Another speculative news, simply done to attract audience. Check the picture closely and you can see the stark difference in the background and the supposed feminine image..seems it was put there electronically by some sick joker(s) at NASA or media.
It is a real photo, but it’s out of context and your brain (and a little suggestion) is filling in the rest. This site very selectively picks a single photo with a vague, hazy image and tells you what it is.
Here’s another photo from the same series and same spot, but a apparently a different time of day:
What this again? “She’s” only three inches high, and besides which curiosity took like a dozen pictures of this spot over the course of a whole day, and “she” only looks like a wan in this one. Pareidolia, matrixing, apophenia, call it what you like its all the human mind’s seeing patterns in random data.
Another speculative news, simply done to attract audience. Check the picture closely and you can see the stark difference in the background and the supposed feminine image..seems it was put there electronically by some sick joker(s) at NASA or media.
It is a real photo, but it’s out of context and your brain (and a little suggestion) is filling in the rest. This site very selectively picks a single photo with a vague, hazy image and tells you what it is.
Here’s another photo from the same series and same spot, but a apparently a different time of day:
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/01001/mcam/1001ML0044550010305292D02_DXXX.jpg
Now you can see there’s a bigger rock there and the ‘woman’ is just a shadow of the rock.
What this again? “She’s” only three inches high, and besides which curiosity took like a dozen pictures of this spot over the course of a whole day, and “she” only looks like a wan in this one. Pareidolia, matrixing, apophenia, call it what you like its all the human mind’s seeing patterns in random data.