A book based on this?
en.wikipedia.org
Not to criticize, but this "proof" would seem far from conclusive. If you squint just right and look at a photo of a vast, 3D object in space MANY light years from Earth, you can see something like a face...This is proof of intelligent design!
Seems a bit of a stretch. Please start a thread with some of your imagery and explanations so that we can discuss your findings.
This author is quite familiar with pareidolia, sir. This does not involve pareidolia. The proof is conclusive.
Apparently, someone has not examined, or has not examined
well-enough, the thirty-six preview images and the two detailed, explained, officially-sourced example images, for which access has been provided in Post #7 of this thread. (That is, search for "Gootee ET Faces", at amazon dot com, and then click on the free "Look inside" link, on the book's page.)
Immediately invoking the "pareidolia" accusation, without first having carefully-enough examined the evidence provided, would not be a valid scientific approach to new information. However, in cases like this, it is expected, and that reaction was predicted in section 2.4 of the book in question. After all, space telescope images of very distant nebulas and galaxies are not perfect and are not even usually clear-enough to see small details. And here, we're not talking about seeing actual beings or their clear faces, nor clear photographs of them, and not even paintings or sketches of any beings' faces. Instead, these are huge artworks of faces, made out of DUST and gases. Even just magnifying them to be slightly too large makes them almost impossible to perceive. A few of them are VERY easy to perceive but most of them are just not very obvious. If they had been extremely easy to see, then everyone would already know about them.
I am also certain that they are easier for me to perceive than they are for most other people, because I have been looking at them for three man-years. And I have proved to myself that I have gotten much better at spotting them, over those three years of work. Maybe the bottom line is that they might not be obvious-enough, to most casual observers, and might actually require that some amount of additional time be used to study them more carefully, before they can be perceived well-enough by someone who is relatively unfamiliar with them. I did try to frame them and size them for easier perception but "your mileage may vary".
But, more to your point:
Firstly, there are far too many intelligence-indicating features in the artworks' designs, for them to not have been created by intelligent beings. But that is something that each person might only be able to learn by actually inspecting the images, rather than from words that I might post. I will consider trying to make a video "tutorial" or something. However, the two spectacular Example Images sections of the book, just after the Preview Images section, in the no-cost "Look inside" link on the book's Amazon page, contain "obvious" proof of intelligent design that could only be denied by someone who refused to look at them.
You might have to look at both the "Print Book" and "Kindle Book" tabs, in the "Look inside" pages, at Amazon, in order to see both of the example images' sections, depending on what pages the "Look inside" feature is showing, that day. They both also include separate cropped face images, from the amazing multiple faces that are in each example image. Also included are the original NASA source image links, and smaller versions of those original source images, with the locations marked, where the example images were cropped-out of them.
In the book, I did address some of the commonly-seen intelligent "features" and artistic "methods" that appear to have been used, when the faces were created. Here are descriptions of some of them: 1. Often, the half of a face that is to our right (i.e. the left side of the face) will be a second face, in profile (i.e. a side view), looking to our left, often sharing the nose and part of the mouth, and one eye, with the full face that faces toward us. 2. Often, there will be an additional face on the right and/or left side of a face or head, sharing one or both of the eyes. 3. (Very common) Often the mouth of a face will also serve as the eyes (or one eye) of another face. (See Example 2.) 4. (Very common) Often, part of a face will be a complete, smaller face.
Secondly, there is "the probability argument": Finding a single detailed, recognizable face, in a dust cloud in space, that has most or all of the right face parts in the right places but which was randomly created by nature and NOT by intelligent extraterrestrials might be very improbable but is still definitely possible. However, if there were a
larger number of such faces, in one image, or in one dust cloud, or as sub-faces in one face, then the probability that they were all made randomly by nature and NOT by any intelligence
quickly becomes impossibly small, as their number increases.
How many recognizable face artworks in one area in space would be considered to be "proof" of intelligent beings involvement? Well, I would first have to estimate the probability of there being one good-enough face that was NOT made by any intelligence, in order to answer that, numerically. But I was easily and quickly able to find 54 of them in a single NASA space telescope image of a portion of the Omega Nebula, even when looking at only one of the eight orientations that I usually examine, and looking at only one magnification value (instead of the 20% to 600% range that I would typically examine for each orientation. Even considering a probability of "1 over 10 to the 50th power" as the statistical standard for "impossible", I am certain that it is impossible that all of those faces were created without any help from any intelligent beings. (And I will include about 4,000 images of ET-created face artworks in my upcoming publication, with about 200 from each of about 20 NASA or ESA space telescope images of nebulas and galaxies, while about 400 of those images are already published.)
I would love to post some of the images, here, but I have heard stories about online social media sites claiming that they own the rights to all of the material that users post, and I'm no attorney. But in case I change my mind, how DO I post an image, here, from my hard drive? I only saw how to post a link to an online image, which would not be ideal.
Respectfully,
Tom Gootee
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram