The Intentionality Fallacy?

Work in progress. NN (Nomen Nescio) IIV: An Uncanny Presence. Series.
Oil on canvas ,94 × 70  cm (37 × 27.5 inches)

I am currently studying and reflecting upon 'Apophenia. Littlewood's Law of Miracles and the Intentionality Fallacy' by David Christopher Lane.  One of Lane's key arguments, is to my mind, whilst not necessarily in based upon the mathematics of Littlewood Law, is his demonstration of how individuals thoughts and needs, both consciously and unconsciously, affect how that individual may connect random dots to form what Lane refers to as desultory decussations. Or the point where two or more random occurrences appear to cross or connect in the mind of an individual due not though the mathematics of Littlewood but simply through  the mind set of the individual in question.
​
This theory is of great importance to the work which I am currently pursuing in that it confirms my own hypothesis that an observer sees an 'image' or idea in a piece of art because they expect, want or even need to see one. In the text Lane uses an excellent example in his debunking of Elliot Benjamins license plate synchronicity by pointing out that it was in all likelihood  Benjamin's own frame of mind  which made him interpret what he saw in his license plates as being significant to him because he wanted or needed it to be so. 

So what do you see it the painting above and why do you see it?