Look old chap, (is that equally patronising?) for the most part people here haven't been hard on you nor has there been "a firestorm of scientific "show me proof" resistance" - although you reacted almost instantly as if there has been.

I think you've made two basic misjudgements:

a.) This is quite the wrong place to accuse people of being excessively keen on scientific orthodoxy, let alone lecture them about it as if they never heard of the concept. Google stone rowing, Cope and Silbaby, just for three. You might be quite surprised, if not chastened.

b.) Second, you've chosen to find your pictures on a few fields that many people here know every inch of and know change daily what with water and seasons and sheep etc. I even think some of the facial features you are assuming exist are in fact shadows of trees we all know well. They are also fields that have been intensively examined for hundreds of years. And the surface of Silbury, where you saw one of your faces, has been minutely scrutinised by some here weekly for the past few years. In fact, there's a reasonable case to argue Silbury's surface is just about the most intensively studied few acres on earth. So if you've discovered a face on it from 3,000 miles away you've done rather well!