The hypothesis that the D&M Pyramid may be the product of
intelligent design cannot be advanced simply because there is no
geomorphological explanation, but must be subjected to an objective
analysis, especially due to its location on Mars, a place where
life is not known to have existed. Thus we must first ask a
preliminary question: What are the hallmarks of architectures that
distinguish them from landforms and how may they be objectively
recognized and evaluated?
In searching for the signs of intelligent design, we cannot allow
ourselves any subjective, Earth-based frames of reference. The
observation "it looks like a pyramid" is sufficient to focus our
attention towards further investigation, but proves nothing else.
With subjective appearances set aside, there are a number of
objective characteristics of architectures that can be identified:
The characteristics listed above cannot by themselves establish an
object as being the product of intelligent design. What is required
is a totality of geometric relationships that, when viewed as a
whole, preclude the likelihood of a natural origin. This is
precisely the same "convergence of evidence" technique used in the
photo-interpretation of aerial photography and satellite imagery. 
- Is the object's geometry inconsistent with known landforms
and geomorphological processes? (i.e. does the object exhibit
straight lines, curved lines having fixed radii, regular patterns,
one or more axes of symmetry, and does the combination of these
characteristics preclude geomorphology as a mechanism of origin?)
- Is the object aligned with the cardinal directions and/or
with significant astronomical events?
- Is the object collocated with other objects that are also
inconsistent with the surrounding geology? And if so, are they
geometrically aligned with each other?
- Does the object's geometry express mathematically
significant numbers, and/or the symmetries associated with
In exploring the geometry of the D&M Pyramid, the most conservative
approach possible was pursued. The reasons for this are partly
historical. The Great Pyramid of Egypt has a long history of being
mathematically abused by mostly well-meaning investigators who, in
attempts to "prove" various theories, have subjected the Great
Pyramid to excessively complex measurements and calculations. It is
only the simplest and most elegant of these measurements that are
widely accepted by architects as valid.
Study of the D&M Pyramid's geometry was therefore restricted to
overall observations of location and symmetry, and to these
These approaches were selected due to their simplicity, their
validity in number bases other than decimal, and their independence
from our convention of expressing angles as a portion of a 360
- The values of observable angles expressed in radian measure.
- Examining the ratios formed between the observable angles
for equality with mathematically significant numbers.
- Examining the Sine, Cosine, and Tangent of measured angles
for the presence of mathematically significant numbers.
As previously mentioned, the D&M Pyramid shows signs of being
damaged on one side, perhaps by a meteoric impact. Some edge and
angle reconstruction was therefore necessary before any accurate
measurements could be obtained. This is a speculative
reconstruction, due to the eroded state of the object. The
reconstructive technique is however the same as that used widely in
archaeology when evaluating sites in which geometry is important,
as in archaeoastronomy.
An NGF filtered orthographic negative of Viking orbiter frame 70A13
was obtained from the National Space Sciences Data Center. An
orthographic projection was necessary to ensure that the geometry
of the object under study was accurately represented on the image.
The negative image of the D&M was projected using a photographic
enlarger that had first been calibrated with a projection grid.
This image was used for the reconstruction, combined with reference
to an unrectified image processed by Dr. Mark Carlotto for
confirmation of detail that was sometimes less clear in the
contrasty original negative.
All visible angles of the D&M Pyramid were measured (+/- 0.2 deg)
and subjected to the tests mentioned earlier: radian measure, angle
ratios, and trig functions. The results of these measurements are
summarized in the following section.
- The most distinct edges on the pyramid, those on the sunlit
side, were marked by visual averaging. These edges were extended to
locate the position of the hypothetical original apex.
- A straight line was drawn from the apex through the flat
protuberance at the front of the pyramid to mark what appears to be
an axis of symmetry.
- A line was extended from the apex to the right front corner,
which is sharp and clearly visible on the Carlotto image.
- The figure was enclosed, based upon the left side of the
pyramid and the right front corner.