in comparing the images of the mars hole and earths holes that you posted I do not see a whole lot of difference. First off, you saved me the task of looking for similar earth features as I was about to start searching myself. The ones you posted are excellent.<br /><br />The size of the hole has some bearing and it appears the upper earth image is close in size to the football field sized mars hole. The illuminated portion of the downslope shows up in both images, its just not as prominent in the mars image and not as much downslope size.<br /><br />The edge of the light falloff looks about the same or fairly sharp in both images. Where you marked "Falloff expected but there is none". I see the falloff line but its just closer to the top of the specular bloom than the earth image falloff line. If you look at the one area you didn't mark, that is the area at the top left of the hole, there appears the same sort of rough features that are present in the earth comparison. In the earth comparison, the rough downslope is present at the top right near the edge of what appears to be a road.<br /><br />Where you marked "What we should expect to see" is an example of how we expect to see one thing and see somethin different. Although in this case, I don't see enough of a difference to get that excited about. But the point here is, we don't always see what we expect to, especially in science.<br /><br />For me, the image comparison actually cleared up a few thoughts I had about how such a cave entry could form. I still don't know how they do form in that manner because I'm not a geologist or areologist, but the fact there are such features on earth tells me they are not terribly unusual. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>