The Face on Mars is one of the most contriversial landforms around. Many people think that it is an artifact that was left behind by past civilizations on Mars. On the other hand, there are people that beleive it is just a mesa, "landorrms common around the American West." There are many people in both parties, making for a huge "debate." The most logical, however, is that the Face is naturally occuring, due to the evidance that NASA has been able to uncover.

The people that say it is an ancient civilization use illogical evidance for their conclusions, such as, "alien markings were hidden by haze." However, the people that believe it is naturally occuring use stable evidance, including, "Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution.' Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo." This evidance shows that the best technology we have shows nothing more than, "a lava dome that takes the form of and isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars."

Another way to show that the Face on Mars is naturally occuring is the comparison to the lanforms here on Earth, such as the mesa landforms in the American West. In the passage, Jim Garvin, a cheif scientist at NASA, working specifically on Mars exploration, is quoted saying,"It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho." Garvin, as said before, is a chief scientists at NASA. If he concludes that it is just like a lanform people can see here, than why would anyone be able to argue that?

People strive to find out what is in the unknown. Researchers are some of the people that put their lives into getting the best evidance that they can find about the unknown. The Face on Mars is one example of many projects scientists have put time and effort into. They will always find the best solution or answer to whatever the question may be. Why not trust their conclusions?