The image was taken from a 45-degree angle, unlike the original Viking image whic h was almost a nadir shot. This makes a naive comparison with the Viking image difficult. e) That, nevertheless, the MGS image of the feature displays secondary facial features (such as nostrils) nor seen in the Viking shot and virtually ruled our on the basis of chance. f) That re-imaging the "Face" from overhead and under better lighting conditions is being given the highest priority.