Being Stupid

I stumbled upon this a while ago and I was reminded of school. I think crap like this is stupid. This sort of thing isn't even supposition. Not a single shred of evidence that this was intentional exists. "But look at it, it can't be a coincidence!"

Oh yeah?

It just looks like it fits. People see what they want and add depth that's not there*. That was something that I felt like fighting all the time in school- you have no idea what they were thinking or what they intended, why how can you possibly assume it was some sort of amazing, hidden meaning or idea behind it, or they used some sort of amazing mysterious system they never talked about or bothered to write down or record in any way?

*This is how we get people that swear they saw Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster instead of actually seeing the empty trash bag that blew by. Basically, the same principle that makes us interpret this as a face.

I'm all for over analyzing some things, but I think you have to draw the line at over-over analyzing. 

"But that's not how it was painted to look, it was unintentional, that's just an explanation of why we find the composition apealing." Nope. We do not "like" things by breaking them down unconsciously, in our minds, then comparing them to mathematical systems that not even everyone knows exists.

It's not even unintentional, you're just imagining that it fits. Am I the only one that finds stuff like this dumb?

Crypto-art history. I named it.