Figure 1- Image from Mars Rover showing putative “Thigh Bone.” From NASA and in the public domain.

Well jumpin’ pareidolia! The world of UFO enthusiasts and other wanna believers was set into an internet frenzy with NASA’s release last week of an image (see Figure 1) from the Mars Rover showing what looks very much like a human thigh bone.  Well sometimes a rock is just a rock, and such is the case here. Sorry!

I want to admit that there is nothing that would excite me more than the discovery of a fossil on Mars. And while Mars Rover has conclusively shown that Mars was once dripping in water, geologists and exobiologists think it very unlikely that Mars ever harbored large creatures – the atmosphere and environment are not believed to have ever been sufficiently sustaining for evolution to progress in that direction.

On the other hand, we may continue to wonder what if – and such is the thought provoking nature of images like this.  Mars indeed has long been a refuge for seeing things, for associating natural inanimate phenomena with objects of human or even divine origin.  There were the “Canals of Mars,” the “Face on Mars, “the Mars Rat,” and now this thigh bone.

Two years ago when I launched this blog, I promised that one of the points that it would feature was the pure magic of photographs.  Well, the Martian Thigh Bone now joins the ranks of images that titillate and fire off the associative neurons of our brains.  Just as we post our selfies in pursuit of connection, just as we look at nineteenth century photographs and see connectivity, so too we look at the alien worlds that NASA brings into crystal clarity and seek something familiar, a connection with what we know that goes beyond a bit of iron rich rock lying in the sand.  We seek the magic of the image.

We spoke recently about the dimensionality of a photograph and how adding color adds dimensions. The point is well taken, but is expressed in purely physical terms. Beyond its personification as wavelength adding color adds a psychological dimension as well because we associate colors with emotion.

I was attracted this morning to an interesting article on the BBC website about the color red, “How the colour red warps the mind,” by David Robson.  What attracted me to this article was a seductive photographs of lips covered with an intensive lipstick (from Getty Images).  I love the forties retro lipstick vogue currently in fashion.  But the point here is well taken: red, scarlet, crimson, or carmine lips are all shades of seduction.  Case in point, the Scarlet Whore of Babylon.

Red can symbolize seduction. It can also symbolize anger and aggression. Dobson cites some interesting studies that demonstrate a commanding edge that red can impart.  Two psychologists, Russell Hill and Robert Barton at the University of Durham, found that in the 2004 Olympics randomly assigned red clothes, for instance, in boxing and tae kwon do, gave competitors a distinct edge.  Similarly playing with red poker chips at casinos tend to make people bet more than people with blue or white chips. While men who wear red ties project authority and dominance in their workplaces.

Dobson shows a pair of photographs of a beautiful, and yes, seductive woman, in red and in blue (from Thinkstock). The images are fascinating.  I keep trying to figure out what my perception of the color effect is.  They both indicate elegance and style.  In both cases I have the sensation of smooth satin. The red one is intense, strong, and dominating.  While the blue one is soft, cool, and mellow.  I am not sure that I would characterize one as more sensual than the other, but the fact that they are evoking a different set of emotions is clear.

We already know that the perception of color is not merely a physical one but a physiological one as well.  But perception of color, and the its psychological effects, go way beyond the physiology of the firing of rods and cones in your retina.  It is a deeply seated brain function. This is what is unleashed, or harnessed depending upon your spin, when you add the dimension of color to a photograph.

While we certainly have more significant issues to worry about, we were diverted Labor Day Monday morning by the revelation that hackers had hacked the Cloud and retrieved deleted naked photographs, real and faked of several actresses and models. Hmm! I suspect that there will be much more to this in the end. And also why would people take and store photographs of themselves in compromising positions? Well really it is a right in a free society.

And I think that there is a simple and profound lesson that goes to the heart of the evil side of the internet and social media. Yes, as with anything created by humans, there is both a positive and an evil side.

We may begin our search for the evil side with the story of Lady Godiva, before she became a chocolate, and the “Peeping Tom.”  It seems that Mrs. Godiva, or as legend goes, begged her husband, ruler of the local kingdom to reduce the taxes on the suffering people.  he agrees provided she will ride naked across town.  The lady in question it seems is able to cover her more private regions with her long tresses of golden hair.  Everyone stays indoors and doesn’t look except for this voyeur, named Tom, who peers through a hole at the Lady.  He is struck blind.  This latter point is significant.  I mean so much for “blessed are the merciful for they shall be shown mercy.” Ironically Godiva’s husband was Leofric, Earl of Mercia.

So I don’t think the Godiva story really relates.The point is not fear of reprisal but civilized action. And to this point, to me this current situation relates to certain private family letters by John Adams to his wife Abigail (July 24, 1775) then attending the Congressional Congress that eventually wrote the Declaration of Independence, in which Adams derogatorily expresses his impatience with certain members of the congress.

The two events may seem unrelated; but the point is this that gentlemen (gentle-people, people with class) do not read the private mail of other gentlemen. There is an implicit rule, a social contract, for members who value a free society and its free interchange and one that should be followed by people who wish to use the internet in an unhurt-full fashion. The term free society is key here. It is not an obligation it is civilized contract. While we probably cannot stop abuse of the internet and abuse of social media, we do not have to look at the garbage, to sneer, chuckle, or chortle at it. And this is also true of stating and restating political untruths over and over again until the seem real solely by repetition.  This is not ideal moralizing. Who is ultimately denigrated when one seeks out this kind of image?