In the 1976 Viking images, the impression of a face was striking. Illuminated from below, the new MGS image seemed, at first glance, to be less remarkable. However, on closer inspection, most of the features first seen in the Viking images of the Face were also present in the new MGS image. For example, an X-shaped pattern above the eyes, barely visible in the Viking images, is clearly resolved into a pair of linear features by MGS. In a computer-generated perspective view of the top of the Face, these features appear to be cut into the formation, leading from the platform down to the ground below. 

Michael Malin once said that to validate our hypothesis, “one must find something substantially different or unanticipated.” It seemed that we had. Additional features, which look like nostrils and lip-like structures, were also found. And like the ‘X’ feature, they are located on either side of the centerline, the left-right axis of symmetry, of the Face.

Maybe the Face wasn’t a natural landform after all.

The previous fall, several of us had submitted abstracts of our work on the older Viking images to the American Geophysical Union for presentation at their May meeting in Boston. But now, with the new MGS images, and after having spent the last couple of months studying this new image of the Face, we decided to present the results of our analysis to the scientific community. John Brandenburg and I prepared a poster presentation entitled: “Analysis of Unusual Martian Surface Features: Enigmatic Geology or Archaeological Ruins?”

Previously unpublished slide presentation presented at the 1998 Meeting of American Geophysical Union in Boston.

Away on business, I was unable to be in Boston on the day of the presentation. John Brandenburg and Vince DiPietro were there along with several others from SPSR. Also there was Arden Albee, MGS’s Chief Scientist, whom McDaniel and I had met with a few months earlier. Albee was visibly disturbed by our conclusion — that the evidence in this new image sustained our original hypothesis the Face was artificial. A bizarre exchange followed, which, according to Brandenburg, went something like this:

Albee: “You say it’s artificial.” 

Brandenburg: “ No. We only said it appears artificial based on our best analysis. It does appear to have eyes, a mouth and a helmet. Look, it appears to have two nostrils, too. Those were not visible in the Viking images.”

Albee: “No, you say it’s artificial.”

Brandenburg: “No, the SPSR has always conceded that the face might be natural. Your people on the other hand, have never, not for an instant, admitted it might be artificial.”

DiPietro then pointed out to Albee how the effective resolution of the image was lower because of the very narrow range of gray levels due to the haze. Albee’s temper flared, “You don’t know what you’re talking about!” DiPietro held his ground, “Yes, I do….” whereupon Albee shouts at DiPietro, “Are you calling me a liar?” and raising his fists screams,” I’ll deck you, by God!”

Why had our findings evoked such a strong emotional response from, of all people, Albee? It seemed we had struck a nerve.