18 thoughts on “Ceiling cat be praised! (Pareidolia or Photoshop?)

  1. Any Photoshopping proving Celing Cat is guided by the paw of Ceiling Cat, and is therefore just as valid as un-shopped images proving Ceiling Cat.

    This validity of ‘shopped images only applies to things that prove ceiling cat, of course. All other ‘shopped images, especially those attempting to prove d*g, are just phoney pictures.

      1. But it HAS been faked a little. I prefer to use ‘faked’ to ‘photoshopped’, not least because there is plenty of other software fully capable of such manipulation other than the overpriced Photoslop; but also because that picture is undoubtedly faked. Features have been added that never existed in reality. Whereas adjusting the contrast or colour balance of a photo, say, to correct for limitations of the camera, I would maintain is not fakery.

        I wish it hadn’t been faked, I was trying to decipher whether those features could have arisen naturally and my conclusion is, they could, though unlikely in that combination.

        1. I looked at the original pic – or wasn’t that an ‘original’ 😀 Regardless, it made me smile 🙂 My own pic of a Ceiling cat disapproving of the Australian Election (see the entry on WET: Australian ELection) was merely adjusted for contrast.

  2. Prof Coyne has his own (unshopped) example of Pareidolia from Hili Dialogue, Sat 7th September.
    Forearm hair Jesus or Forearm hair Paul Macartney be praised!

  3. For some reason I immediately saw on the right side a very large shark jumping straight up from the water. Was that just me? 0_o

Comments are closed.