You should watch the video linked below before reading my comment.
I think that all the known logical fallacies are practiced by this expert in Farsight. He is of selling his book, (published in 2006,) and constantly suggesting that the Far Sight science, which of course doesn't exist, is used by the military.
Ambiguity, false analogies, appeal to authority, mixing scientific words with the usual meaningless terminology, false precision, abusive analogies, reification, irrelevant humor and loaded words. These are only some of the logical fallacies committed here.
(Observe the dirty trick of naming the government or the military and them gives us the …"ups…I press the wrong button")
This is done to make people believe that he knows much more than what he tells.
The faked science of Far Sighting is called technology.
NASA spends billions in the exploration of Mars when this gentleman and other scientists like him do the same thing sitting in a chair in the kitchen. Presumably you can also do this if you buy the book of this individual.
The video is presented with the following words.
Published on Aug 7, 2012 by MarsResearchSociety
An extensive remote-viewing study was conducted at The Farsight Institute in March 2010 to investigate an anomalous high resolution image of Mars that suggests artificiality. The study involves nine highly trained remote viewers across four remote-viewing methodologies, all methodologies of which are identical to or derived from remote-viewing methodologies used by the United States military forces. The image that constitutes the target of the remote viewing suggests that a spray or fountain of liquid is being discharged from a long tubular nozzle, which in turn is connected to an apparent pipeline that leads to a dome formation. There is another larger dome formation nearby that is also part of the target. The remote-viewing sessions are evaluated with respect to verifiable target qualities as determined by the target image. This study notes a high degree of correlation between obvious target characteristics as determined by the target image and the detailed remote-viewing data. In the aggregate, this study offers strong support for the idea that the spray and the two dome formations deviate from known geological processes, and thus may be artificial. The remote-viewing data also shed some light on possible current activities and/or processes that may be taking place at this location on Mars.
And here is the video