In the article "Umasking the Face on Mars", there are diffrent theories on what exactly they think this is. The logical answer is that the face is just a natural landfrom the article states not logical reasons and conspiracy theories not provided from NASA, they have done their research.

During the article it provides pictures varying in dates from 1976, 1998 and 2001. Over these years it begins to form and show more. Its classified that it really is just a mesa. Different research and other many pieces of evidence back up this statement. It is just a natural landfrom.

Twenty five years ago when the viking 1 was out it spotted the likeness of a human face, an enormous head nearly two miles end to end. They unveiled it as a huge rock formation that resembles a human head. Others refused to belive this and insisted that the NASA had to be covering up something, even though they provided all the research and more than needed.

The "Face on Mars" attracted films, books, magazines, radio talks. Some people still thought the face of it being something else was something they would rather hide than bring to the public eye. Even though they had all the facts and research to back up their theory of exactly what it was. Which was a natural landform thats all. People say it even looks like some other landforms they've seen or come across.

The face that was found on mars was accused of being many things and an amazing finding. To this day im sure there are still disputes over what it actually was or is. Although it was proven, not to be a face or an alien artifact. It was just a land formation that took place or just a rock formation. It was a natural landform.