For your Friday amusement:
Pareidolia.
Evah.
Via Pharyngula. Please keep the comments clean, folks.
Update (mar 26 2008): The link has been updated, since the old one is now 404.
About Bad Astronomy
If you went to BadAstronomy.com and found yourself here, never fear: the BA Blog has moved to its new home at Discover Blogs. The original BA site (with the Moon Hoax debunking and all that) is still online, too.
Phil Plait, the creator of Bad Astronomy, is an astronomer, lecturer, and author. After ten years working on Hubble Space Telescope and six more working on astronomy education, he struck out on his own as a writer. He has written two books, dozens of magazine articles, and 12 bazillion blog articles. He is a skeptic, and fights misuses of science as well as praising the wonder of real science.
Contact me: The Bad Astronomer "at" gmail "dot" com
Bad Astronomy is a Wikio Top Blog! Clearly, Wikio has excellent taste. 
Bad Astronomy was chosen as one of Time.com's Best Blogs of 2009. Subscribe to BA using an RSS Feed
Death from the Skies!
Order a copy of Death from the Skies! from Amazon, Barnes and Noble, or Borders.
"If things worked the way I wanted them to, any reporter about to do another 'sensational' story on deadly meteors would consult this volume, and bang! common sense would find its way into the news. How strange would that world be?"
-- Adam Savage, Mythbusters"Reading this book is like getting punched in the face by Carl Sagan. Frightening, but oddly exhilarating."
-- Daniel H. Wilson, author of How to Survive a Robot UprisingSocial/Networking/Cool Stuff
DISCOVERmagazine.com: Latest Articles on Space- Will Our Universe Collide With a Neighboring One?
- Visual Science: Polishing a Cosmic Spyglass
- Visual Science: NASA Unveils Its New Rocket
- Is Jupiter's Bizarre Moon Our Best Hope for Finding Extraterrestrial Life?
- Reviews: Clashes With Aliens, America vs. Science, and Really Horrible Sci-Fi: The Best in Science Culture
- DISCOVER Blogs: The Loom
September 22nd, 2006 at 12:09 pm
Now, that one is nasty.
September 22nd, 2006 at 12:22 pm
You owe me a new keyboard!
*SNRRRRRRRK*Bwahahahahahaha!
September 22nd, 2006 at 12:24 pm
That’s terrible, terrible …
Excuse me while I stop laughing…
Okay, deep breath.
That’s terrible, terrible …
Sorry, here I go again …
September 22nd, 2006 at 12:25 pm
Hahahaha! Are the apostles the testicles?
September 22nd, 2006 at 12:55 pm
The big question around the office here is: is this faked or not?
September 22nd, 2006 at 1:00 pm
Oh Jesus!!! (Pun intended). Excuse me a minute while I go earase that image from my mind.
Are you there God? Please, please, please only limit youself to cinamon buns and highway underpass’ from now on.
Phil, I’m almost afraid to ask, but how do you find this stuff? Do you just Google random words and pick whatever looks the most interesting?
September 22nd, 2006 at 1:11 pm
Don’t forget about the rust stain on the side of the water tank.
September 22nd, 2006 at 1:18 pm
Uhm… WTF.
Well, god backwards is dog, after all.
Just as long as he doesn’t start checking the children for signs of Jesus, everything, er, might be okay? Er?
September 22nd, 2006 at 1:22 pm
I could swear that this specific example of Jesus pereidolia (Seeing jesus in a dog’s butt — based off of “if my dog were as ugly as you, i’d shave his ass and teach him to walk backwards” joke) came up either in a comment thread at Pharyngula, or here, or at the skepticality.com forum and then somebody went specifially looking for it. I have to go to work soon, but I swear I’m gonna go look for that comment/post/whatever.
September 22nd, 2006 at 1:42 pm
As it says in the small print in the entry, I saw it on PZ’s blog, and had to repost it for those folks who don’t, for some reason, read Pharyngula.
September 22nd, 2006 at 2:14 pm
good thing it wasn’t an image of mohammed; there would be riots! this is hillarious!
September 22nd, 2006 at 2:35 pm
good thing it wasn’t an image of mohammed; there would be riots! this is hillarious!
And mass killings of dogs for their sacrilidge, too.
September 22nd, 2006 at 3:34 pm
So dogs sniff each other´s butts because they´re deeply religious?
September 22nd, 2006 at 3:54 pm
Ok, I don’t know if any of you remember (I doubt you do) but I was looking for a subject to do a 3000 word project on;
Pareidolia!!
I could show test subjects….. It doesn’t matter what I do but thanks BA
September 22nd, 2006 at 3:57 pm
Bad ASStronomy. Would you have dared post it if it had been big Mo on the Dog’s anus?
September 22nd, 2006 at 4:11 pm
Alright, alright, but making him fade in and out is just cheating.
September 22nd, 2006 at 6:11 pm
I am so going to hell for laughing at this!
- Jack
September 22nd, 2006 at 6:32 pm
This is satire worthy of Johnathon Swift!
Nice job, folks!
Thanks for making me nearly spray soda out my nose, Phil.
September 22nd, 2006 at 9:02 pm
Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha! (Gasp!) Ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Sigh…
I will still be laughing at this tomorrow. I’m going to show it to a lot of people, too. This is the best visual example I’ve seen of why people shouldn’t hold such faith in ’signs’ such as moldy food, rust, whatever. Face it: a stain is just a stain. A piece of food is just a piece of food. A dog’s bum… well, you get the idea.
September 22nd, 2006 at 9:35 pm
NO, you don’t get it Phil. I saw somebody comment, “How come nobody sees Jesus or Mary in a dog’s ass or something” or a similar quote less than a week ago. Not yesterday, not today, within a week.
September 23rd, 2006 at 12:10 am
He he he *snort*
September 23rd, 2006 at 1:07 am
Wow. I wonder how long that guy had to stare into his dogs ass before he randomly say Jesus in it. I guess its like looking at clouds, stare at one long enough and your mind will try and think it looks like something.
September 23rd, 2006 at 4:21 am
“Holy holes Batman!!!”
September 23rd, 2006 at 6:17 am
Phil,
Was this what you were looking at when you had your vision?
September 23rd, 2006 at 9:11 am
It obviously is faked or at least augmented, it is actually an animated graphic. Very funny though, maybe the Lord likes the stimulating feeling of a dog’s tongue.
September 23rd, 2006 at 12:28 pm
Who says God doesn’t have a sense of humor? WE’RE still here after all our laughter and I’ve been dancing in the rain.
GAry 7
September 23rd, 2006 at 11:20 pm
Good doG!
I don’t expect any fishes, but shouldn’t there be some loaves laying around there somewhere?
And will it be revealed later that the Apostle Mark is just a dog with a harelip?
Mark! Mark! Mark!
September 24th, 2006 at 8:20 am
I think this is rather sad. Sure, it’s become fashionable to make fun of religions but it is a mistake to assume that whoever belives i God is a retard. This link is *very* insulting to christians who take their faith seriously. Question is then what would be the aim of putting it here. Further good science? I’d say it can only serve to alienate those who appreciate respecting other peoples’ views. It should also be pointed out that actually very few christians are anti science. As a point in case I can mention that the heliocentric system, genetics and Big Bang all have been devised by catholic clergymen of one sort or another. World isn’t just black and white. There are good and bad people all over the place so a little sofistication would be in order even though a lot of folks seem to find this kind of ’satire’ amusing.
Gee weez, I got a little upset but I am fine now…
September 24th, 2006 at 8:25 am
Yeah, this is just in really poor taste. It’s a free country, and you can say whatever you want, but you’re alienating a large slug of the population with this type of behavior. Why not banish ignorance on both sides by having an honest dialogue? I guess that would bee too hard.
September 24th, 2006 at 8:43 am
………I’d say it can only serve to alienate those who appreciate respecting other peoples’ views.
There is respecting your RIGHT to your views, which I hope we all share…and there is respecting your VIEWS. That is a whole different thing. I will not be so dishonest as to pretend to do so just to make you happy.
I will laugh at your religion and make fun of your gods just as I would laugh at a Scientologist who believes that the Galactic Emperor Xenu banished his enemies to Earth where they yet live in the bodies of men.
Sounds silly doesn’t it? Do you respect such beliefs? Would you not snicker if they were brought up in conversation? Sweet Holy Koresh, I hope you would.
September 24th, 2006 at 8:57 am
> I will laugh at your religion and make fun of your gods just as I would laugh
> at a Scientologist
Well, this is the core of the problem. I belive it is wrong to laugh at anybody’s views no matter how silly they seem. If they are so wrong prove them wrong. Making fun of people never makes them appreciate your ideas. Wouldn’t it be better to win someone over to the right understanding of reality in stead of pushing him even further away? Good tone and critisism are not mutually exclusive in my opinion.
September 24th, 2006 at 9:34 am
The point here is not to make fun of religion. The point here is to poke fun at people who keep seeing icons of their religion everywhere, when in fact what they are seeing is just a product of their eyes, brain, and zeal.
If they wish to see Jesus and Mary in tortillas, window panes, trees, and oil smears under highways, then they have to accept that these apparitions can appear anywhere.
September 24th, 2006 at 9:52 am
…..”If they are so wrong prove them wrong.”
I can’t prove that the Emeror Xenu didn’t banish his enemies to Earth or that the Christian God did not sacrifice himself to himself to appease himself of his anger at his own creation.
Laughter is all I can manage for such ideas.
September 24th, 2006 at 9:56 am
> The point here is to poke fun at people who keep seeing icons of their religion everywhere
It’s rather obvious to me that this was the idea. However this page is not showing what someone imagined. It’s made up, apparently to make fun of some individuals. The question I’m trying to put here is how far can we go without crossing the border between ‘humorous’ and ‘insulting’. I was offended and that’s quite an achievement since I live in a country where it is almost an official policy to make fun of everything religious so I should be used to this kind of stuff.
I would like to note, however, that I don’t hold any grudge. I just disagree with this particular way of expressing views. I write this because it is difficult to convey mood when only using the written language.
September 24th, 2006 at 3:22 pm
Hmm, would that be holy or holey? If there is any doubt that religion is bunk, one need only consider whether a deity would actually manifest an image of itself in a dog’s hind-quarters.
God created man in his own image? I guess that says something about man then, yes?
September 24th, 2006 at 3:44 pm
God made man in his own image?…
It is said, by Christians and followers of related religions that God made man in his own image (Genesis 1:27). Now some of those people also think their deity leaves images of itself in various places. You may have heard…
September 24th, 2006 at 7:19 pm
“I belive it is wrong to laugh at anybody’s views no matter how silly they seem.”
So if a person believes that they are a chicken, you should respect that view? If a person believes that Spam is an evil instrument of the devil then you should respect that view? If a person thinks YOU are a pomegranate you should respect that view? Should you then act as if you really are a pomegranate while around them, to avoid challenging their belief system? There are a million bizarre and inexplicable beliefs out there, and every single one of them appears absurd to people who do not subscribe to the same viewpoint.
By the way, I believe everyone except for myself and my dog is a pomegranate. If you claim to be otherwise, you are mocking my views. And don’t even start trying to PROVE SCIENTIFICALLY that you’re not a pomegranate. That’s not just mockery; that’s an outright attack on my belief system.
September 24th, 2006 at 11:58 pm
It’s a bit funny how some people seem to think that having different views and beliefs implies offending each other. Showing respect for other people doesn’t mean pretending to agree on everything. Our civilization has a problem with conducting a good dialogue. Some fear saying anything just so as not to offend some unknown ideology while others go out of their way to insult as many people as possible so that everybody is treated equally. This behaviour suggest a deeply rooted insecurity about one’s own beliefs. No wonder many people both laugh at us and hate us in many places around the world. But that’s a discussion for another forum, I should think.
September 25th, 2006 at 2:34 am
A little off topic, but here is an example how pareidolia can be used to (try to) manipulate individuals:
http://www.pbfcomics.com/?cid=0PBF59011BC-Not_Today_Little_One.jpg#60
September 25th, 2006 at 5:37 am
First if all, this is not the least bit funny. Secondly, I have no problem when a religious group is called out for their statements, when those statements are made in direct conflict with known science, but superimposing a picture of Jesus onto a dog’s genitals is nothing more than a way to mock religious beliefs. You sir, are a horse’s ass, no digital manipulation necessary.
September 25th, 2006 at 6:59 am
Bob…
You do know that the Dogsbottom Jesus isn’t from this site, and that nobody here did it, yes?
Mayhap your energies would be better directed at that site’s creators.
September 25th, 2006 at 7:18 am
Evolving Squid,
Regadless of who created it, the BA chose to put it on this site. I actually don’t even have a problem with the creators of it, if they think it’s funny, and other people think it’s funny, then have a good laugh. The purpose of this website, however, is supposidly to encourage scientific discussion and point out errors of scientific reasoning. This did nothing to further either, and, instead, did nothing but mock a religious belief.
Please spare me the explanation that this was shown as an example of pareidolia. The figure only appears because a picture is superimposed upon it.
The worst part is that, although this site is suppose to encourage independent thought, the responses are all from a group of mindless followers talking about how this is just the funniest thing they have seen. If this is the funniest thing you’ve seen, it’s time to put down the telescope and get out a little.
September 25th, 2006 at 10:58 am
Now, that’s a Hole-ee image!
September 25th, 2006 at 12:15 pm
To Bob L. – Honour the Eleventh Commandment: i.e. “Lighten up!” Life is too short to waste on petty arguments about religion. In fact all the petty arguments about religion that are going on in the world right now are what is making life very short for some already. So I will reiterate: God gave us a sense of humour (well some of us anyway); so use it! Before we all start tearing each other apart over trivialities such as pictures and cartoons. Sit down, get yourself a drink and watch Monty Python’s Life of Brian!
September 25th, 2006 at 2:46 pm
FYI, the superimposed image doesn’t appear on my computer, because I’ve got animations disabled. So, the image I saw was just the unretouched one of the dog’s backside. It STILL vaguely resembled an iconic Christian image just as ALL the other examples of pareidolia have vaguely done. THAT’S THE WHOLE POINT!
There’s nothing there, except the dog. Just as all the other “miraculous signs” are nothing more than the earthly things they are.
Heck, I’ve got a large gnarled portion of a tree root in my yard that looks exactly like a long-snouted version of a Sleestak from the 1970’s tv show ‘Land of the Lost.’ Doesn’t matter what direction the sun is shining on it, nor even if the sky is cloudy. Rain, snow, dry weather, daytime, nighttime… the root always looks the same. Is that some “miraculous proof” that Sleestaks really exist, and they’re coming soon? (I know several of you are going to chime in at this point about welcoming your new reptilian overlords.)
Of course it isn’t. Just as all other examples of pareidolia are nothing significant. Neat, yes. Miraculous, no.
Sure, the pics that started this whole thread were in poor taste. But I find equally in poor taste people’s belief in pareidolia as evidence of divinity, regardless of how sincere their belief is. It’s misguided, and gets people further away from the truth. (And I’m not just referring to the truth of scientific facts; it includes the truth of religion, as well. Whatever happened to not worshipping idols?)