Neither. I don't trust my eyes, too much. My visual interpretation of things tend to be a little off, sometimes. As are everybody's. Difference is, some people place way too much weight on their perceptions.
What do you think you are seeing from that and other shots? Is there any photos in that area that strike you as odd?
Honestly, if you had shown me the picture and said "these were taken in the Sahara", I would've been inclined to think they may be man-made. But just because something looks like something else is not reason to think that it IS that something else, especially when there's reason to think it isn't.
In the case of Mars, you'd expect A LOT of evidence of civilisation if it were so advanced as the CTers say, and the lines of the 5-sided pyramid would actually have to be somewhat straight. The "face" on mars, in fact, is one of the most blatant examples of misperception in recent history. It looks a whole lot more like a face on the old lurry 70s photo than it does in the recent, high-def one. Now, why would that be ?
How about those shots of what looks like covered,banded, roads. Sort of tubular roads. Thats what they look like. Of course this is not to say that that is what they are.
What about the canals ? Remember those ? Mars was all the rage, back then. Until we found out, in the closer, more detailed pictures, that there weren't any canals on Mars. Same with the face and pyramid and others, in my opinion. The former two don't even look like they are artificial, and the third one isn't even straight.
