 |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Yes Virginia, It really is a "Catbox
..." Ezekiel 41:18 Ezekiel 41:19
As you can see by the quotes from Ezekiel, our over 20-year investigation into the mysteries of Cydonia has now reached a major, startling plateau. As first predicted by Richard C. Hoagland almost a decade ago at the United Nations, the right-hand (eastern) side of the new Face image (above), initially released May 24, 2001 by Dr. Michael Malin, now reveals a striking feline visage when compared to the more familiar "hominid" (western) side first sent to Earth by the 1976 Viking Mission over a quarter of a century ago. The implications of this startling new confirmation -- not only for the reality of this object as a structured Martian Monument, but for its ultimate "message" to Humanity at large -- are overwhelmingly profound. For those who have insisted from the beginning (such as the Brookings Institution) that "extraterrestrial artifacts" (such as the Face on Mars) would likely be perceived as "connected" to Humankind's most deeply held religious doctrines, the astonishing confirmation of this specific "man-lion duality" -- and on the surface of a nearby world -- is only the beginning Because of the sudden nature of the new image release (once again in violation of NASA's own stated policy on reimaging Cydonia), we were only initially able to offer a brief synopsis of the status of the "intelligence hypothesis" in light of this startling development. Now, after a few days of reflection and analysis of this crucial confirmation (of the "partial feline model"), and after gauging the wildly contradictory official, press and public reaction to its surprise release, we are in a much better position to explore the current, obviously chaotic political and scientific climate regarding where we are now in this generation-long, increasingly astonishing inquiry. That said, this article will concentrate a great deal on the Face itself, and its now resoundingly confirmed, stunning implications for the meaning of Cydonia. This is important, insofar as the Face represents the starting point for countless new or casual followers of this long, scientific controversy -- especially following this startling new release. But simultaneously, we do not want anyone to lose sight of the fact that the Face, at a more fundamental level, has almost become a secondary part of this debate for many years; Hoagland's Geometric Relationship Model for Cydonia -- with its potential for quantification and testing of the foundations of the "intelligence hypothesis" itself, in the form of specific predictions made by the Hyperdimensional Physics theory derived from that alignment Model -- has clearly stepped to the forefront of the debate over the artificiality of Cydonia of late. Because of this quantifiable basis for the Model, the Face itself ("But, what does it look like?") has been relegated to a secondary, "confirmatory" status -- rather than the linch-pin around which all decisions vis-ΰ-vis the artificiality of Cydonia must (or should) be anchored. The reasons for this are myriad and complex, but revolve chiefly around the major problem confronting modern "scientific" archaeology. Initially, from mere "appearance," archeologists and geologists can't even agree on whether a fairly obvious Earth bound artifact is artificial or derived from a completely natural process. It is hardly, therefore, surprising that a potential artifact on another world, with all the possibilities for chaos in an otherwise orderly "geological model of the solar system" that its mere presence would create, has been a source of intense, continuing debate for decades.
A case in point is the set of recently discovered pyramids below the Pacific Ocean just off Japan, on a submerged undersea island called "Yonaguni." Archeologists were quick to point out the various characteristics that identified these structures as artificial, monumental architecture "from the get-go." Geologists countered with a series of equally reasoned arguments based on the biases of their science -- that all these data points could be explained just as readily by natural processes. To most observers, the winning argument was made patently obvious simply by looking at the pictures (above). The underwater pyramids are artificial! Yet still, for years the debate has raged on, both on the web and in the journals.
It was only when a team of divers sent by the Discovery Channel discovered a stunning, underwater Face, complete with a Meso-American Headdress (or lion's mane?), that some of the geologists relented. These new finds, joined with some key observations by Japanese marine geologists, finally broke the dam and forced the admission of the obvious -- "somebody built the stuff." But even this single, redundant, unifying theme -- Faces amid the ruins, both here and on Mars-- can leave some geologists searching for some remotely plausible natural explanation.
This sort of debate is exactly why we have always argued that planetary geologists are not well equipped to solely evaluate Cydonia -- or any other putative artificial structures (above) on the planet Mars. If the Face and other objects there are artificial, then they should be looked at first and foremost thru the lens of archaeology , and geology only secondly (for their natural context) if at all. Geologists tend to look at everything as the product of one of their familiar natural processes, since their training has told them that (a planet full of artifacts on Earth notwithstanding!) that is the process by which everything in the solar system has been formed. This is how you get the simplistic (and scientifically absurd) "sand dunes" argument when geologists are confronted by true anomalies like the "Glass Tunnels of Mars" (above) The simple fact is that when dealing with a problem outside their own discipline, and (therefore) limited expertise, most scientists -- from whatever field -- will resort to any familiar explanation from that field and then cling to it at all costs no matter how silly or ultimately contradictory it turns out to be. This is what their training has taught them to do (go for the familiar first). It is also what their training limits them to. Fortunately, we have an impartial arbiter that transcends the biases of any particular discipline of science. It is called the "scientific method." The cornerstones of this method are specific measurement and specific prediction. As our erstwhile friend and colleague, Tom Van Flandern of Metaresearch.org is fond of pointing out, "you do not have a science without prediction." This is a modern (but no less correct) play on the axiom advocated by early 20th Century astronomer Sir Arthur Eddington, who inserted the measurement side of the equation into the method with his simple statement "Gentlemen, you do not have a science unless you can express it in numbers." Well, for a number of years we have had a science here at Enterprise that has been expressed in both numbers and successful prediction. For NASA, or any other critic for that matter, to pretend otherwise is just so much word play. The record is clear. And, in this particular example (the new Face image), it totally vindicates the position that one of us (Hoagland) has held vis-ΰ-vis the Face for over a decade. The Face is really two faces. One human. One feline. In a way, perhaps the name itself "The Face on Mars," unfairly raised expectations that we would see a friendly, all-American, symmetrical human visage when we finally got a real good look. But we never expected that. And we said so repeatedly and for many years. By the early 90's, Enterprise Principal Investigator Richard C. Hoagland had come to the conclusion that the Face was significantly asymmetric. While broad features, like the platform and the two visible "eye sockets" were generally aligned, Hoagland decided upon close examination of the original Viking data that the overall features would be significantly asymmetric when new imagery of the entire feature was obtained. Various possibilities for this apparent divergence were bandied about among the other Cydonia researchers at the time (including, that it was not a "Face" at all, or, that the right side was "significantly" eroded), while Hoagland began seriously thinking that such asymmetry was actually planned. Kynthia, the Enterprise Mission Art Director, was in the process of sculpting successive 3-D models of the Face in this time period. She saw -- and even modeled -- the same asymmetry, but was uncertain of the cause. It was only years later, after the acquisition of the 1998 "catbox" image, that Kynthia -- working to bring her 3-D analog Face sculpture into conformity with the new data -- became a convert to Hoagland's specific "asymmetry ideal" -- that the right-hand (Cliff) side was specifically intended to represent a "lion." Even afterwards, however, a few of the other scientists working the "Cydonia problem" continued to argue that the Face had to be symmetrical -- and attempted to persuade Kynthia to re-sculpt her model to conform, as a "valid reconstruction of the original design." But, as previously noted, for a long time Hoagland hadn't bought that the "original" shape was anything like a symmetric form ... and, more important, not necessarily even human. One key reason was a little experiment that he'd conducted; Hoagland had taken a series of cutouts of large photographic blow-ups of the Face from the Viking data and made himself two faces (below) -- one "mirrored" from the Western or "City side," and one "mirrored" from the Eastern or "Cliff side." What he found astounded him.
When the two "City halves" were put together, they created a distinct (if primitive) proto-human form -- a clear "hominid" appearance. When the Cliff side halves were placed together, they created the markedly feline image you see on the right (above). Hoagland later made a major point of this during his 1992 UN Presentation, and included the feline side prediction in all subsequent versions of his book "The Monuments of Mars" -- from the Second Edition on. But he did not stop there. When the first MGS image was released in April, 1998, Hoagland again went on nationwide radio and television, reiterating his position that the Face was two distinct Faces and that one was feline. He even posted the old and new images pointing out feline characteristics of the Face on the Enterprise Mission web site at the time. Then, a few weeks ago -- literally the night before the release of the May 24, 2001 new Face image -- Hoagland once again reiterated his stance on Art Bell's "Coast to Coast," that the Cliff side would be revealed as feline (below).
Now, it is very, very crucial to appreciate the significance of this recorded sequence of events. The presence of a "feline side" of the Face on Mars (which a wide segment of the public, if not other Cydonia researchers, are now independently recognizing from the new Face image for the first time) in and of itself would be meaningless without Hoagland's decade-old prediction. In fact, some of our critics (as usual) have been deliberately (and falsely) accusing us of changing our tune after the fact ("a posteriori"), by claiming that the Face had a feline half only after this image was released May 24th. Clearly, the record overwhelmingly affirms exactly the opposite!; the existence of Hoagland's published, specific feline prediction -- now nearly ten years old -- validates the entire 20 year history of the rest of this investigation. Because without the rest of the supporting Cydonia research we've been pursuing, there is simply no way Hoagland's "dual" model of the Face could have turned out now to be so strikingly correct just "by chance." With depressing unanimity, however, the latest news articles critical of the Cydonia investigation (The New York Times, The Washington Post, USA Today, CNN, etc.) have relied on a flawed recitation of previous claims made about "the face" by other Cydonia researchers over the years. NASA's own position, highlighted by the flurry of specially prepared "hit pieces" carefully released coincident with the new Face image, is that all of the Cydonia researchers have consistently claimed that the central feature at Cydonia would be "a symmetrical humanoid Face." They -- the mainstream press and NASA -- have maintained this blatantly false stance despite the fact that the most well known proponent of the artificiality of the Face, Richard C. Hoagland, has argued no such thing for almost ten years! When you consider that without holding the artificiality of Cydonia to this single question -- the question of precise symmetry of human features -- NASA now has no case against artificiality at all (because, there's not one Face but two), it is no wonder that they blindly seek to reduce the debate to this single mis-framed question -- and are now desperately trying to pretend that Hoagland's published, decade old prediction never happened! Because lets Face it, on every other line of attack the NASA boys are getting their asses kicked by these new Mars Surveyor images. Other recent Cydonia frames have revealed that the Cliff is every bit as straight and weird as we all thought it was; that the Tholus is an equally (and wonderfully) weird mound with a ruined tetrahedron crowning it; and that there are bizarre ruins all over Cydonia, for that matter, just screaming "artificiality." The only thing we lacked relative to the "old" artificial model of Cydonia was a good look at the D&M (still curiously not released ), and a clear, overhead, full-on shot of the Face itself -- which we now have. Faced with this inexorable reality, critics (and even some within the Cydonia research community, who would rather see anyone other than us get credit for being right on this) have been reduced to either rewriting history (by pretending that our model does not exist), or simply arguing "I don't see a Lion!"
But of course, it's there. In response to this long-awaited image, a few in the independent research community have even responded by declaring that the Eastern half, or Cliff side, is "more eroded" than the City side. Or, they have described the previously shaded side as "more irregular" -- anything apparently to keep from admitting that it's feline.
In truth, it is simply wrong that the Eastern (Cliff) half is "more eroded" than the Western (City) half (above). It is equally wrong that that side (the right) is also more "irregular." These are clearly coping mechanisms put forth by those that expected to see a symmetrical "human" face. The reality is that the Eastern half is simply less familiar than the more commonly seen Western (Viking) half. And, since it is decidedly feline, it is less consistent with many of the hopes and expectations of seeing a familiar, friendly human visage staring back at us from the Cydonia Martian plain. In reality, the Eastern half is significantly less eroded and appears to have more of the original "casing" on it then the more weathered Western half (above). What the problem really comes down to is that the Cliff side confirms our model -- that that side is feline -- and not "theirs" (that the Face would be symmetrical, and human) -- and that is a new scientific and political reality that many long-time researchers (and even casual observers) of this decades-long puzzle are having difficulty coping with right now. The majority, fortunately, are not. Faced with the collapse of their own models, these same few critics have said of us; "they'll never give up their position that it is artificial, no matter what the pictures show." Well, of course we won't -- when they show exactly what we have been predicting they would show for almost ten years! The real test should have been whether the feline predictions stood up against the details revealed by the new Face image, and whether or not the Face could now validly be viewed as an eroded remnant of "a once much grander Monument." The symmetrical beveled base, the rough facial symmetry and specific corresponding features (the left and right eyeballs and eye sockets, and the nostrils) all argue that even if we are wrong in our feline interpretation -- the damn thing still looks an awful lot like a Face. And again, it is surrounded by a crucial context -- all that other "weird stuff" also lying at Cydonia. Still, "collapse" is an interesting term -- because there does seem to be some evidence of it taking place on some key portions of the Face.
Certain areas around the right (Cliff side) chin, especially, seems to have literally collapsed (above). While we maintain that the Face was originally intended to be seen as two very different species, there is what appears to be a structural failure on the lower right that accentuates this planned asymmetry well beyond what we think was originally designed. The problem with "collapse" as a natural mechanism for these features is that it just isn't very likely. For a long time now, the only active erosive mechanism on the planet Mars has been "aeolian erosion" (wind). And wind, especially when it carries large quantities of sand and grit, tends to blast away outer layers over eons, producing the pitted, cavity-strewn surface you see on the Face's City side (above left). The indicated areas on the right, on the other hand, seem to have collapsed from the inside Without any fluvial or tectonic activity (for a very long time ) to induce such collapse, it is somewhat difficult to explain. But not impossible. Remember, our model of Cydonia is that all these major monuments are "architectural ecologies," within which once were huge living spaces. The Face has all the earmarks of just such a (now moderately) collapsed arcology -- with a complex, internal substructure. A substructure that would be especially vulnerable to certain kinds of internal degradation. And thus, if this object that we call "the Face on Mars" was truly a designed Monument (and not just a "reshaped mesa" -- as Hoagland has also has maintained for almost a decade -- even joking about it as "Headquarters" ) -- then, like all arcologies, it must have had an internal, highly geometric, manufactured substructure. And such a substructure would have been especially vulnerable to other kinds of "entropic forces" besides external sand blasting. Like rust. Because, when a metal and/or organic (plastic?) substructure is exposed to sufficient quantities of water and oxygen -- such as would have been mandated in the arcology model for an internal, contained atmosphere for the inhabitants -- then an inexorable process would have begun and continued long after the inhabitants died or fled. The metal and other materials inside would have begun to oxidize. They would literally have begun to "rust!" And then they would have weakened. And then they would have begun to collapse until sufficient internal walls and ceilings were breached, and the remaining oxidizing air found a pathway to the cold, almost vacuum conditions on Mars outside The expected end result of such an internal collapse process would be very much what we now seem to be seeing in the latest, high-resolution Face image. Because the internal failure of walls and structural supports below the surface was halted when the oxygen-rich air finally escaped to the surface, the results of this catastrophic internal collapse were self-limiting -- and, in accordance with this prediction, appear on the surface to have been confined only to certain areas primarily around the "chin." "Why" is total speculation at this point; perhaps those areas contained the largest, thinnest volumes (huge greenhouses, facing south?), and thus the thinnest layers to corrode between the inside and the surface of this massive Monument. We'll only truly find out when the first human expedition sends us live TV from inside the Face on Mars someday.
As noted earlier, some have tried to make the case that the entire Cliff side of the Face shows evidence of collapse (however, why would such an internal process be restricted to only one side ...?). As you can see from this animation produced by Borgus, the Cliff side eye socket and mouth area appear to have once been more similar to the City side, but have now slumped inward. Subsequently, the beveled base around the upper and lower Cliff side has slumped outward slightly -- from a proposed accumulation of material that pushes outward underneath the substructure. If this is the case, then it is possible that Face did have a much more uniform left/right appearance at one time. Still, in the absence of a specific engineering analysis or, especially, a prediction that this process would produce the resulting asymmetric appearance, this after-the-fact reconstruction has little weight behind it. Ultimately, it is the predictive aspect of the "feline model" (in all its implications see below) that gives it a leg up on the "general collapse concept." Another serious problem is that whatever material the surface "casing" of the Face is made from should show serious signs of fracturing, if it has generally fallen in on the eastern half. Such a dramatic cave-in would have produced a chaotic, shattered appearance quite unlike the smooth and non-fractal appearance that we actually see facing the Cliff. So which is it? A partially collapsed Pharaoh representation? Or, a "Pharaoh/Lion hybrid" split down the center? We think the latter, as we always have. But then, if that's truly the case, the next (really loaded!) question must be answered What is a terrestrial feline "half Face" doing on a half "hominid" Monument on Mars? Well, that depends on how weird you want to get. After the initial shock of NOT seeing "Paul Newman" in
the latest Malin release, more and more independent researchers are now coming
around to the idea that the feline prediction appears to be valid -- but they're
just beginning to come to grips with the meaning of such a specific
"split image"; and most of them are still light years from grappling
with the sheer, enormous implications of a recognizable "lion" on the
planet Mars! If we can show that this "alien artifact" has a fundamental "terrestrial connection" (as Hoagland has rigorously argued for years) -- both in form and fact --to the practices and rites of ancient cultures here on Earth, then we can go a long way to explaining how a "Lion/Pharaoh Monument" ended up on a nearby planet. Remember, our model -- shared by other researchers like Michael Cremo and Graham Hancock -- is that all of the ancient "advanced" cultures on Earth ultimately sprang (in the form of refugees) from the same pre-diluvial, truly advanced "root civilization." The Golden Age of Science and Technology that the Maya called "the Fourth World," the Egyptians called "Zep-Tepi" (the First Time), and the Greeks called "Atlantis." So as we look to these ancient civilizations, we must question whether we see any similar examples in monumental architecture or cultural precedent to what we're now -- unmistakably -- seeing on Mars. It turns out that the Maya, one of the most advanced (if not in some ways the most mysterious) of these early "post-catastrophic civilizations," did indeed have exact examples of these "split faced gods" (below).
We've found (with the invaluable research of George Haas and his colleague William Saunders) that there are indeed innumerable terrestrial examples of precisely such "split faces" among the Maya -- in ceremonial masks, monumental architecture, even in the classic "Mayan glyphs." In many cases, these split faces are precise man/animal hybrids (like the man/jaguar image, below) -- just as Hoagland long ago proposed for the Face on Mars.
And, as the extraordinary quotation from the Old Testament demonstrates-- Ezekiel 41:18 Ezekiel 41:19 -- there is also an ancient Hebrew text describing Ezekiel's vision surrounding the statuary that would someday adorn the rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem that dictates exactly the same Man/Lion split face imagery that we now see at Cydonia! So, there is a major human tradition -- across not one, but several human cultures -- that reinforces the notion that the apparent asymmetry of the Cydonia Face is in fact intentional. But we think even more important is the specific nature of that union -- the Man/Lion hybrid -- for it uniquely speaks to a very sacred, very ancient human religious tradition
The most obvious Earth bound affirmation of the Man/Lion hybrid tradition is the Great Sphinx at Giza. With the head of a Pharaoh and the body of a Lion, the Great Sphinx is the ultimate terrestrial architectural expression of this deep "connection" to the ancient mysteries of antiquity ... and apparently to Mars. Recent geological research has shown that the Sphinx most probably dates to a much earlier epoch than had been previously assumed, to a time when its gaze to the East would have let it bear direct witness to the rising of the Sun in the constellation of Leo (the Lion) -- to which the Sphinx is inextricably linked and identified. Most startling, the timing of this particular alignment, 10,500 BC, predates by literally thousands of years the existence of any accepted "advanced" ancient human civilization.
The constellation of Leo and the Sphinx itself were considered by the Egyptians to be one and the same. They were also both identified with a particular god of ancient Egypt, Horus.
Horus was the son of the Egyptian gods, Isis and Osiris, two Egyptian deities whom we have shown inexplicably appear over and over again in the (modern!) "mythical symbolism" of the folks who took us to Mars the folks at NASA. Horus represents the notion of "rebirth and resurrection" to the Egyptians, since he grew to manhood and defeated his uncle Set (sound like a recent Disney movie, anyone like "the Lion King?") -- who was the murderer of his father. Afterwards, Horus re-established the "good kingdom" of his father Osiris to ancient Egypt, and according to Egyptian belief he was in essence "the first Pharaoh" -- since all later Pharaohs descended directly from him and ruled as Horus themselves. What's even more provocative is that the Egyptians also identified Horus directly with the planet Mars -- as they both shared a name; "Hor-Dshr," literally "Horus the Red." Graham Hancock also discovered that in its early history, the Great Sphinx at Giza was painted red -- in honor of this specific Man/Lion-Horus/Mars connection. And the memes headdress, the one we are so used to seeing on images of Egyptian Pharaohs, is designed to represent the mane of a lion.
This Pharaoh/Lion connection even stretches into our own modern Christian traditions. Besides the startling Hebrew testimony of Ezekiel, there are additional "Man/Lion" connections at the very foundations of Christianity. Elsewhere in the Old Testament, one of the great prophets was Daniel. During the first year of Belshazzar's rule in Babylon, at about 556 BC, Daniel had his own series of "great visions" -- featuring four "great beasts." One of those eerily echoes the same combined imagery we've now confirmed on Mars ... "The first [was] like a lion, and had eagle's
wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from
the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given
to it.." Jesus, the central figure of Christianity, had a lineage directly connected to "the House of David" -- the first King of the tribe of Judah (Israel). The line that was prophesized to one day produce "the Messiah" was described in the Old Testament thus: "Judah, you are he whom your brothers shall praise; your
hand shall be on the neck of your enemies; your father's children shall bow down
before you. Judah is a lion's whelp
the scepter shall not depart from
Judah." For this reason, Jesus was specifically known by the messianic title "Lion of Judea" (below). In the last Book of the Biblical Canon -- titled "the Apocalypse of Jesus," but better known as "Revelation" -- Jesus' crucial role is prophesized at the "End of Days":
"So I wept much, because on one was found worthy to open
and read the scroll, or even look at it. But one of the elders said to me, 'Do
not weep. Behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, has
prevailed to open the scroll and to loose its seven seals.'"
In the Apocrypha (books no longer accepted into the Biblical Canon), this dual imagery -- Man and Lion -- also is echoed The Gospel according to Thomas contains this remarkable passage: "(7). Jesus said, Blessed be the Lion, which eaten by man, becomes man. Cursed is the man, whom eaten by the Lion, becomes a Lion." The Sacred City of Jerusalem itself -- site of the famed Temple, and controversial modern crossroads of three of the world great religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam -- flies a flag (below, left) emblazoned with the lion image -- tribute to the symbol of power and authority behind all three. Many other official flags, such as the flag of Scotland (below, right), contain identical lion images of power and authority. One must now wonder
Jesus was also known as the "King of Kings" -- as good a description of supreme authority as you will ever find. Do all these Earthly "symbols of authority" extend back across an immensity of space and time ... to an eroded, monumental "Human/Lion" image ... lying on the rusted Martian Sands ..?
There are many extraordinary parallels -- between "Horus" of the Egyptian tradition, and the historical Jesus (as chronicled by the well-known Biblical scholar, Gerald Massey):
Indeed, even the traditional depiction of Mary and Jesus as "Madonna and Child" derives from the earlier Isis and Horus. How all of this terrestrial esoterica relates to a possible "monument" discovered by a ritually-bound space agency on Mars, is ultimately to be found in the true meaning of the Face on Mars. The now unmistakable "Pharaoh/Lion connection" at Cydonia -- and identical "dual imagery long present here on Earth -- was obviously intended to express some deep, fundamental Message for the human species. Even the NASA hit piece astonishingly acknowledged that the Viking view of this Cydonia enigma bore a strong resemblance to "an Egyptian Pharaoh." With Hoagland's leonine interpretation of the Cliff side now being taken seriously by those looking for real answers to this age-old mystery, it seems obvious what this Monument is trying to communicate. It is none other than -- "A Martian Sphinx" -- the first Horus.
Literally, Horus-the Pharaoh Horus the Lion Horus the Savior ... Horus the Red Horus of Mars. This unique redundant symbolism is now overwhelmingly apparent, the connections crystal clear -- including Hoagland 's long published determination that the tangent of the Face's Cydonia latitude on Mars is precisely equal to the cosine of the Sphinx's latitude at Giza! The Message of the Face on Mars is that of Horus here on Earth -- either as a true "one-to-one" epic recreation of a specific personage on Mars or as a Monument to an idea : that the Golden Age may be long gone but it still lives ("the King is dead long live the King). The literal recreations of the redundant "Man/Lion" message here on Earth -- copied in increasing likelihood from their immensely ancient template at Cydonia -- speaks to a time of great human accomplishment and enlightenment. As Hoagland has said many times, the stunning news from this new image, and the generation of research that came before, is increasingly that -- "WE are 'the Martians' " And though the dating of the creation of Cydonia and this extraordinary Monument is probably hundreds of thousands to literally millions of years the last time humans from this planet may have walked amid the vanished splendor that it represents may have been as recently as only 13,000 years A time "someone," ever since, has apparently been patiently seeking to recreate here on Earth ... witness the extraordinary monumental civilizations of Egypt, Sumer, the Mayans and the rest. These attempted "recreations," however, obviously came long after whatever series of unimaginable catastrophes erased that Epoch Time, not only from two worlds but almost from human memory itself. "Something" happened. That is increasingly obvious. Something destroyed (apparently not once, but several times) what was once a vast and far reaching solar system wide human Civilization that seemingly left its calling cards on at least two worlds, anchored in the identical Pharaoh/Lion symbolism we've now conclusively identified on Mars. The "Message of Cydonia" (as Hoagland termed it years ago) is now apparent: we are supposed to see/to ask "how is this Monument related to us ?!" And ultimately go back to Cydonia to find the Answer! And what will we find? Our own all-but-forgotten Past amid the reddish sands? Or, something even more essential: a window on our coming Destiny as well ? Indeed, it seems that some have been prepared (and have been preparing others) for just such a journey for some time: among them, that deeply hidden priesthood within NASA (with their relentless ritual commemorations), who obviously think only they deserve to inherit such an awesome human Truth . Despite this long deception (or, is it because of it?), our own modern culture is incredibly replete with hints about what we would find if and when we ventured back to Mars -- appearing inexplicably (for some) even before the first modern spacecraft took that Viking image
As far back as from the 1950's, Hoagland had previously uncovered astonishing (if highly controversial) references to "feline Faces on the planet Mars." "Science fiction" stories -- like this now-familiar Tom Corbett Space Cadet ViewMaster reel (above) -- told a saga essentially identical to that which now confronts us in this new Face image. A tale that centers around "ancient, long-abandoned ruins on Mars" ... built somehow by "an ancient feline race"; of "geometric alignments" involving tetrahedrons (which promise nothing less than a "whole new physics of energy and anti-gravity"); and an explanation at last of "our own true history" ... somehow all connected to "a long-lost planet" intimately associated with to the planet Mars ... And the guys who came up with these "tall tales?" Why, none other than the group of Government-imported Nazi's -- with their ancient mythic religion of the "pure 'Arian (Martian!) supermen,'" from whom they (and only "they," of course) were genetically descended -- who, in addition to leaving this clear "foreshadowing" in the medium of 50's television, national magazines and coffee table books (below), simultaneously built the legacy of the modern, inexplicably "ritualistic" NASA to one day return to the Red Planet to secure "their" rightful legacy.
Of course, all of this centers around one extremely crucial issue: the question of interpretation of the Cliff side of the Face. Some of our former friends have argued that our feline prediction is ad-hoc and "totally subjective." The reality is that it is anything but ad-hoc, having been developed over literally decades of research, careful consideration, and prior publication. As you have seen, it is a hypothesis anchored in tradition, rich in prediction, and productive in its results. But despite this success, we have always maintained that individual "interpretations" of the Face are subjective; no matter how clear some of the features are -- the "eye socket," the "brow ridges," the "pupil," the "feline features," etc. -- it will always come down to a question of whether or not a given individual thinks it looks like "a Face." No matter how much some of them try to wrap their own analysis in "measurement and prediction," they are still reduced to simply arguing that it "looks like a Face." Just because you pull numbers out of a hat to try and quantify the probabilities, it doesn't change the fact that you can't test whether it really is a "pupil," or "nostrils," or whatever until you go there. And when the May 24th Face image showed that this enigma was substantially "asymmetrical," these same individuals were suddenly reduced to arguing that "the asymmetry does not exist," or, that it is the product of a truly ad-hoc "melting" explanation. Good theories don't require massaging when their predictions don't come out right. Bad ones do. Yet still, if this was all we had, we ourselves would not today be any closer to explaining "what the Face is" and whether it is artificial. For that, as Sir Eddington reminds us, you need real numbers And, just as our decade-old prediction of the leonine nature of the Face, we've had those "crucial numbers" too. Our "opposition" hasn't -- mainly because it has chosen to ignore them
Hoagland's "Geometric Relationship Model" of Cydonia (above), from which the new science of Hyperdimensional Physics was derived, has also been a fruitful ground for successful scientific prediction. By taking the relationships between the various anomalous objects at Cydonia and analyzing them against the mathematics apparently redundantly encoded there, Hoagland and Erol Torun deduced their first version of the mathematical "Message of Cydonia" in 1988. Since then, Hoagland has further developed the idea with no less than six specific astrophysical and geophysical predictions, based on those mathematics -- four of which have been strikingly confirmed, and all of which have been verified to some degree. Among those paying close attention, this track record -- combined with the now successful, astonishing (to some) prediction of the feline nature of the Face -- has virtually ended the debate over the artificiality of the Cydonia Complex. It's just some elements in NASA (and their parrots in the mainstream press -- what was that Neil Armstrong once said at the White House about "parrots," in 1995 ..?), that don't seem to "get it" yet. Because, despite their blatant and continuing attempts at propaganda the Face persists ... and more and more "average citizens" are seeing it as such, lion and all It is a sad commentary on the state of the dominant media culture in this Nation that, out of all the major news agencies, newspapers, wire services, broadcast and cable networks, etc., only one reporter -- MSNBC's Alan Boyle -- even bothered to do anything except repeat the NASA party line after the sudden release of the May24th new Face image. Not one of those other "intrepid reporters" or their news organizations even seemed to notice the way in which NASA tried so hard to "spin" them in the "right" direction -- that it was finally "all just a pile of rocks." Not one asked for a specific pictorial example (from overhead!) of the "common buttes and mesas" that NASA claimed the Face now so resembles (although two of our Enterprise colleagues, Carol Maltby and Lan Fleming, did find one nearby example of the southern Idaho natural landform NASA's Jim Garvin says "reminds him of the Face" -- below. Remind us to NOT send Jim out for pizza ).
And not one reporter could apparently be bothered to go to the official MOLA instrument NASA Web page, and check to see if the instrument even had the resolution to make the "conclusive determination" that NASA claimed it had ("There are no eyes, no nose, and no mouth ..!") Is it any wonder that maverick reporters, like Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly -- who actually asks a few hard questions of Government sources now and then -- are cleaning up on the ratings? How come not one of these "best and the brightest" of the fourth estate seemed to notice that the image that NASA showed in its hit piece as "proof" that there was "no Face," was upside down!? How come, even if some reporter did, he or she had nothing to say about it!? Why didn't any of these reporters consider for a moment the possibility that "an ancient, alien monument" might be a little bit eroded ? Maybe, even more so on one side than the other (because wind erosion, on a desert planet like Mars, is directional)? After all, the Sphinx at Giza is hardly in perfect condition -- and it's "only" 10,000 or so years old. Did they really expect Paul Newman or Marylyn Monroe!?
Why didn't any of these news organizations simply turn the image right side up, compress it back to its original proportions (above) -- and let their audience decide what it really looked like? Probably because they feared what polls are showing the People know it's artificial. The MSNBC Web poll on the subject shows that of those that have changed their minds based on the new picture, the possibility that it represents former intelligence on Mars is running ahead by about 6%. Art Bell's e-mails are running about 55/45 in favor of artificiality -- despite the fact that Art remains (very vocally) unconvinced by the new image (so much for Art's "undue influence" on his audience). When you actually examine the arguments NASA uses to dismiss the Face, it is easy to see why despite a ton of money invested in this disingenuous "media blitz," they've been unable to stamp out a rising tide of interest.
So, in other words, the only way to establish NASA's heavily financed position that "the perception of a Face at Cydonia is totally misguided," is to refer to "disconfirming images" that don't exist, and then (20 years later) release a new low-angle view, taken under the worst possible lighting conditions then filter the hell out of what's left, effectively removing almost all remaining gray scale information and 3-D relief. Next, when a really good image is finally forced out of NASA's clutches by a major political initiative, you completely ignore any prior published scientific predictions made by the independent research teams that turn out to be correct, deliberately misuse altimetry data that has only 300 meters per pixel resolution, and turn this "best picture" upside down stretching it in the process to make it seem wider and even more asymmetric. Then, you top off this blatantly unethical and unscientific behavior by claiming that "it's really quite similar to other natural objects" but you never produce any of those images to prove your point. And no one -- except for Alan Boyle -- even bothers to question your scientific accuracy or, more important, your scientific integrity in all of this. The point is, despite all this, we're winning. NASA's public stance simply isn't making it with "the Public." In the Internet age, the mainstream media's biases and incompetence have failed to even make a dent in the whole issue -- much less "close the book" on the subject of "the Face." So what's next for NASA? And, on careful analysis, did they really try all that hard in this latest go round -- to knock down the entire concept of "the Face?"
When you look at the ludicrous ineptitude of the latest NASA "smear campaign" against this controversial object, it's almost laughable. The major spin ("it's NOT a 'face'") was clearly aimed at the naοve and the uninitiated (particularly in the major media) -- because anyone who has followed this issue to any depth across the years, knows just how specious NASA's dismissive "scientific" arguments turned out to be. What intrigues us more is the political timing of this major new Cydonia release. We don't think, for instance, that it was a coincidence that the image was (finally) released the same day as another major national news story broke in Washington: the defection of Republican Senator James Jeffords. We think (based on when it was actually acquired, and Dr. Weiler's May 11th letter revealing this specific date of April 8th) that some elements in NASA deliberately kept this image "in the can" for quite a while -- just waiting for a chance to dump it when it would least be noticed by the media Hardly the expected behavior of people who think they've finally proven "nothing's there." Make no mistake, despite this apparently contradictory behavior, NASA wants to get the Face "out there." In our model, they eventually have to because they eventually have to come up with a significant justification for a major (possibly imminent) announcement: that they're" finally going to Mars." But, they want to do this in fact, apparently must do this -- in a "measured, metered way." Simply releasing this latest image, and letting it be defined by the independent researchers, for NASA's careful strategy would have been disastrous. The polls now clearly show this. So what they did is to put it out, but with a "spin." Yet, when you examine it more closely, it's a pretty mild spin. And it is full of interesting little (and some not so little!) contradictions. For one thing, according to NASA's Jim Garvin, we're going to get another picture of the Face and soon! In a couple weeks, when Mars is at its closest position to Earth for the next two years (and general media and public interest highest), "coincidentally" Garvin promised that the Face would be targeted again -- along with "several other anomalies" located at Cydonia. This seems a little strange to us, considering NASA has now officially decreed "the case of the Face is closed," not counting that it costs upwards of $400,000 to target any specific feature on the planet! Dr. Malin, for one, has previously complained bitterly about the costs associated with targeting the Face the first time in the MGS mission, back in 1998. Don't get us wrong, we very much want another picture. But the more obvious question must now be: why does NASA want another picture!? One possibility is that critical artificial substructures -- whose presence would unequivocally prove the designed nature of the Face -- may not be clearly visible without the ability to use "stereo pairs" for 3-D reconstruction. Our own preliminary analysis of the single high-resolution image NASA released May 24th has already revealed provocative evidence of precisely such structural detail. In other words, as opposed to being "carved" -- like a Martian "Mt. Rushmore" -- significant portions of the Face on Mars seem to be composed of highly eroded manufactured elements. There literally appear to be a series of still detectable geometric rooms and complex supporting structures -- nakedly exposed on the heavily eroded western platform of the Face (below).
So, chalk up another successful prediction for the Hoagland camp. Writing in "Monuments" in 1992, Hoagland -- based on Carlotto's previous revealing fractal imaging analysis -- noted that the appearance of "a Face itself" might be due to the "sophisticated placement of shadow-casting pyramidal substructures on [the] underlying mesa " In other words, that when sufficient optical resolution was achieved, the Face would be found to be a highly complex, constructed object whose former sophistication would now be evident by its repeating arrays of geometric ruins. The close-up from the May 24th image (above) is striking confirmation of that major prediction . The final confirmation of this major discovery can only come with true high-resolution stereo of the entire Face. Right now, the only stereo to be had is of a portion of the City side of this enigmatic object -- thanks to the high resolution "west side image" initially released by Malin in January, 2001; this, several weeks ago, was composited by Malin Space Science Systems together with a similar slice of the western side of the latest April 2001 image, producing the "partial Face" red-green stereo "analglyph" released May 24th (below).
A second overhead "Face shot"(as Garvin's promised) would allow the entire Face to be viewed in stereo 3-D. This would go a long way to answering the final nagging questions that remain (for some) about the striking "feline" appearance of the Cliff side -- as well as providing additional confirmation of the Monument's critical 3-D "honeycomb" structural details. But there may be even more to it than that. Garvin has promised that Cydonia and the Face will also be a target of the 2001 Mars Odyssey spacecraft, due to go into Martian orbit in October. Odyssey will carry not only a gamma ray spectrometer [which should be able to detect the underground hydrogen from any (crucial, for a human NASA mission) Martian reserves of ice or water], it will also carry a combined visual/infrared high-resolution camera called THEMIS (for "THErMal Imaging System"). (Remarkably, Themis was a Titan -- the ancient Greek goddess of "justice," who was also mother to Prometheus, the human who stole the "fire of heaven" for men on Earth -- not a bad description of reclaiming the implications of Hyperdimensional Physics from Cydonia .). According to Garvin, this unique instrument (with a resolution about twice that of the original Viking cameras) would be able to distinguish the Pyramids of Giza (which are much smaller than "the Face"), separate from their natural surroundings of the Sahara Desert -- if Odyssey were orbiting the Earth -- by determining the unique spectral signature of the materials making up the Pyramids. If that's not a blatant hint This last bit of remote sensing data is crucially important, because with Odyssey's spectrometer we should be able (according to Garvin's carefully-planned "leak") to determine once and for all the composition of the Face and the other structures at Cydonia. Our prediction is that these highly anomalous objects will be found to have very unusual spectral characteristics indeed (even through the dust!) ones that will show unequivocally that they have very "unnatural" compositions -- including a variety of exposed, highly-refined metallic alloys. The detected presence of any unusual quantities of metal would be a dead giveaway that the basic structures of these monuments are clearly artificial. So our prediction, once again, is that the Face -- over and apart from what it looks like -- will finally be shown to have a very unusual fundamental make-up indeed. Still another, curiously "leaked" indication of NASA's future plans can be found at the end of their previously cited "hit piece" on NASA.gov. In it, NASA for some reason includes an EVA map (produced by Garvin), showing a "hiking path" winding to the summit of the Face (which just happens to end at the tip of the "nose" ). Now, we can't help but think this is another big fat "hint"
EVA maps like this are commonly produced by NASA, in the planning stages in advance of an actual landing and exploration mission.
They are used by the astronauts for their actual exploration of the landing sites (as with Apollo -- above) -- as a guide to key "sample sites" and other revealing features along the way. So, why go to the trouble of actually planning out an EVA traverse of "the Face on Mars" if you don't "really" want to go there!? What Garvin seems clearly to be showing us "between the lines" is that -- besides their announced plans to photograph the Face again, and cover the area with the Odyssey spectrometer -- NASA truly does plan to actually send a manned mission to the Face itself!! Now, again, this fits exactly with the model we've been formulating and publicly presenting vis-ΰ-vis NASA's inexplicable, even contradictory behavior on Cydonia for years. We have argued (to the chagrin of some of our critics) that eventually NASA must get funding for a new manned Mars Initiative and soon. We believe they are on a highly accelerated clock, a schedule that has to do far more with "ancient calendars and feline faces on the planet Mars" (!) than with any "conventional" agenda involving "party politics" or "science." But our next insights into that critical agenda must wait for another chapter in this constantly unfolding saga Once we have the spectrometer data from "Arthur's" Odyssey Mission to Cydonia (probably by December), the analytical sciences aspects of this question will have pretty much played out. We will then have probably reached the limits of what the science of remote sensing, and its foundation of "logical prediction" can tell us of "what's there." The scientific debate over the continuing reality of Cydonia -- as an extraordinarily ancient Complex, with pivotal connections to ourselves -- will then be down to a few specific arguments "Could these aggregations of 'anomalous' materials possibly be natural (there will always be some hold outs )?" But, in addition to this imminent (and hopefully conclusive) spectral data, we have the previous geomorphic analyses of the Cydonia complex, which tell us that the Face and other anomalies are unique and not "geologically common," as NASA's always tried to claim. We have the cultural context of the now confirmed feline/hominid model of the Face -- with all those staggering human implications . And we have the Geometric Alignment Model of Cydonia, which leads inexorably to the predictive science of Hyperdimensional Physics -- with it's incalculable potential to improve our lives if not ultimately answer the question "What happened to the builders of these Monuments ..?". But only when we actually land at Cydonia and walk among the ruins of this vast and ancient artificial Complex, will we know the Truth that now beckons like a mysterious, feline siren's song for us to just "get on with it!" Then the real work will begin for only then can the final chapter of this "quarter-century old Odyssey" be written .. But we do not want to finish this odyssey alone. The harsh truth is that while many ships afloat on the Cydonia "ocean" have been steadily taking on water in the last few years (and a few just ran aground with Malin's latest image), some have remained steadily afloat steaming ahead toward an inevitable confrontation with the Truth. There are some of our friends and colleagues who are still decidedly uncomfortable with our (as they term it) "strident stance" toward NASA. That's unfortunate: NASA's lied (certainly, some parts of it -- look at their behavior over this latest image). Those responsible MUST be held accountable -- if only for the practical reason that they currently control the only means of getting at that Truth. Others simply don't agree with us because of fundamental differences on scientific issues. But, where is it written that just disagreeing with someone makes that person less worthy of respect? The truth is, we at Enterprise didn't agree on the Feline Nature of the Face among ourselves until (with this new image) Hoagland was unequivocally proven to have been correct. With that reality established, we're now in "a totally new ballgame" -- regardless of NASA's increasingly desperate (and transparent) continuing efforts to mislead the media and everyone else about the truth. The issue is no longer the "reality" of Cydonia but the meaning. And we -- as a larger community of diverse, independent researchers -- don't need to agree on everything (in fact, that's one of our major strengths) to continue to work together towards an ultimate understanding of that Meaning . But, to achieve that crucial goal -- given the major resources and political connections of our "opposition" -- we definitely need to work together. Because, given the implications looming over this latest, haunting image of Cydonia it's only the most important thing that any of us will likely ever do. |
