THE MOBIUS MISSION
'My own suspicion is
that the Universe
is not only queerer than we
but queerer than we can
Haldane's Law put
by geneticist J.P.S. Haldane
We have com e on a strange journey since
we first realized the science that lay behind the stone circles at
Stonehenge, Brodgar, Avebury and thousands of other Neolithic sites
across the British Isles.
We believe that our determination not to draw conclusions too early
has paid dividends. We have refused to ignore those pieces of the
puzzle that seemed outlandish or even downright impossible, and have
retained our tolerance for unexpected results.
They say all progress is dependent on the unreasonable person.
Alexander Thom was certainly an
unreasonable person, or else he would have capitulated in the face
of the wave of rejection he received from the majority of
professional archaeologists. How irritating of the man, his
opponents thought, to repeatedly insist that his reams of data,
gathered over scores of years, show that the Megalithic builders
worked to an incredible degree of engineering accuracy and employed
precise standardized units of length.
Any reasonable person, and certainly any academic who wanted future
employment within a specific discipline, would have buried the data
that showed that the Megalithic Yard and its accompanying geometry
were integer to the Moon and Sun as well as the Earth. It sounds
ridiculous, and those who are members of the 'club' will consider
anyone who speaks of it equally ridiculous.
Yet the Moon unquestionably does conform to Megalithic geometry and
now, we believe, we are beginning to understand why.
The SETI institute is still sweeping the skies looking for incoming
electromagnetic radiation that deviates even a tiny amount from the
anticipated background noise - something that could conceivably be
an indication of intelligence elsewhere in the cosmos.
But the message they seek is already
with us because, by the standards of what SETI considers might
constitute a message, surely the material we have described here
must be the world's first prime contact with a consciousness that
existed 4.6 billion years ago.
The assumption of SETI and its operatives is that another
intelligence will make contact from far away and so the searchers
are focused on staring into the far depths of space for a message.
But if any entity were that smart why would it have to make a
Four hundred years ago our solar system was the great mystery - but
our own immediate environs hold less fascination in the light of
incredible devices such as the Hubble telescope, which can reach far
into space and into the past. We have ticked the box that is the
solar system and astronomers are more interested in distant quasars
and nebula. Is it this new leading edge of attention that has
previously blinded us to the obvious in our own backyard?
The message we have received has told us about the way that the Moon
was constructed to give life to the Earth, and there are tantalizing
hints that this design may extend to the rest of the solar system,
and possibly even beyond.
Modern scientific culture has evolved
from its roots in the ancient world and has become a complex web of
m any highly specialized disciplines.
Gone are the days when one man, such as the seventeenth-century
Robert Hooke, could be a groundbreaking inventor, microscopist,
physicist, surveyor, astronomer, biologist and even artist. Today
the sheer enormity of available information has led to highly
defined specialisms, and academics are expected to keep to their
field - despite the truism that science has no experts.
No one, for instance, doubted
Alexander Thom's abilities as a professor of engineering but he
was not welcome in the world of archaeology.
The gains from modern science are beyond counting. But the loss,
arguably, is the synthesis of information generated by the many
gentleman scholars that once existed, before becoming extinct
somewhere around the late nineteenth century.
So few scholars now have a chance to
view the bigger picture - to seek out patterns that might
unexpectedly exist when apparently unrelated data is brought
together. It has to be remembered that the difference between a
major breakthrough and nothing at all can be just the angle of view
rather than anything else.
Occasionally, two or more disciplines are brought together to form a
new specialty in science. One of these turned out to be the subject
that was directly invented by Alexander Thom, namely archeo-astronomy
- a field of study involved with the use of astronomy by ancient
Our previous book, Civilization One,
demonstrated the geometry that lies behind Thom's proposed
Megalithic Yard. We unambiguously showed how it is directly related
to other measurement systems (linear, volumetric and weight) and put
forward a testable theory of how it was reproduced using Venus and a
pendulum. We therefore decided to send a copy of our book to a man
who we believe is the world's only professor of archeo-astronomy. He
received a precis and the completed book but we received no
We knew that the information we had put forward was not incorrect
because people suitably qualified in astronomy and mathematics had
carefully checked it.
So why no response? Perhaps the approach
was so counter to the worldview of this particular expert he could
not understand it. Or maybe he just did not like the implications of
We also attempted to get a copy of the book to a world-class
physicist. When he was told of the subject matter he responded
almost angrily by saying that it was well known that Thom's work had
been discredited decades ago and only weirdoes clung onto the
romantic hope that Stone-Age man possessed a rational and unchanging
unit of length.
In actual fact he was repeating a mantra that has sprung up in
academic circles but is no m ore than an urban myth, because no one
has proven Thom to be wrong. We responded by pointing out that we
had done our research very carefully and that whilst there are
certainly people who have argued against Thom's conclusions, they
have not proven his conclusions to be wrong - nor is it possible for
anyone to prove a negative.
The academic then responded politely and accepted what we said,
although he explained that he did not have time to read our book due
to personal problems.
We therefore expect to have a fight on our hands when it comes to
getting leading academics to review the findings contained in this
book. But fight we will.
Finally, it is probably helpful to apply to our whole hypothesis a
test created by the late, great astronomer Carl Sagan, that he
called a 'Baloney Detection Kit'. Sagen suggested a set of tools
shown below for testing claims and detecting fallacious or
fraudulent arguments. We have put our responses beneath in italics.
Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the
All of the key elements that we consider constitute a message are
checkable using data published by leading authorities. Encourage
substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of
all points of view.
Yes please. We have tried and will continue to do so. Arguments from
authority carry little weight (in science there are no authorities).
At least it should be a level playing field. Spin more than one
hypothesis - don't simply run with the first idea that caught your
fancy. We have had to dismiss only one possible hypothesis:
coincidence, and have investigated every other avenue we can think
Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's
yours. Quantify, wherever possible. We struggled to accept our own
results initially and we remain entirely open to any other
interpretation that might be brought forward.
If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work.
Unlike the existing main theories of the Moon's origin and the
origin of DNA, we believe that we have a very strong chain with no
Occam's razor - if there are two
hypotheses that explain the data equally well, choose the simpler.
But the simplest is also the weirdest,
although it is also the most scientifically robust.
Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least
in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous
test). In other words, is it testable? Can others duplicate the
experiment and get the same result?
The number sequences we have found are checkable by anyone with a
book on basic astronomy and a calculator. The question is just how
far people are prepared to go in claiming coincidence.
We believe we have made a case that deserves to be heard and
investigated. It is hard to imagine how even the most skeptical,
unimaginative academic could deny the possibility that we are
looking at a message here. Not to investigate and discuss it further
would be anti-scientific and, we believe, very foolish.
Everyone who has bothered to think about it is agreed; any message
from the distant past either has to be very big or very small. We
believe it is both.
We have good reason to think that Professor Paul Davies and
others who suspect that there could be a communication addressed to
us in apparently empty sections of DNA are correct. If the next
layer of the message is, as seem s likely, contained in the cells of
our own bodies - it must be sought out!
Our suggestion that the group of a million unused base pairs, found
by geneticist Edward Rubin and his team, might be a viewable
message if laid out on a format of 3663 x 273 has to be tested. It
might be the answer and, if so, humankind is on the verge of a new
age - an age of maturity.
But if the message is not detected in that way, the peculiarities of
the Moon remain and we need all serious scientists to work together
to solve this riddle - which must be almost in our grasp.
We call on the world to assemble a team of leading scientists from
all of the disciplines that could possibly be involved in
deciphering the Moon's message and, if our third scenario is
correct, constructing the CTC - the time transport system. And we
may need observers from the leading religions.
We suggest that this be called 'The Mobius Mission' - a project to
begin all projects!
Albert Einstein was an incredibly wise man as well as a
scientific genius. Amongst his many quotable observations he once
'Imagination is more important that
We therefore need people with depth of
vision as well as knowledge and practical ability. So, it is our
intention to first approach scientists such as Paul Davies, David
Deutsch and Ronald Mallett.
We feel sure that their curiosity will
help to change the world.
Back to Contents